266
edits
User talk:Waahlis: Difference between revisions
→Circumstantial Evidence
| Line 177: | Line 177: | ||
I think it's okay not to follow Leipzig standards if they've forgotten something or if it is unclear. {{sc|circ}} or {{sc|cst}} or the like should work fine if you state what it mean. :) [[File:Waahlis.png|35px|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 19:31, 13 May 2013 (CEST) | I think it's okay not to follow Leipzig standards if they've forgotten something or if it is unclear. {{sc|circ}} or {{sc|cst}} or the like should work fine if you state what it mean. :) [[File:Waahlis.png|35px|link=Linguifex:Administrators]] '''[[User talk:Waahlis|<span style="color: Orange;">Waahlis</span>]]''' 19:31, 13 May 2013 (CEST) | ||
== Contionary Help == | |||
Thank you for pointing out those corrections! (and even more for pointing to which contionary entry I should be modeling after!) Most of how I've been building up the format and lay out for my language on this site (and previous sites) has been by looking at other entries and emulating them, so I was a little lost as to what I needed for a Contionary Entry. | |||
Question: I'm patterning my language on a mixture/slurring of several older languages, but as I've never had the chance to document the etymology before now, I didn't record it - do you think that my language will suffer because of this? I could possibly find which language the words came from, but it would take a lot of work and effort, and I'd much rather spend that energy moving forward. It's not all of my language, but the pronouns, the colors, then numbers and some other vocabulary... Would it be wrong to list the origins of those words as "lost"? [[User:Zomborgs|Zomborgs]] ([[User talk:Zomborgs|talk]]) 22:08, 14 May 2013 (CEST) | |||