I'd like to open this post with a thank you to those who have replied to my rather vague and cryptic questions of the last post. I'm happy to hear that this workshop has helped in some respects - but while I'm a staunch supporter of consciousness-raising, I am hoping I can offer a few concrete suggestions on the projects you all have described to me. Since this is the first workshop I've offered on the topic of language design, I've been feeling my way a little, and I'm grateful for your patience.
Here is where I have arrived in my thoughts on the various projects, and my suggestions for what you might submit to me:
pyraxis: I'm happy to see you thinking through the phonology of rsakki and systematizing the names. I appreciate you posting the excerpt, also. I wonder if you could show me a short (up to 250 words) excerpt which demonstrates the rsakki interacting with non-rsakki, perhaps showing some of the ways you indicate language contrasts.
wordjinn: I'm happy to see you thinking through how to express the various nuances of the djinni speech. Since I was most intrigued by the idea of sung vs. spoken and spoken vs. telepathically communicated, I'd like to see a short (up to 250 words) sample conversation which involves some of these distinctions - hopefully also one that hints at the main conflicts of your story.
K: I'm happy to see you thinking about the relation of language and culture to your story on so many different levels. I was very intrigued by the idea of the contrast between languages that Kei has to bridge, so if you could I'd like you to try making a list of phrases that might be used for social purposes among the Eyans - trying of course to let the content of these phrases indicate people's attitudes toward various types (psychic and non-psychic) of communication. Here's an idea that might start you off: see if you can construct a compliment or two, something you'd say in admiration of someone else's restraint, for example. Or perhaps an insult that deals with insincerity of emotional projection.
David: I'm happy to see you attempting a project so thoroughly permeated by language. There are so many things I could ask about that I find it a bit daunting, but I think I'd most appreciate it if you could give me a rough timeline of language development among the arcati. Points that I'd really like to see you address would be:
1. Why language use evolved among the arcati before the inundation (why did they need to speak? Why was it adaptively successful to communicate using the auditory or visual channel that they do?
2. What form written language took before the inundation
3. From the point of view of a genetic engineer, how they planned to deal with the problem of living and communicating underwater
4. From the point of view of a genetic engineer, how they justified a complete abandonment of air-breathing capability (or not).
5. What kind of attempts were made to preserve written information through the inundation (waterproof floating libraries :-) ?)
Catreona: I'm really happy that you've found the workshop to be illuminating. I feel for you in the story dilemma that you're facing - but I feel strongly that it's important to face such issues and work through them. While your story may emerge different, you may find that it becomes stronger and more compelling for you as well as others. I don't want to put you under pressure for a final product here, because after all this is all about making the story better. If you feel you would be better served by explaining the premise problem you're facing, then feel free to do so. I'll leave it up to you - but you should know this: none of the effort spent on a story is ever wasted. I have enormous quantities of text that I've created that no one will ever see, but all those words have served to deepen my understanding of created worlds and writing, and sometimes I'll find phrases or concepts I hated to discard showing up in unexpected places in my newer work.
Thanks, everyone. I'd like to see replies from all of you by the end of Wednesday if that's not too much of an imposition. In the meantime I'll try to compose some posts that have been inspired by our discussions in this workshop.
More soon...
In Chapter Two as presently constituted, Charlie runs into Emma onh her way indoors from having snatched a few precious moments outdoors with Bronte. The blindingly obvious question that finally occurred to me is: Why would he let her go back into that house? Why not take her and Packer (her personal care robot) and make tracks? She's of age, and so can go anywhere she wants to go. He has telekynetic powers, and so can transport her to Marrooner's Haven, or his grandmother's home in the Falibars, or anywhere else. So, why not just do it? After all, the main point is, or has always been, to get her out of an increasingly difficult, potentially abusive home situation.
ReplyDeleteThe alternatives I see are three:
1. Bronte seizes the opportunity while Mrs. Morrow is from home and spirits Emma away. In which case, Charlie doesn't run into her when he's at the house. In fact, in this case Morrow engages Charlie to find Emma, even though Charlie is not a detective.
2. Charlie runs into Emma as she is on her way out to meet Bronte through a side or back door and accompanies her. In this case, Charlie, Packer, Emma and Bronte have a council of war at the rendezvous point.
3. Charlie runs into Emma as she is on her way out to meet Bronte. They briefly converse, but before she can proceed, she has that coughing fit, worse than currently envisaged, and Packer takes her back upstairs, thereby canceling the assignation and blowing any chance of escape.
Since I posted my complaint the other night, a friend has suggested that there might be a very good reason Bronte doesn't "telelope" with Emma, a reason that is not revealed till the end of the story. This suggestion appeals to me. Such a reason would doubtless have both personal and cultural components. For instance, Emma might not want to abandon her father.
