The CBB

Dezinaa wrote:I've been nerding out about sign languages recently.

By necessity, conversations would only allow one person to talk at a time.

I'm guessing you've never seen a group of deaf folks all talking at once!

Vocalizations could be used for emphasis, onomatopoeia, and getting someone’s attention, but there would be no full-fledged spoken languages. Some simple messages could be conveyed vocally, like “Stop,” “Hello,” “Help me,” “Excuse me,” etc, and highly specialized trade-specific signals.

Communicating while using one's hands for something else would be akin to talking with your mouth full.

Anak! Don't talk with your hands full! It's not nice.

Singing and dancing would be combined. It would use rhythmic, exaggerated hand movements and body/foot movements. Instead of bands having a lead singer, they would have a lead signer. (Something like this, minus the actual singing, of course.) The implications for poetry are pretty beautiful too, in my opinion. See here

Possibly also more rhythmic in nature. Choral signing would definitely be a thing. Although their harmonisation / choreography leaves a bit to be desired. Their disjointed movements, each individual with his own idiosyncratic interpretation of signs in space and time, would be like an annoyingly out-of-tune quire among language speakers.

Individuals that break/lose one or both of their arms (assuming this species has two arms) would have a difficult time communicating.

Sign prosthesis systems would become a necessity, much the way we have external larynxes for vocal cordless people.

The advent of telecommunication would be delayed, because there doesn't seem to be any intuitive way to transcribe sign language into a Morse Code-like system.

If they have a written form of the language, a morse system would not be all that difficult to come up with. If anything, signed language is far more amenable to morsification. They might for example develop a simple morse code where you bob your hand up and down as if rapping on someone's (chamber) door. Each rap with closed fist is a dot; each strike with a flattened hand is a dash. A manual morse code. Very handy (coo, pun totally intended!) for quick communication across a room, for example. With the bonus that a morse signer can carry on two convos at once using both hands.

I have to put this all in a conworld! This new aspect of conlanging/conworlding is exciting.

Please do!

Also: monks who take vows of silence might wear mittens. Perhaps, like when you were a kid and had a string connecting the two so you wouldn't lose them. Such a binding would hinder signed speech, rendering the monks so bound essentially voiceless.

@ Dezinaa & elemtilas:


http://pislresearch.com/illustrations/l ... x8_046.jpg


http://pislresearch.com/illustrations/l ... x8_065.jpg
http://pislresearch.com/illustrations/l ... x8_094.jpg



http://www.babysignlanguage.com/signs/thank_you.gif



Sorry for the PISL/ASL mishmash. I'd prefer to use PISL, but individual sign illustrations on the 'Net are woefully scarce
I had a lot more to say, but it got erased when I went to send {I got bumped back to the sign in ¿¿¿ftw??? Anyways, rock on handsigners!!!

Dezinaa wrote: The advent of telecommunication would be delayed, because there doesn't seem to be any intuitive way to transcribe sign language into a Morse Code-like system.

That's a bit of a cart-before-horse thing, though. You have to have a writing system, first—which may very well be ideographic, but doesn't have to be—and then that writing system may or may not lend itself towards Morse Code. And if you're dealing with an ideographic system, you'd probably end up with something like Chinese telegraph code.

Creyeditor wrote:I had a similar idea. One interesting aspect is that there might be a special 'spoken language' for blind people

That's a good idea!

Creyeditor wrote:

Dezinaa wrote:By necessity, conversations would only allow one person to talk at a time.

Why?

Well, I guess I didn't think about it enough. My thought process was that you don't have a choice to listen to spoken language; if someone says something, you hear it. With sign languages, you have to be looking at the speaker to "hear" them. I suppose peripheral vision would allow two or more people to talk at once, though.

elemtilas wrote:

Dezinaa wrote:I've been nerding out about sign languages recently.

By necessity, conversations would only allow one person to talk at a time.

I'm guessing you've never seen a group of deaf folks all talking at once!

No, I haven't. I should do some more research/video-watching.

Singing and dancing would be combined. It would use rhythmic, exaggerated hand movements and body/foot movements. Instead of bands having a lead singer, they would have a lead signer. (Something like this, minus the actual singing, of course.) The implications for poetry are pretty beautiful too, in my opinion. See here

Possibly also more rhythmic in nature. Choral signing would definitely be a thing. Although their harmonisation / choreography leaves a bit to be desired. Their disjointed movements, each individual with his own idiosyncratic interpretation of signs in space and time, would be like an annoyingly out-of-tune quire among language speakers.

