This is about conlexing, not conlanging. In a conlex (article on definition forthcoming), there is a community of users and they don’t take well to deep reforms that you might see in independent conlanging or collaborative conlanging. In a collaborative conlang, people might collectively decide to switch from nominative-accusative to ergative-absolutive and that would be find because no one was speaking it off the cuff anyhow and no one had invested 100 hours into memorizing flashcards. For a conlex, you just aren’t going to convince people to re-do that 100 hours of flash card memorizing and habit-undoing.
So back to toki pona, a project that I have been planning to take a break from in favor of spiffying up my Russian.
A field linguists reference grammar. The hard part here is tying everything back to community corpus text.
The phrasal dictionary. Writing a dictionary that tracks down an example community corpus usage is hard.
Watching the net for toki pona activity. I use RSS, twitter, and a google search alert to find toki pona stuff as it pops up.
- Reposting new tp content on toki lili & twitter (or the main forum)
- Welcome committee. Let people know that they will be corrected a lot. Correct people a lot. Respond to questions.
- Self appointed tutor. Lesson plans need to be written.
- Translate the foundational docs.
- News contriver. The inventor used to contrive news by adding a new word to the lexicon every other year or so. It’s a big deal if the lexicon is all closed classes and there’s only 125 or so words. The threshhold for what counts as news is pretty low, but if someone isn’t out there contriving news, the conversation dies out.
Systems. Especially ones that don’t call on lots of proper modifiers.
- Number systems. Can anyone make a truely quick to say number system?
- Spelling systems.
- Calendar systems.
- Writing systems.
- Science systems. From Moh’s scale (geology) to Biological taxonomy systems to systems for describing the life cycle of a star. It’s a endless pit of small projects.
- Monitor the wikipedia article. These get in accurate and fixing them is hard because of original research restrictions. So if I do a survey and figure out the true number of “fluent speakers”, I’m not supposed to go fix the article and post a link to my blog. Someone else is suppose to do it.