From CthulhuWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

No offense but have you taken into acount the probablity that not every word in these authers stories may be of the same language. In Through the Gates of the Silver Lovecraft mentions Hyoerborean Tsath-Yo and R'lyeh Glyphs. In Out of Aeons he mentions Muvian Naacal. Arthur Machen's Aklo language allso turns up in several stories.

Plus many of the words used in spells and rituals may be incantatory words with no actuel liguistic meaning.

In Through the Gates of the Silver Key, R'lyehian and Naacal are explicitly said to be different languages. Nescio 20:51, 9 December 2008 (GMT)

Edit: Yes that is the point! Not very word may be of the same langauge.

R'lyehian to English Dictionary

In order to introduce and understand R'lyehian better, I think it would be helpful to combine this section with the "Examples" section and the "Language Function" section. I don't see why they have to be three separate sections (if necesssary, subsectioning might be a solution). An explanation or a source of the rest of the vocabulary list, following the example in "Language Function", would also be very helpful.--Niscate (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Language Function

I found it hard to follow the text, because it sometimes uses premises which were not defined in the text previously. They are just stated as if they were facts that everybody knew. I could not really follow which translations have been deduced on what basis. Was the vocab list used as a source? Were other deductions by the author used as source? For example: "We propose keeping the original assumption that mg- is a prefix denoting a juxtaposition of opposites[...]" What original assumption? I can't find it in the text. I got the impression that parts of this essay were not published on the wiki page. Generally, this section is great work, though! Sorry to be so critical, but I believe other fans that are passionate about the language would benefit from these improvements and I can see that the author put a lot of work in there that he or she might want to share with the rest of us.

Another minor note: For my taste, the writing style is too casual. It might be "just" a fan wiki, but I still propose using a more formal style like in the original Wikipedia.--Niscate (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)