Talk:Table of loglangs and quasi-loglangs

The table is excellent.

It would be good if some of the cell items (e.g. Families) were links to pages on the family and some headings (e.g. Family and SSM strategy) were links to pages listing and explicating these values.

I love the adjectival Family names!

The term "speakable" is potentially ambiguous. In the light of the Saussurean distinction between Tongue (Langue) and Speech (parole), a speakable lg is one capable of producing parole -- at first blush the notion of an unspeakable language might sound nonsensical, but in fact there's many an incomplete conlang that has grammar without lexis and so is incapable of producing parole. This is probably not the sense intended here; my initial thought is that "speakable" means "oral", as opposed to "only written" (like UNLWS). But would a signed, chiretic, language be speakable? I think we'd sort of want the answer to be yes. So rather than speakability (apart from in the Saussurean sense), I think the better parameter is "primary realizational medium for phonology", which may be phonetic (as with all the languages listed), chiretic (no loglang that I know of, but Rikchik could count as a conlang example, if chireticality includes tentacularity), or graphical (UNLWS).

"Year" should be "Year of Publication", possibly with a separate column for "Years of Active Development"? Or even if not these exact two columns, it's still potentially important to distinguish dates of publication from dates of development.

And (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)