L'Inziziun dal Società per l'Ilesnaziun del Glheþ

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Sept 9, 2017 13:36:21 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

It is my belief that the CÚG, in recent times, has failed in its task as the regulatory agency of the Talossan language. It does nothing nowadays, despite our language's urgent need of decisions about things like consonant mutations, the vocabulary, and the grammar. Also, membership is too exclusive to allow new opinions.

It can't be denied that the CÚG has been less active recently than anyone would like. However, it has not ignored the "urgent need of decisions" regarding mutations, rather, it has come to considered decisions regarding mutations that are different than what their (mutations') fan club would prefer.

The CÚG isn't going to simply disappear. As such, I'm gravely concerned that your new organisation will result in more confusion and dialectisation than we already have unless you account for that fact. I would encourage you to either clarify your vision for the respective roles of this new organisation and the CÚG to account for their continued coexistence, or propose reforms to the CÚG to broaden its membership or make it more responsive.

[Iac Marscheir]

Sept 15, 2017 10:06:59 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Sept 9, 2017 13:36:21 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

It is my belief that the CÚG, in recent times, has failed in its task as the regulatory agency of the Talossan language. It does nothing nowadays, despite our language's urgent need of decisions about things like consonant mutations, the vocabulary, and the grammar. Also, membership is too exclusive to allow new opinions.

It can't be denied that the CÚG has been less active recently than anyone would like. However, it has not ignored the "urgent need of decisions" regarding mutations, rather, it has come to considered decisions regarding mutations that are different than what their (mutations') fan club would prefer.

The CÚG isn't going to simply disappear. As such, I'm gravely concerned that your new organisation will result in more confusion and dialectisation than we already have unless you account for that fact. I would encourage you to either clarify your vision for the respective roles of this new organisation and the CÚG to account for their continued coexistence, or propose reforms to the CÚG to broaden its membership or make it more responsive.

I'm more in line with people's opinions on the mutations now that I understand where people are coming from.

As to the continued existence of the CÚG, it was suggested to me to create an organization of my own by a person who is in the CÚG. At the moment, it seems to be easier to create a new organization, and, as such, one we are able to mold to make better. Do you beat old metal into the tool you want, or do you forge a new one direct from the flames? With regards to the creation of more dialects, the goal of the SIGN is to create a version of the CÚG that is not quite as difficult to join so that people will want to develop, and therefore use, the language. If SIGN were to become the "official" Talossan language organization, then its policies would become the standard language, and whatever dialect created by the SIGN would become official.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Sept 15, 2017 11:23:36 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

At the moment, it seems to be easier to create a new organization, and, as such, one we are able to mold to make better. Do you beat old metal into the tool you want, or do you forge a new one direct from the flames? With regards to the creation of more dialects, the goal of the SIGN is to create a version of the CÚG that is not quite as difficult to join so that people will want to develop, and therefore use, the language. If SIGN were to become the "official" Talossan language organization, then its policies would become the standard language, and whatever dialect created by the SIGN would become official.

The CÚG has over 30 years of history behind it, and I feel strongly that that's something worth preserving. I really think it's a big mistake to unilaterally create a new organisation and expect everyone else to just jettison the one that's been around since 1983 and has official legal status and join yours instead. I do not believe this is in the best interest of the language, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Did you really expect everyone to abandon the CÚG? Without even discussing the idea or suggesting any reforms to the existing organisation? Or are you unconcerned by the idea that some people will stick with the CÚG and there will simply be one more competing standard going forward?

[Iac Marscheir]

Sept 15, 2017 12:10:22 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Sept 15, 2017 11:23:36 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

At the moment, it seems to be easier to create a new organization, and, as such, one we are able to mold to make better. Do you beat old metal into the tool you want, or do you forge a new one direct from the flames? With regards to the creation of more dialects, the goal of the SIGN is to create a version of the CÚG that is not quite as difficult to join so that people will want to develop, and therefore use, the language. If SIGN were to become the "official" Talossan language organization, then its policies would become the standard language, and whatever dialect created by the SIGN would become official.

The CÚG has over 30 years of history behind it, and I feel strongly that that's something worth preserving. I really think it's a big mistake to unilaterally create a new organisation and expect everyone else to just jettison the one that's been around since 1983 and has official legal status and join yours instead. I do not believe this is in the best interest of the language, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Did you really expect everyone to abandon the CÚG? Without even discussing the idea or suggesting any reforms to the existing organisation? Or are you unconcerned by the idea that some people will stick with the CÚG and there will simply be one more competing standard going forward?

I do not expect people to abandon anything or to join my organization, nor do I believe anyone should. I just think that there is a better way to do things. Whether general opinion agrees is yet to be seen. You are perfectly allowed to have your opinions, and I won't tell you you can't.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial]

Did you really expect everyone to abandon the CÚG? Without even discussing the idea or suggesting any reforms to the existing organisation? Or are you unconcerned by the idea that some people will stick with the CÚG and there will simply be one more competing standard going forward?

Oh god. Would that mean that Talossan would fracture into four (or eight, if mutations are considered) competing dialects?

Oh god.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Sept 15, 2017 12:46:58 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

I do not expect people to abandon anything or to join my organization, nor do I believe anyone should. I just think that there is a better way to do things.

Do you not see the implications of your approach, and the precedent it will set? What happens when the next new citizen comes along 6 months from now and thinks he or she has a better way to do things? Why shouldn't he or she just create yet another language organization and fork the language yet again?

