What's Chomsky's deal with conlangs?!
I honestly could not give a single blink what Noam Chomsky thinks about anything having to do with language.
seen from China
seen from United States

seen from T1
seen from Vietnam

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from TĂźrkiye

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Albania
seen from United States
seen from United States
What's Chomsky's deal with conlangs?!
I honestly could not give a single blink what Noam Chomsky thinks about anything having to do with language.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Two question about English-like systems: how do I get something like English's weird Spelling rules and its amazingly ridiculous adjective order?
Spelling: Fossilize the spelling system at a time before major sound changesâalso deregularize spelling at that time, and have different regions with different spelling traditions. As for adjective order, itâs just the order that makes sense to speakers. Have something else make sense to speakers.
Continuind from my last ask, my objective is to develop a language with a definite article that works like hebrew's 'ha' prefix, but having it evolve from the accusative declension; and the same with the indefinite article, but from the dative. My question is if it is naturalistic to have that kind of development from a declension, instead of the appending of another word (like hebrew did (as far as I know...)). Thank you!
I was still trying to imagine how this would work, but no, I canât see it. It doesnât make sense to me that one declension would evolve into a definite used everywhere, and the other would evolve into an indefinite used everywhereâand especially not the ones you chose. I donât see that working at all, Iâm afraid. :(
In some languages, one or more glyphs have a word-final form. How do these evolve? Would it be posswfor all of the glyphs to have one?
Happens just naturally in handwriting. The reason it happens with some and not others has to do with the shape of the glyphs and how theyâre written and their word-final frequency. Iâm not sure what mechanically explains this, but itâs easy enough to see it happening in various writing systems.
Regarding your recent 'Thought on "all your conlangs are English". Spanish 'papel' doesn't exactly translate to 'paper' so, when making up a conlang's words, do you conciously design the different possible uses of all words? I'm asking particularly about common words such as your example, 'man'. Such words are (my opinion here, I don't know for sure) much more translatable between languages than 'paper'; I'm thinking about 'man' and 'hombre' which, to me, seem much closer than 'paper'. Thanks!
Close?! I donât think so!
Man the ship! *Hombrea el bote!
Iâm a root beer man. ??Soy un root beer hombre/un hombre de root beer.
How many men (lives in a video game) do you have? ?¿Cuåntos hombres tienes?
Man, Iâm tired! *ÂĄHombre, estoy cansado!
Nah, if you want to find words that are used almost the same in every language, you have to go way in the other direction. Iâm talking words like âcaesiumâ and âinterdimensionalââwords whose meanings are so specific and so specialized that theyâre unlikely to be used in any other context than their literal context. (E.g. how many idioms do you know involving caesium?)
To answer your question, yes, of courseâand so are you, by default. Every single word in every single language covers a range, even if that range is too trivial to note. If it didnât, each word would apply to one and only thing throughout the history of time, and it would be impossible to generalize. When you create a word, youâre creating (most likely) its initial range, and its initial range may be small. But as you use the word, you expand its range. Sometimes the expansion is so great and so non-obvious that the new expansion has to be listed as a separate definition in the dictionary. Even if the expansion makes sense, youâll often have to list it. For example, adere in High Valyrian means âslipperyâ. It also means âfastâ. I think itâs pretty obvious how you got from the first one (the initial one) to the second one. Nevertheless, this is nothing that anyone would assume by default. Thus, if youâre making a useful dictionary, you have to list that as a secondary meaning.
If you do any kind of translation into your language, youâre also likely coining non-obvious secondary meanings, whether youâre recording them or not. If youâre consciously avoiding this, though, youâd better be creating a non-naturalistic conlang, because natural languages donât do that. Itâs never one word = one object/idea. Itâd be too tedious to use.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Hi! On several of your talks, you (and other conlangers) have talked about the possibility of simulating an alternate vocal tract. As we know how the physics of sound waves works, it makes sense that it's theoretically possible so... do you know if there exists a program somewhere, or if somebody has done it? By "it" I mean the simulation of a different vocal tract to that of current humans'. Thank you!
Not that Iâm aware of. The false vocal tracts I know were done to simulate human noises, and theyâre static (so if you blow into them on one end a vowel will come out the other). Such a thing should certainly be possible with software, but that kind of thing sounds technical and expensive to meâand while the former favors conlangers, the latter does not. Iâm happy to post this here, though, to see if anyone else knows of any interesting experiments!
how do you think language began? which of all the circulating theories do you think is the most likely? and which one would you like to be true, regardless of the evidence? If I had to choose, I'd say aliens are my favorite (though I personaly do not consider it likely)
I honestly havenât looked into it. Frankly, Iâm shocked language didnât develop in the course of a single personâs life. Then again, looking back on technological advancement, Iâm constantly surprised that certain technologies lasted as long as they did with no one getting on to the next thing in, like, four or five years. Itâs hard to imagine what it would be like without having all oneâs modern assumptions at oneâs disposal.
It really seems like it shouldnât take long for someone to go, âHey, this person made this sound when this thing happened. What if we made a different sound when a different thing happens?â And then language would follow. But itâs probably something that happened gradually over many centuries, with first analogical patterns leading to culture, and then leisure time leading to language. Honestly, though, I know so little about the early history of humankind or, like, biology, then any guess I make is worth less than the paper itâs printed on (and no oneâs printing this).
Hey there. I ask this despite knowing that you haven't have much spare time in the past few months (years?): do you still conlang for yourself? That is, do you create languages just for the sake of your own amusement, not having been payed to do so? Thanks
When Iâm working on a show or movie, itâs an active project, and I work on that exclusively. When I have no active project, I work on whatever I happen to want to work on at the time. That includes every language Iâve ever created. At this stage, what are the languages of Defiance other than personal projects (since Trion canât be bother to give a single shit about the languages I created)? Theyâre all my own conlangs; I was just paid to create some of them and given a few extra constraints.
Also, now that Iâve been running my own D&D campaign, Iâve been working with languages Iâve created in the past that Iâm using for the campaignâspecifically, Bodzvokhan and ĂvĂźsi from Bright (figured in case I get to work on the sequel, itâd only help to beef up the vocab of each); Shiväisith from Thor: The Dark World; and Gweydr, one of my old ones. The latter is just awful. It needs so much work to be respectable. And the font is an abomination. I really want to rework it, but itâs really not a good use of my time (Gweydr is simply a naming language, since itâs the language that everyone speaks. Consequently, you donât hear itâitâs just Englishâbut if there are decorative signs, etc. that players donât need to read, theyâll be in the Gweydry script).
Honestly, though, I really donât draw a distinction, or think of one. These are all simply languages I created, and I work on them because I love them.