Experimental features: Difference between revisions

704 bytes removed ,  13:44, 15 February 2022
m (fix toadua links)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Prefaçe ==
== Preface ==
All living languages, constructed or natural, have a tendency to fluctuate organically. This is in no small part because languages are tools for expressing ideas, and when a new kind of idea arises in the world, there’s usually a lockstepped linguistic shift to account for it. In the domain of logical languages, however, things are much more clear-cut – there’s the ''official'' language, [[wikipedia:prescriptive|prescriptive]] by definition, more or less comprehensively outlined in a [[reference grammar]] or two; and then there’s the “actual”, descriptive outlook on the shape of the language. And while the inherent prescriptiveness of loglangs ([https://loglangs.wiki/Definitions_of_loglanghood whatever they are]) does mean that there will always be a discernible “barrier” between the official and the unofficial, this does not mean that the prescriptive standard cannot embrace features found within the community over time; the typical motivation for even desiring to use such is to improve the language’s ergonomics by experimentation, by “empirical proof”, which also entails that features which do not gain traction by oral dissemination or by vocal advocation, or ones which are left unacknowlegded by [[Hoemaı|the creator]] – or even consciously rejected, as it happens from time to time – typically die out rather than form discrete dialects used by paticular members. (This is not true for [https://lojban.org languages whose conservative governance continuously rejects innovation in the name of… well… in the name of ''something'', I’m sure].) The creator of Toaq has himself put forth several proposals with the intention that the community test them; and even some of those (despite coming from the very [[wikipedia:BDFL:]]!) have not stood the test of time.
All living languages, constructed or natural, have a tendency to fluctuate organically. A conlang, especially a [[logical language]] like Toaq is by its very nature [[wikipedia:prescriptive|prescribed]] by its author (in the [[Reference Grammar]]) to a large degree. While the inherent prescriptiveness of loglangs ([https://loglangs.wiki/Definitions_of_loglanghood whatever they are]) does mean that there will always be a discernible “barrier” between the official and the unofficial, this does not mean that the prescriptive standard cannot embrace features found within the community over time.


This page documents the lexical and grammatical, conceptual and pragmatical proposed experimental features of the language, grouped by category and sorted in semi-chronological order where convenient. Each particular feature is not elaborated upon beyond what is necessary to grasp the gist of it; this is not a discussion page nor a soapbox (that’s where the [[Discord]] is), and is intended as a historical, at-a-glance document.
Such unofficial features may improve the language’s ergonomics by experimentation, and eventually become adopted officially. Others may not gain traction, or be rejected by the community or [[the author|Hoemai]]. These features typically die out rather than form discrete dialects used by paticular members. (This is not true for [https://lojban.org languages whose conservative governance continuously rejects innovation in the name of… well… in the name of ''something'', I’m sure].)
 
The creator of Toaq has himself put forth several proposals with the intention that the community test them, and even some of those have not stood the test of time.
 
This page documents experimental features of the language. Each particular feature is not elaborated upon beyond what is necessary to grasp the gist of it. This is not a discussion page nor a soapbox (try [[Discord]] instead), and is intended as a historical, at-a-glance document.


= The Catalogue of Experimental Features =
= The Catalogue of Experimental Features =