<p>At the end of this question I will provide a link to the grammar in question.</p>
<p>I have created an Auxlang that I call Ulimi (because ulimi porridge is simple. It's a stupid pun). I have also got a grammar for it. No, it's not ridiculously long like some official grammars of the English language, but I tried to keep it simple for people/the layman learning it.</p>
<p>I need to know whether my IAL is developed and simple (maybe objective enough? most likely not, but I don't know how to fix that rn) enough to be an effective IAL. You can also tell me if it needs more development (and in which areas). For example, I might be taking for granted things as a native English speaker which ultimately narrow its employment.
My Goals for the language are these:</p>
<ol>
<li>I want the Grammar to be complete enough that you only have to translate it into the language from which someone is learning Ulimi. For example, Person A speaks Tagalog and wants to learn Ulimi. Pretty much all that needs to happen to get the Ulimi grammar in Tagalog is translation. I.E. No extra rules need to be specified to learn from that language specifically. There may be some additional clarification, however, since Japanese, for example has both topic and subject, and English has only the latter.
I understand that there may be smaller languages where this is necessary, but otherwise that is how I want it.</li>
<li>I want Ulimi to have very few facets to its grammar and for those facets to be most common in the worlds major and mediate languages. For example, SOV, NA, VA, [I have a lot of tenses, so everyone should see some tenses native to their tongue], and Common Phonemes. Also, having Non-Gendered words should make it easy for people learning from any language (I think).
I.E. a good IAL, lol!</li>
</ol>
<p>Here is the link where you can comment on the Document; I want NO arguments in the suggestion boxes: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nSRCpz9TwSGmys31Tayd7UpoTKRn3pERyn4TLH6pEWo/edit?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nSRCpz9TwSGmys31Tayd7UpoTKRn3pERyn4TLH6pEWo/edit?usp=sharing</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-18T10:51:18.700Z
Welcome! It's clear you put some work into that grammar, nice! The answer to "I need to know, realistically, what needs to be specified or revised" is a bit subjective though and depends on what your goals are. If you would tell us more about what you want to achieve, your question would be easier to answer.
Edvin
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-18T17:05:30.457Z
@EdvinW Will do!
Itsuki Ookami
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-18T22:20:16.363Z
This can't be answered objectively - you can do whatever you want. However remember there are 7000 languages with almost zero true universal grammatical features. Your first goal does not sound realistic.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-19T11:58:18.577Z
I agree with @curiousdannii. Also, English does have topic: it's typically marked by position in the sentence.
Oliver Mason
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-19T23:18:11.863Z
I'm not good at SE so I don't know if it would be sanctioned, but could you guys at least give your opinions? I will implement that which I deem important and try to see the importance in these things as objectively as I can. I'm not emotionally attached to my Lang. I just want to improve it.
Itsuki Ookami
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-21T03:52:43.913Z
I see you have found a better place to seek suggestions: https://www.reddit.com/r/auxlangs/comments/muz7nj/come_help_me_develop_my_ial/
Anton Sherwood
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-22T02:59:38.660Z
There's no international bureau of aux langs, so there aren't any "qualifications" for "legitimacy" that your conlang can meet. Sorry. The only real marker of success is whether people start using it.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-11T19:18:57.197Z
This question cán be answered objectively; but you're going to have to define your terms. What constitutes "legitimacy" and "effectivity" among IALs? Basically, we'd need to understand by what measure you want us to measure your IAL. For example, am I to measure your invented IAL against the most obscure IAL project you've never heard of or am I to measure it against English, which is the most legit and effective IAL ever, in the entire history of the planet? And by what particulars do you wish us to measure it by?
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-11T19:22:35.737Z
Also: what ìs it with IAL inventors and "gendered" words? Do they not realise that very many of the worlds language families actually use gender systems? In nominal as well as pronominal systems. Be ware of your own language's (or worse, political) biases!
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-12T20:25:03.870Z
@elemtilas Simplicity of phonology, How large the English bias is, whether it would be better than English, possibly?
I would like to say that global objectivity in the grammar is a particular, but maybe something close to that instead. maybe "global majority congruence" in grammar might be good to shoot for.
I am not biased by my language or politics in the gendered thing. I just saw that so many languages *don't* use genders, and it seemed pretty easy to have a language without them, so I said to myself "one less grammar aspect to have!"
Itsuki Ookami
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-12T20:28:47.397Z
UPDATE! Check the link again because I changed it.
Itsuki Ookami
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-12T22:33:33.497Z
Yet so many language do... and I found it ironic that your language's name derives from Swahili, which has loads of genders (all those noun classes are, like we find in Spanish or German). Anyway: I'll take a look at the link, but ideally you should be doing the work of editing your question to make it answerable in the mean time!
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-14T00:54:04.997Z
I have a better place to ask these questions now. Stack Exchange is overly strict.
Itsuki Ookami
<conlang-creation><grammar><tense-aspect-mood><auxlangs>
Does My Conlang, After Looking At My Grammar, Meet the Qualifications For a Legitimate IAL?
# Does My Conlang, After Looking At My Grammar, Meet the Qualifications For a Legitimate IAL?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-04-18)

At the end of this question I will provide a link to the grammar in question.

