@markbeadles You were the one active on the Conlang proposal right? I think it was you... I don't know if you saw that, but Conlangs are on topic on Linguistics now. With some not-clearly-defined-yet caveats, maybe, but the're on topic. I wanted to notice all of those committers in the Conlang proposal but the proposal itself was deleted.
I've seen many questions on this site asking about the famous space problems in Android phones. None of those I've seen helped me and since none of them asked about my phone, I'd like to present a new case.
I have three memories, and this is a table showing the usage:
What's most bothering is...
I'm not a field linguist but my hobby overlaps with it, particularly the descriptive part.
At the far ends, with remnant langauges (Virginian Algonquin) and well studies mega-lingua francas like English or French the answer is clear. Given limited time and resources, what constitutes enough dict...
@Cerberus That's the only solution. :) Why can't I uninstall the standard apps? Like G+?
@johnlawler I didn't know you had problems with your accounts. I thought you chose to have a different name on Ling than on EL&U. If I had known that, I would have talked to the Team.
The "root" of a file system is the lowest possible directory, so the "C:\" folder in Windows. In some file systems, a normal user only has access to some higher folders, like C:\data. The OS is installed in a different folder, and you need access to the root to be able to access the OS folder. By access could be meant "the ability to change files', not sure. So in Android, root access means you are able to change things on the phone that the OS normally wouldn't let you.
Root access is commonly abbreviated to just "root".
@Alenanno Yes, that was me. Thanks! I believe that it is possible to have linguistically relevant questions that involve constructed languages, and even more likely that conlangers with questions on linguistics might find this a useful site to ask specific questions helpful to their efforts.
Nice "advertisement". I will advertise it on some places I frequent. The worst that can happen is we'll get some bad questions, but loads of bad questions are not intrinsically a bad thing.
The kind of question I think would be most useful would be "I am creating a conlang with 5 genders and I want to know what natural languages have multiple noun classes" - that might be OK since it's really about gender in natural language, with the conlang only being the motivation.
(It's just that there are other things you could mean by "noun class", such as which declension it belongs to, whether it is countable/uncountable/collective, or proper/common...)
But anyway, won't the answer be "these 14,987 languages have more than one noun class"? And why can't the part about creating this language be left out, if he is asking about real languages anyway?
@Cerberus I do not disagree with the first part; the question would have to be edited to not be a list question. @Alenanno is right about the second part; context is important
@Cerberus Considering the premise, you could set some requirements for the list of questions you're asking. This would help increase the quality of the question.
@MarkBeadles That reminds me of the Japanese 弟 (otōto) younger brother.
We have already established the boundaries of what questions we allow on constructed languages, I believe, in some older Meta question; but creating languages certainly was not what we would allow.
Guys, the "what other languages have this feature" is already on topic for us. Certainly, if you ask for a feature that is too common, then it's too broad.
@Cerberus I think maybe I'm not being clear. I do not advocate questions like "help me build my conlang". I am saying, "if conlang is part of the questions, don't close it immediately"
@Alenanno Perhaps I got the wrong impression from your example question here...so what kind of questions about constructed languages would you want to allow now that we didn't already allow a month ago?
@Alenanno Well. If you won't even allow that, then how have things changed between the last time you posted a Meta question about conlangs (when we were agreed) and the latest Meta question? The latter seems to want to allow "help me construct x"?
@MarkBeadles What kind of question? "Wouldn't it have been more consistent for Tolkien to have used word x in language B instead of word y?"? I would not like a question like that.
@Alenanno Again, the real question is not about conlangs, so it could be OK. The first bit is mainly irrelevant, so I would not say this question is about conlangs.
@Cerberus I mean, if you say "more consistent", you're asking for answers that bring up facts and references and analyze the problem, not for opinions.
Because you're referring to the rules Tolkien himself used.
"Tolkien used a word with a harsh cht sound in the elven word for "tree", "achts"; would it not have been more consistent to have used a softer, friendlier sound, like "and"?"
@Alenanno I see what you mean, but surely this means conjecturing about Tolkien's rules, and implying that following a rule is good, and that he did not do so?
@Cerberus In Tolkien's case, he heavily documented his process, was a trained and working linguist, and based his languages off of real-world ones. So I could see an answer that was rigorous, depending on how the question was constructed
Secondly, how is asking about the intentions of a single artist part of linguistics? Unless you apply elaborate literary theory, which I am sure will not happen here, it will not be academic at all.
@MarkBeadles In theory, yes; but you would have to be a Tolkien expert and apply literary theory, not the kind of linguistics typically applied her.
@Cerberus Indeed, it's going to depend on the questions. Since there are as yet none, and we all have good awareness of the "issues", let's deal with them as they come. Truly bad questions are pretty easy to agree on.
It's the "borderline" questions that will cause arguing.
> The community has voted to favor the questions about Constructed and Fictional languages. However, some conditions must be met. For example: Off Topic: Why was this feature constructed the way it was?