<p>My personal guess would still be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua" rel="nofollow noreferrer">IALA Interlingua</a> which has an established language community and some tradition. It came with a rather elaborate dictionary right from the start.</p>
<p>But there are some contenders, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klingon_language" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Klingon</a> driven by fandom with an active language community, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Toki Pona</a>.</p>
<p>I am not sure about the status of the various projects of zonal Slavic languages like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Slavic_language" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Interslavic</a>—tracking and distinguishing all the ongoing projects with vexingly similar names and frequent renamings or synonyms is already really difficult.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-25T11:17:52.570Z
Isn't Toki Pona designed specifically to be simple and minimalistic, i.e. not elaborate? (Not to say that the _construction_ of Toki Pona was not an elaborate task; Lang's work is certainly incredible)
Cecilia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-25T12:39:45.523Z
Sometimes, simple rules can create very complex systems, in terms of games I think of Go/Baduk/Weiqi compared to Chess. Elaboration is than the amount of theory and practice available, both Go and Chess are highly elaborate games. Judging from the Q&A to Toki Pona here, it has reached some higher level of elaboration already.
Sir Cornflakes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-23T15:28:27.153Z
2022-05-23T15:39:23.630Z
2022-05-23T15:39:23.630Z
Sir Cornflakes
<p>What would be the most elaborate constructed language today in terms of size of vocabulary, complexity of grammar, number of exceptions to the rules of the language, etc.?
If we exclude Esperanto, of course, which I suspect would be the number one on the list.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-24T22:24:32.360Z
Esperanto doesn't come *close* to being number one in terms of complexity of grammar. Ithkuil laughs at that assertion.
Keith Morrison
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-25T06:05:54.983Z
@KeithMorrison that is why size of vocabulary, number of exceptions, and, most importantly, "etc" are all there in the question.
Maksim
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-25T11:13:19.297Z
How can "etc" ever be the most important item on a list? If there are more important items than the ones you said, what POSSIBLE reason could there be to not list them first?       Regardless, I'd say Ithkuil might not have many exceptions, but its grammar and phonology are incredibly complex, and its vocabulary still contains at least almost 1000 roots, producing 18000 stems of distinct meanings.
Cecilia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-25T14:49:47.780Z
Size of vocabulary could be a discussion on its own and would be more objective.  I don't see why Esperanto would be first in complexity of grammar or number of exceptions, and I have no idea what "etc." might include.
prosfilaes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-05-26T05:53:20.940Z
I'm inclined to close this as opinion based - "most elaborate" really isn't an objective description.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-06-01T07:07:10.333Z
@curiousdannii that is why "most elaborate" is explained just after it - size of vocabulary, complexity of grammar, number of exceptions.
Maksim
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-06-01T07:13:25.060Z
@Maksim But there's always tradeoffs between them, so how do you compare all those different criteria to determine which is the most elaborate overall?
curiousdannii
<grammar><vocabulary>
What is the second most elaborate constructed language up to date after Esperanto?
# What is the second most elaborate constructed language up to date after Esperanto?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-05-22)

What would be the most elaborate constructed language today in terms of size of vocabulary, complexity of grammar, number of exceptions to the rules of the language, etc.?
If we exclude Esperanto, of course, which I suspect would be the number one on the list.

**Tags:** grammar, vocabulary

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Esperanto doesn't come *close* to being number one in terms of complexity of grammar. Ithkuil laughs at that assertion.  
> **username_0**: @KeithMorrison that is why size of vocabulary, number of exceptions, and, most importantly, "etc" are all there in the question.  
> **username_2**: How can "etc" ever be the most important item on a list? If there are more important items than the ones you said, what POSSIBLE reason could there be to not list them first?       Regardless, I'd say Ithkuil might not have many exceptions, but its grammar and phonology are incredibly complex, and its vocabulary still contains at least almost 1000 roots, producing 18000 stems of distinct meanings.  
> **username_3**: Size of vocabulary could be a discussion on its own and would be more objective.  I don't see why Esperanto would be first in complexity of grammar or number of exceptions, and I have no idea what "etc." might include.  
> **username_4**: I'm inclined to close this as opinion based - "most elaborate" really isn't an objective description.  
> **username_0**: @username_4 that is why "most elaborate" is explained just after it - size of vocabulary, complexity of grammar, number of exceptions.  
> **username_4**: @username_0 But there's always tradeoffs between them, so how do you compare all those different criteria to determine which is the most elaborate overall?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2022-05-23. Score: 3

My personal guess would still be [IALA Interlingua](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua) which has an established language community and some tradition. It came with a rather elaborate dictionary right from the start.

But there are some contenders, [Klingon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klingon_language) driven by fandom with an active language community, and [Toki Pona](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona).

I am not sure about the status of the various projects of zonal Slavic languages like [Interslavic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Slavic_language)—tracking and distinguishing all the ongoing projects with vexingly similar names and frequent renamings or synonyms is already really difficult.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Isn't Toki Pona designed specifically to be simple and minimalistic, i.e. not elaborate? (Not to say that the _construction_ of Toki Pona was not an elaborate task; Lang's work is certainly incredible)  
> **username_5**: Sometimes, simple rules can create very complex systems, in terms of games I think of Go/Baduk/Weiqi compared to Chess. Elaboration is than the amount of theory and practice available, both Go and Chess are highly elaborate games. Judging from the Q&A to Toki Pona here, it has reached some higher level of elaboration already.  

---