I have created an Auxlang that I call Ulimi (because ulimi porridge is simple. It's a stupid pun). I have also got a grammar for it. No, it's not ridiculously long like some official grammars of the English language, but I tried to keep it simple for people/the layman learning it.

I need to know whether my IAL is developed and simple (maybe objective enough? most likely not, but I don't know how to fix that rn) enough to be an effective IAL. You can also tell me if it needs more development (and in which areas). For example, I might be taking for granted things as a native English speaker which ultimately narrow its employment.
My Goals for the language are these:

1. I want the Grammar to be complete enough that you only have to translate it into the language from which someone is learning Ulimi. For example, Person A speaks Tagalog and wants to learn Ulimi. Pretty much all that needs to happen to get the Ulimi grammar in Tagalog is translation. I.E. No extra rules need to be specified to learn from that language specifically. There may be some additional clarification, however, since Japanese, for example has both topic and subject, and English has only the latter.
   I understand that there may be smaller languages where this is necessary, but otherwise that is how I want it.
2. I want Ulimi to have very few facets to its grammar and for those facets to be most common in the worlds major and mediate languages. For example, SOV, NA, VA, [I have a lot of tenses, so everyone should see some tenses native to their tongue], and Common Phonemes. Also, having Non-Gendered words should make it easy for people learning from any language (I think).
   I.E. a good IAL, lol!

Here is the link where you can comment on the Document; I want NO arguments in the suggestion boxes: <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nSRCpz9TwSGmys31Tayd7UpoTKRn3pERyn4TLH6pEWo/edit?usp=sharing>

**Tags:** conlang-creation, grammar, tense-aspect-mood, auxlangs

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Welcome! It's clear you put some work into that grammar, nice! The answer to "I need to know, realistically, what needs to be specified or revised" is a bit subjective though and depends on what your goals are. If you would tell us more about what you want to achieve, your question would be easier to answer.  
> **username_0**: @EdvinW Will do!  
> **username_2**: This can't be answered objectively - you can do whatever you want. However remember there are 7000 languages with almost zero true universal grammatical features. Your first goal does not sound realistic.  
> **username_3**: I agree with @username_2. Also, English does have topic: it's typically marked by position in the sentence.  
> **username_0**: I'm not good at SE so I don't know if it would be sanctioned, but could you guys at least give your opinions? I will implement that which I deem important and try to see the importance in these things as objectively as I can. I'm not emotionally attached to my Lang. I just want to improve it.  
> **username_4**: I see you have found a better place to seek suggestions: https://www.reddit.com/r/auxlangs/comments/muz7nj/come_help_me_develop_my_ial/  
> **username_2**: There's no international bureau of aux langs, so there aren't any "qualifications" for "legitimacy" that your conlang can meet. Sorry. The only real marker of success is whether people start using it.  
> **username_5**: This question cán be answered objectively; but you're going to have to define your terms. What constitutes "legitimacy" and "effectivity" among IALs? Basically, we'd need to understand by what measure you want us to measure your IAL. For example, am I to measure your invented IAL against the most obscure IAL project you've never heard of or am I to measure it against English, which is the most legit and effective IAL ever, in the entire history of the planet? And by what particulars do you wish us to measure it by?  
> **username_5**: Also: what ìs it with IAL inventors and "gendered" words? Do they not realise that very many of the worlds language families actually use gender systems? In nominal as well as pronominal systems. Be ware of your own language's (or worse, political) biases!  
> **username_0**: @username_5 Simplicity of phonology, How large the English bias is, whether it would be better than English, possibly? I would like to say that global objectivity in the grammar is a particular, but maybe something close to that instead. maybe "global majority congruence" in grammar might be good to shoot for. I am not biased by my language or politics in the gendered thing. I just saw that so many languages *don't* use genders, and it seemed pretty easy to have a language without them, so I said to myself "one less grammar aspect to have!"  
> **username_0**: UPDATE! Check the link again because I changed it.  
> **username_5**: Yet so many language do... and I found it ironic that your language's name derives from Swahili, which has loads of genders (all those noun classes are, like we find in Spanish or German). Anyway: I'll take a look at the link, but ideally you should be doing the work of editing your question to make it answerable in the mean time!  
> **username_0**: I have a better place to ask these questions now. Stack Exchange is overly strict.  

---

## 0 answers