Good points.

Individuals that break/lose one or both of their arms (assuming this species has two arms) would have a difficult time communicating.

Sign prosthesis systems would become a necessity, much the way we have external larynxes for vocal cordless people.

Interesting idea!

The advent of telecommunication would be delayed, because there doesn't seem to be any intuitive way to transcribe sign language into a Morse Code-like system.

If they have a written form of the language, a morse system would not be all that difficult to come up with. If anything, signed language is far more amenable to morsification. They might for example develop a simple morse code where you bob your hand up and down as if rapping on someone's (chamber) door. Each rap with closed fist is a dot; each strike with a flattened hand is a dash. A manual morse code. Very handy (coo, pun totally intended!) for quick communication across a room, for example. With the bonus that a morse signer can carry on two convos at once using both hands.

I was thinking it would be more difficult because of all the possibilities of hand movement compared to speech. But I guess a Morse code wouldn't have to encode everything (an audio-abjad?).

I have to put this all in a conworld! This new aspect of conlanging/conworlding is exciting.

Please do!

I'll be sure to make a thread when I work some details out.

Also: monks who take vows of silence might wear mittens. Perhaps, like when you were a kid and had a string connecting the two so you wouldn't lose them. Such a binding would hinder signed speech, rendering the monks so bound essentially voiceless.

Also a nice idea.

Axiem wrote:

Dezinaa wrote: The advent of telecommunication would be delayed, because there doesn't seem to be any intuitive way to transcribe sign language into a Morse Code-like system.

That's a bit of a cart-before-horse thing, though. You have to have a writing system, first—which may very well be ideographic, but doesn't have to be—and then that writing system may or may not lend itself towards Morse Code. And if you're dealing with an ideographic system, you'd probably end up with something like Chinese telegraph code.

Thanks for the link, interesting.

Dezinaa wrote:

elemtilas wrote:I'm guessing you've never seen a group of deaf folks all talking at once!

No, I haven't. I should do some more research/video-watching.

I was on a train once sitting near I think five or six deaf students. They were all talking at once. Just like hearing folks, it's possible to carry on more than one simultaneous conversation.

Rather ironic, watching them engage in boisterous convo while in the quiet car of the train!

I was thinking it would be more difficult because of all the possibilities of hand movement compared to speech. But I guess a Morse code wouldn't have to encode everything (an audio-abjad?).

There's a lot one can encode in morse type systems. 19th century telegraphers certainly had access to what we know as emoticons to encode supralinguistic stuff. I see no reason why an obligate signed language culture would not come up with some way for its telegraph operators to succinctly communicate emotions, attitudes and &c.

73

Axiem wrote:

Dezinaa wrote: The advent of telecommunication would be delayed, because there doesn't seem to be any intuitive way to transcribe sign language into a Morse Code-like system.

That's a bit of a cart-before-horse thing, though. You have to have a writing system, first—which may very well be ideographic, but doesn't have to be—and then that writing system may or may not lend itself towards Morse Code. And if you're dealing with an ideographic system, you'd probably end up with something like Chinese telegraph code.

I first thought that an ideographic system would be more closely aligned to a hand-sign language, but then, ¿why? Why would it be any different from spoken langs?
I then likewise contemplated an alphabet or syllabary (or abjad per Dezinaa) for a hand-sign language. But, instead of vocal morpheme, individual hand-sign 'gestemes' might be represented with greater or lesser accuracy in these non-ideographic systems.

Wow. Very interesting.

Micamo wrote:Midh believe (or rather, once did) that something's shadow is the anchor that ties it to reality. If you lose your connection with your shadow, you can be whisked away to all sorts of horrible places by evil spirits. So, to make sure this didn't happen, they took their shadows and wove them into blankets, black as the night sky, which they wrapped around themselves at all times.

...That probably sounds really stupid, doesn't it?

Not at all! I really like that idea! You reminded me of a concept I've employed for a world of mine, one in which I've been running a long daydream story.

Through certain spells (which very from region to region and teacher to teacher), magicians can create two types of entities from their soul: a Reflection and a Shadow. These tie into the two primary elements, Light and Shade. Light separates, Shade unites. Following with this, a person's Reflection is an aspect of themselves which they are too closely tied to. The Reflection seeks to separate from its host, as they do not want to be seen as the defining part of the person. The Shadow, on the other hand, is an aspect which the host does not wish to acknowledge they have. The Shadow seeks to unite, and be recognized as part of the person.