Catreona,
ReplyDeleteCyrillic is a very interesting alphabet, but not one with which I'm terribly familiar. This should probably explain why I don't mention it much :-). I have sung music written in medieval notation, and it's perfectly doable, if a little disorienting at first. Your idea of a complex system sounds very interesting. The only difficulty with ideographic systems that portray meaning is the sheer number of different possible meanings. Capturing language sounds generally reduces the number of total symbols needed.
As far as the story options you've shown me, the one I like the best is #1, where Bronte does elope with Emma (by whatever means) and then Charlie gets sent after them. The reason I like this one is that it appears to have the most opportunity for conflict. I've always thought Charlie and Bronte were on good terms if they weren't actually friends - so to have Charlie have a difficult choice between honoring his contractual obligation to Emma's parents and honoring his friendship with Bronte and Emma would be fascinating. That would be a neat place for the story to go.
1. Why language use evolved among the arcati before the inundation (why did they need to speak? Why was it adaptively successful to communicate using the auditory or visual channel that they do?
ReplyDeleteThe pre-sentient arcati were an omnivorous humanoid species living in small family groups. In that era, their homeworld was largely covered in heavy forest, and the arcati were tree-dwellers. Their communication channels evolved to suit this environment and heavily forested terrain.
When a predator was spotted, the arcati could skinflash bright warning colours to alert the rest of their family group, and then camouflage themselves by adopting the colouring of the trees and leaves around them (at this point, the predator has most likely spotted them, so running away probably helped, too).
The scent language started out as a further disguise -- looking like a leaf doesn’t save you if the predator hunts by smell. But if you can also make yourself smell like a leaf…
It also makes it easier for you to hunt if you smell like your prey, instead of like a predator.
But line-of-sight is limited in heavy forest. And smell is fine if you’re close or downwind. So the vocal channel became more important simply because it carried further in the forest.
2. What form written language took before the inundation.
Haven’t given that much thought, beyond the idea that the colours of skinflashed emotional nuances could be indicated by the colour of the ink. Of course, then I have to choose some sort of neutral colour for the paper -- you can’t read submissive-white words on submissive-white paper.
3. From the point of view of a genetic engineer, how they planned to deal with the problem of living and communicating underwater?
The original idea was that the engineered arcati would be air-breathers like marine mammals, and that they would assist the un-engineered arcati in the colonisation of the oceans. There were also plans for lungfish-style gills and lungs, for those deeper dives when reaching the surface just wasn’t an option. Both engineered and un-engineered arcati could communicate vocally at the surface of the sea, or in the access chambers built into the first undersea habitats. Underwater microphones could pick up aquatic arcati vocal speech, and relay it to air-breathers.
Big windows in the undersea habitats would allow skinflash communication to go both ways.
Scent only works for those who can smell underwater. The scent language is limited to communication at the surface, or between aquatics.
4. From the point of view of a genetic engineer, how they justified a complete abandonment of air-breathing capability (or not).
Survival. The genetic engineers got all caught up in the excitement of what they could do, and didn’t bother asking the general population if they really should do it. Some sections of arcati society thought that the engineered were abominations that should be shot on sight. So having to surface for air became a liability, putting the engineered at the mercy of fanatics in boats. Being able to remain underwater became a plus for survival.
5. What kind of attempts were made to preserve written information through the inundation (waterproof floating libraries :-) ?)
Yes, there would have been attempts like that. But there was a war going on, a civil war fought along religious and racial/genetic lines. There would have been attempts to sabotage any attempt by the other side to preserve their “knowledge” (which was obviously heretical, anyway).
As I write this, I’ve just had an image of a vast floating library, in flames. Burning to the waterline.
I’m also wondering how well engraved plaques might survive underwater. And how certain characters might not want to believe what is written there…
Juliette,
ReplyDeleteDon't apologise. Your daughter's health obviously takes a much higher priority than my writing.
Now, initial thoughts:
I do want Talioth choking in one of the early scenes, as she tries to breathe air, and doesn't quite manage it. But this would be possible if she still has air-breathing capability, she has never used it, she panics, and the gulp of air blows through her gills instead of her lungs.
I hoped that I'd given the impression that the competition between communication systems had been won by the vocal channel, for the reasons we've both identified. The other two channels remain as emotional indicators more than anything else, although of course camouflage can be useful in some situations.
With the genetic engineers - I was thinking that they would be so focussed upon the technical problems (we need people who can work at a depth greater than the hold-your-breath limit, so how do we do it?) that they, well, not IGNORE, but grossly underestimate the objections of the deeply religious (who are fully prepared to die for their purity, until they realise that they can always survive on ships).