[Iac Marscheir]

Sept 15, 2017 12:53:27 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Sept 15, 2017 12:46:58 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

I do not expect people to abandon anything or to join my organization, nor do I believe anyone should. I just think that there is a better way to do things.

Do you not see the implications of your approach, and the precedent it will set? What happens when the next new citizen comes along 6 months from now and thinks he or she has a better way to do things? Why shouldn't he or she just create yet another language organization and fork the language yet again?

Okay, what do you suggest?

[Iac Marscheir]

I honestly do want to hear what you have to suggest, if anything.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Sept 15, 2017 12:53:27 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Sept 15, 2017 12:46:58 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

I do not expect people to abandon anything or to join my organization, nor do I believe anyone should. I just think that there is a better way to do things.

Do you not see the implications of your approach, and the precedent it will set? What happens when the next new citizen comes along 6 months from now and thinks he or she has a better way to do things? Why shouldn't he or she just create yet another language organization and fork the language yet again?

On a personal level: I am amused by people who thought they could unilaterally fork the language in 2007 arguing like this.

As MiniCult: let a hundred flowers bloom. The existence of SIGN may well spark the CÚG back into action. I don't see a problem with this, and I'm happy to be involved in both bodies. King Robert I tried to shut down our "Penginijtung" dialect in 1997 because it competed with el glheþ naziunál (he thought - he was wrong). That just made its proponents more determined.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Sept 15, 2017 13:43:24 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

I honestly do want to hear what you have to suggest, if anything.

Hmm. Here's my thought. I'll join your organisation and you join the CÚG. One focus of the SIGN Congress should be a discussion of what the role of the new organisation should be, particularly in relation to the CÚG. We'll try to get as many CÚG members as possible to participate as well. All options should be on the table, including:

1. Winding down the SIGN but reforming the CÚG to make it more efficient.

2. Winding down the CÚG and replacing it with SIGN.

3. SIGN and CÚG both become components of some umbrella organisation, with complementary roles.

4. SIGN becomes a subsidiary organisation of the CÚG.

5. The CÚG becomes a subsidiary organisation of SIGN.

6. We end up agreeing to disagree and both organisations do their own thing.

Let's see how many viewpoints we can get and see if we can come to some kind of consensus that takes all interests into account. We need some degree of stability and continuity with the language, but we also need to get people active and provide ways for them to be involved. We need to keep enhancing the depth and complexity of the language, and we also need to broaden its appeal and make it accessible to as many Talossans (and interested non-Talossans!) as possible. We need to find out how many people are interested in being involved with the language, and what kinds of things they are interested in doing.

Incidentally, the Talossan language organisation of the Republic was l'Icastola, or the Academy. I've always thought the "Academy" name seemed cool (like the French Academy or the Royal Spanish Academy) and have long wondered whether there was a way to revive the Academy in a coordinate role with the CÚG.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Sept 15, 2017 16:30:31 GMT -6 Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN said:

On a personal level: I am amused by people who thought they could unilaterally fork the language in 2007 arguing like this.

Understandable. The 2007 Arestada had some things that I think were very good, some things that in retrospect were not so good, and the unintended consequence of a major division in the Talossan language community. I can understand the perspective that it wasn't worth it. I can also understand the perspective that it was worth it (while recognising that it also had drawbacks). What I can't understand is the idea that what we really need now is more division.

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

¿Come povadr’éu entrarh àl SIGN?

[Iac Marscheir]

Sept 15, 2017 23:09:05 GMT -6 Sir C. M. Siervicül said:

Sept 15, 2017 13:43:24 GMT -6 Iac Marscheir said:

I honestly do want to hear what you have to suggest, if anything.

Hmm. Here's my thought. I'll join your organisation and you join the CÚG. One focus of the SIGN Congress should be a discussion of what the role of the new organisation should be, particularly in relation to the CÚG. We'll try to get as many CÚG members as possible to participate as well. All options should be on the table, including:

1. Winding down the SIGN but reforming the CÚG to make it more efficient.

2. Winding down the CÚG and replacing it with SIGN.

3. SIGN and CÚG both become components of some umbrella organisation, with complementary roles.

4. SIGN becomes a subsidiary organisation of the CÚG.

5. The CÚG becomes a subsidiary organisation of SIGN.

6. We end up agreeing to disagree and both organisations do their own thing.

Let's see how many viewpoints we can get and see if we can come to some kind of consensus that takes all interests into account. We need some degree of stability and continuity with the language, but we also need to get people active and provide ways for them to be involved. We need to keep enhancing the depth and complexity of the language, and we also need to broaden its appeal and make it accessible to as many Talossans (and interested non-Talossans!) as possible. We need to find out how many people are interested in being involved with the language, and what kinds of things they are interested in doing.

Incidentally, the Talossan language organisation of the Republic was l'Icastola, or the Academy. I've always thought the "Academy" name seemed cool (like the French Academy or the Royal Spanish Academy) and have long wondered whether there was a way to revive the Academy in a coordinate role with the CÚG.

Ah, okay, now we're getting somewhere. That being said, I kind of created el congreßeu for internal discussion of how the SIGN was going to work. However, I'm all for the idea of creating another thread for discussions between the CÚG and the SIGN as to their existence relative to one another.

[Iac Marscheir]

Sept 16, 2017 2:38:53 GMT -6 Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun said:

¿Come povadr’éu entrarh àl SIGN?

Voi fossent solamint zirarh qe veletz ça entrarh, parsequitat par 'n post àd acest fil.

[Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun]

D’acîrd, ¡volt entrarh àl SIGN, sch’o Voi piaça!