The Shadow and Reflection take on the form of the actual shadow and reflection cast by the host. They can "manifest" as a semi-physical being (they can interact with the host or with other Shadows and Reflections), so one's shadow might start walking around, or their reflection could leave the mirror. When they manifest, the quality they embody is diminished in the host. So Shadows rarely manifest, and never go far from the host (it's emotionally straining for both of them), while Reflections will any chance they get. Oddly enough, from "experience," most hosts are annoyed by the presence of their Shadows at first. I'm not sure about Reflections, but it's likely inverted.

Hmm... not as short as I thought it would be, but I have one last note. Since Shadows are constructed from Shade, they can absorb magical energies, basically turning into walking spells. Reflections are composed of Light, and cannot be affected by spells--the energy will bounce off them and create a random burst.

I just had a random idea I thought I'd share. What if god(s) of a setting were like developers of a MMO game, releasing patches and expansions when they discover exploits or create new content?

I have noticed that conworlds which have god(s) usually fall into one of two categories: either there is a god (or gods) who create the world and then let it run its course according to the rules they set out or gods are immanent in the world and are themselves subject to the world's rules. With this idea, gods would be periodically involved, altering the rules, changing the geography or even introducing new magic (or removed old capabilities which they consider overpowered).

Not sure if I will ever use this idea myself but I thought it was interesting and unique enough to share here. :)

The "character" of Magic in El Goonish Shive does that sort of thing, changing how magic works every so often for reasons. (And, the people affected get the chance to influence how it changes). Also, the immortals are (at the time I'm writing this) potentially debating changing the rules that prevent them from interfering with the human world for reasons.

Otherwise, I don't know that I've seen it. It's a pretty interesting idea, and you could do a lot of stuff with it.

For some reason, this idea makes me think of the movie The Truman Show, even though it's not exactly the same as what you described.

gestaltist wrote: ↑31 Jul 2018 14:16 I just had a random idea I thought I'd share. What if god(s) of a setting were like developers of a MMO game, releasing patches and expansions when they discover exploits or create new content?

I have noticed that conworlds which have god(s) usually fall into one of two categories: either there is a god (or gods) who create the world and then let it run its course according to the rules they set out or gods are immanent in the world and are themselves subject to the world's rules. With this idea, gods would be periodically involved, altering the rules, changing the geography or even introducing new magic (or removed old capabilities which they consider overpowered).

Not sure if I will ever use this idea myself but I thought it was interesting and unique enough to share here. :)

It's a fantastic idea, indeed!

One worthy of squirrelling away for consideration...

I have an idea that the Mata people(they are humans with mostly a Central Asian look, with some members look White), the speakers of Mayato( https://conworkshop.com/view_language.php?l=XMY ) have fairies that look like old women, and those old-looking fairies are the queens of fairies.

It is said that they created such fairies to teach children to respect the old, especially old females.

elemtilas wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 00:08 It's a fantastic idea, indeed!

One worthy of squirrelling away for consideration...

Thanks elemtilas. At the moment, I'm thinking this might be a way to unify some of my as of now separate conworlds. It's quite exciting but I've since learned to approach new ideas with some level of caution lest I end up with Yet Another Incomplete Conworld (TM).

k1234567890y wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 10:42 I have an idea that the Mata people(they are humans with mostly a Central Asian look, with some members look White), the speakers of Mayato( https://conworkshop.com/view_language.php?l=XMY ) have fairies that look like old women, and those old-looking fairies are the queens of fairies.

It is said that they created such fairies to teach children to respect the old, especially old females.

Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard of fairies being conscious human creations. So they'd be more like robots or artificially engineered humanoids? And can they reproduce or are they only ever made by humans?

gestaltist wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 11:52

elemtilas wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 00:08 It's a fantastic idea, indeed!

One worthy of squirrelling away for consideration...

Thanks elemtilas. At the moment, I'm thinking this might be a way to unify some of my as of now separate conworlds. It's quite exciting but I've since learned to approach new ideas with some level of caution lest I end up with Yet Another Incomplete Conworld (TM).

k1234567890y wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 10:42 I have an idea that the Mata people(they are humans with mostly a Central Asian look, with some members look White), the speakers of Mayato( https://conworkshop.com/view_language.php?l=XMY ) have fairies that look like old women, and those old-looking fairies are the queens of fairies.

