902
edits
Nicolasstraccia
Joined 11 July 2014
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''Hello, and welcome to my Linguifex user page!'' | <big>''Hello, and welcome to my Linguifex user page!''</big> | ||
<br/> | |||
==About me== | |||
Hi, my name is Nicolás and I'm from Argentina. | Hi, my name is Nicolás and I'm from Argentina. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 12: | ||
I'm passionate about and enjoy learning languages, and also about their history and many intricacies. I also like travelling to get to know the different aspects of the cultures of the world. Besides designing languages and writing systems, I study philosophy (undergraduate) and also like to read, draw and make music. | I'm passionate about and enjoy learning languages, and also about their history and many intricacies. I also like travelling to get to know the different aspects of the cultures of the world. Besides designing languages and writing systems, I study philosophy (undergraduate) and also like to read, draw and make music. | ||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
== | ==About my Languages== | ||
Even though my tastes have changed over the years (the main difference being an increasing emphasis in historical linguistics) most of my conlangs still fit in the definition of ''artlangs'', in particular, ''a priori naturalistic artlangs''. That is, they are ''not built upon any natural language or language family'', yet they ''strive to be not more nor less complex as any given natural language'', while ''their purpose is that of an artistic endeavour'' and their ''development is strongly driven by their particular aesthetic'' (and not, for instance, the search for a purportedly superior effectivity or the intent of making them specifically easy to learn, as is the case with other kinds of conlangs<ref>Many criteria can be used to classify constructed languages. Some good pointers towards understanding the most usual terminology can be found, for instance, [http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/classification.html here], [http://www.frathwiki.com/Conlang_terminology here] and here [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructed_language here]</ref>). Nevertheless, even though that's the kind of conlang I mostly make, I enjoy a wide variety of styles and genres across the whole spectrum of the craft. | Even though my tastes have changed over the years (the main difference being an increasing emphasis in historical linguistics) most of my conlangs still fit in the definition of ''artlangs'', in particular, ''a priori naturalistic artlangs''. That is, they are ''not built upon any natural language or language family'', yet they ''strive to be not more nor less complex as any given natural language'', while ''their purpose is that of an artistic endeavour'' and their ''development is strongly driven by their particular aesthetic'' (and not, for instance, the search for a purportedly superior effectivity or the intent of making them specifically easy to learn, as is the case with other kinds of conlangs<ref>Many criteria can be used to classify constructed languages. Some good pointers towards understanding the most usual terminology can be found, for instance, [http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/classification.html here], [http://www.frathwiki.com/Conlang_terminology here] and here [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructed_language here]</ref>). Nevertheless, even though that's the kind of conlang I ''mostly'' make, I enjoy a wide variety of styles and genres across the whole spectrum of the craft. | ||
::Please take into account that this listing may be considered to be a work in process in at least two senses: 1) ''existing conlangs'' are still being wikified, and 2) ''new conlangs'' will continue expanding it. | ::Please take into account that this listing may be considered to be a work in process in at least two senses: 1) ''existing conlangs'' are still being wikified, and 2) ''new conlangs'' will continue expanding it. | ||