[1] From: Stephen Clark <srlclark@liverpool.ac.uk> (10)
Subject: imaginary languages
[2] From: Ambroise Barras <ambroise.barras@yale.edu> (22)
Subject: Re: imaginary languages
--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:01:19 +0000 (GMT)
From: Stephen Clark <srlclark@liverpool.ac.uk>
Subject: imaginary languages
Jim Marchand <marchand@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> asked about imaginary languages:
The best known modern imaginary language is Elvish (in two versions, Quenya=
=20
and Sindarin), invented by Tolkien and elaborated since. There is a short
Introduction to Elvish, and there used to be an email list, tolklang. Then=
=20
there's Klingon (elaborated from Star Trek). And there are some details of
several languages invented by C.J.Cherryh, a classicist and sf writer: e.g.
in *Hunter of Worlds*, in *The Faded Sun*, and in *Foreigner*. Dialects
of English have been created by Anthony Burgess, Russell Hoban and probably
many others.
Stephen Clark
srlclark@liv.ac.uk
--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 22:32:14 +0100
From: Ambroise Barras <ambroise.barras@yale.edu>
Subject: Re: imaginary languages
About imaginary languages, read the recent book by Umberto Eco (1994): _La
ricerca della lingua perfetta nella cultura europa_, published in english
too (Basil Blackwell, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford).
I quote here the introductory words of the french version of this book:
"Au cours des si=E8cles o=F9 l'unit=E9 linguistique et politique du monde r=
omain
entre en crise et o=F9 commencent =E0 r=E9sonner ces langues que l'Europe p=
arle
aujourd'hui encore, la culture europ=E9enne m=E9dite de nouveau l'=E9pisode
biblique de la confusio linguarum, et tente de gu=E9rir la blessure de la
Tour de Babel en essayant de r=E9cup=E9rer la Langue Adamique, ou de la
reconstruire comme Langue Parfaite. Quelques-unes des personnalit=E9s les
plus marquantes de la culture europ=E9enne se sont consacr=E9es =E0 ce r=EA=
ve et,
bien que leurs utopies ne se soient pas r=E9alis=E9es, chacune d'entre elle=
s a
produit des "effets collat=E9raux". C'est pour cette raison que si nous
connaissons aujourd'hui le monde naturel =E0 travers des taxinomies
rigoureuses, si nous inventons des langages pour les machines, si nous
tentons des exp=E9riences de traduction automatique, nous sommes encore, en
quelque sorte, d=E9biteurs de ces tentatives multiples de retrouver une
langue adamique."
See particularly the extensive bibliography.
Ambroise.Barras (@yale.edu)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humanist Discussion Group=20
Information at <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
<http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D