It is said that they created such fairies to teach children to respect the old, especially old females.

Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard of fairies being conscious human creations. So they'd be more like robots or artificially engineered humanoids? And can they reproduce or are they only ever made by humans?

I mean, the people created the legends of old fairies to teach children...;-;

gestaltist wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 11:52

elemtilas wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 00:08 It's a fantastic idea, indeed!

One worthy of squirrelling away for consideration...

Thanks elemtilas. At the moment, I'm thinking this might be a way to unify some of my as of now separate conworlds. It's quite exciting but I've since learned to approach new ideas with some level of caution lest I end up with Yet Another Incomplete Conworld (TM).

YAIC ~ yikes!

Good one, friend!

k1234567890y wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 14:05

gestaltist wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 11:52

elemtilas wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 00:08 It's a fantastic idea, indeed!

One worthy of squirrelling away for consideration...

Thanks elemtilas. At the moment, I'm thinking this might be a way to unify some of my as of now separate conworlds. It's quite exciting but I've since learned to approach new ideas with some level of caution lest I end up with Yet Another Incomplete Conworld (TM).

k1234567890y wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 10:42 I have an idea that the Mata people(they are humans with mostly a Central Asian look, with some members look White), the speakers of Mayato( https://conworkshop.com/view_language.php?l=XMY ) have fairies that look like old women, and those old-looking fairies are the queens of fairies.

It is said that they created such fairies to teach children to respect the old, especially old females.

Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard of fairies being conscious human creations. So they'd be more like robots or artificially engineered humanoids? And can they reproduce or are they only ever made by humans?

I mean, the people created the legends of old fairies to teach children...;-;

I think gestaltist meant that it's rare, or even unheard of, to have fairies be human creations within a conworld or a work of fiction.

shimobaatar wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 21:39

k1234567890y wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 14:05

gestaltist wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 11:52

elemtilas wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 00:08 It's a fantastic idea, indeed!

One worthy of squirrelling away for consideration...

Thanks elemtilas. At the moment, I'm thinking this might be a way to unify some of my as of now separate conworlds. It's quite exciting but I've since learned to approach new ideas with some level of caution lest I end up with Yet Another Incomplete Conworld (TM).

k1234567890y wrote: ↑01 Aug 2018 10:42 I have an idea that the Mata people(they are humans with mostly a Central Asian look, with some members look White), the speakers of Mayato( https://conworkshop.com/view_language.php?l=XMY ) have fairies that look like old women, and those old-looking fairies are the queens of fairies.

It is said that they created such fairies to teach children to respect the old, especially old females.

Interesting. I don't think I've ever heard of fairies being conscious human creations. So they'd be more like robots or artificially engineered humanoids? And can they reproduce or are they only ever made by humans?

I mean, the people created the legends of old fairies to teach children...;-;

I think gestaltist meant that it's rare, or even unheard of, to have fairies be human creations within a conworld or a work of fiction.

I make fairies be held as a belief of the Mata people instead of something in-world-real, like what happens to fairies of our world.

getting an idea of a group of people who always believe in polytheism, and for them, the word for "god" is a plurale tantum(words that are plural only)

that is, a group of people where the idea of "a single supreme god" does not make much sense, if it makes any sense at all.

k1234567890y wrote: ↑16 Dec 2018 18:59 getting an idea of a group of people who always believe in polytheism, and for them, the word for "god" is a plurale tantum(words that are plural only)

that is, a group of people where the idea of "a single supreme god" does not make much sense, if it makes any sense at all.

One could argue that Hebrew Elohim is a plurale tantum, and yet it didn't stop the Hebrew people from believing in a "single supreme god". For your idea to work, that world would have to be one where Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is strictly true.

gestaltist wrote: ↑18 Dec 2018 09:46

k1234567890y wrote: ↑16 Dec 2018 18:59 getting an idea of a group of people who always believe in polytheism, and for them, the word for "god" is a plurale tantum(words that are plural only)

that is, a group of people where the idea of "a single supreme god" does not make much sense, if it makes any sense at all.

One could argue that Hebrew Elohim is a plurale tantum, and yet it didn't stop the Hebrew people from believing in a "single supreme god". For your idea to work, that world would have to be one where Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is strictly true.

ok thanks for telling