26-03-2004 04:51									#1
	The Language Thread Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

old threads bunged together - please follow links before spouting

quote: language is usually the first thing that defines an ethinic group . dialects are when languages evolve into new languages. , or could be a barrier or advantage in certain negotiations. imagine you are a European nation, and you are competing with Japan for an important treaty with China, the Japanese are going to have an advantage because they can commuicate more easily. (I speak Japanese and Chinese, and I know from first hand experience that Jap and Chi people can get the jist of each other's written texts without having to learn the other language) race and language and religion are often historically important factors in the making or breaking of alliances. so there are real applications for language. perhaps it could affect your ability to pacify conquered territory or success in espionage. culture, and language are also a way of conquering territory without expensive and time-consuming military force. ------ examples of ethnic group mergers - the English - Celtic ethnic group, germanic language the French - same the Turkish - Graeco-Armenian related ethnic group, Central Asian language the Hungarians - Similar. language could be more than just a cosmetic feature, but even as just a cosmetic feature - it's nice! -------------- http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...15&pagenumber=8 i should modify my ideas a little on the second quote - but look at the pan-ethnic movments pan-arabism, pan-americanism, pan-slavicism, pan-celticism, even the Nazis - i think there should be some room for this kind of nationalist movement in a game where politics is apparently a major feature. it is complex, when we lok at the current thing in Iraq, most Iraqis are Shia muslims, unlike most of the arab world, but still a sense of ethnic brotherhood, based on language is strong - but yes, Hebrew is also a semitic language, but adifferent one, and their religion is certainly a factor which seperates them from arabs. in this scenario, to what extent is religion on it's own important? don't Sunni muslims generally feel opposed/suspicious towards Shia Muslims? I think this is an example of Language being a factor - because they all speak the same language the suffering of Iraqi civilians affects the populations of other Arab speaking countries, making them feel more inclined to get involved. of course, if you are french, i don;t know how you might feel if Quebec, Belgie or Suisse were under attack and you saw french speaking victims, or if Francophone African countries would cause you to fell somehow more of a sense of brotherhood? one thing i would like to see is an ethnic group divided between two nations - take the Basques for example. If you were playing as France or Spain and you wanted to eradicate them, desroying their language would be one important way of breaking them. likewise a foreign enemy might seek to provide aid to this ethinc guerilla group to weaken your nation... can we have guerilla ethnic groups who can become nation potentially? as a feature - so that pacifying ethnic groups becomes an important task lest they become militant and seperatist. if in the Basque scenario, Spain was at war with france, they might seek to bribe the Basques as a way of getting more territory, ameliorating them with language rights and unification. ...................................... i've heard about recent genetic maps being made of of least europe, but perhaps also much of the world. showing how that the Welsh are genetically related to the Spanish - strengthening the supposed link between Basques and ancient Picts of Scotland, who were there before the Celts. that the bulk of Scots English and French are very similar genetically. the English are overwhelmingly ethnically Celtic with a Roman and German influnce, much like the French, but i think the French have more of a Germaninc and Roman influence. the Scots having some of the Welsh and Irish influence in addition. [yes i over-summarised france - excuse moi!] what i was talking about is how one ethnic popultaion can be dominated by a ethnically different overlordship. the Hungarians for example - the closest language to Hungarian is called Khanty-Mansi and is spoken to the northeast of the urals in northern russia. thos people look like eskimos or koreans - hungarians generally look like most central/eastern europeans - but a small number do have asiatic features. the same is true in Turkey, the people ARE by blood descended from a mixture of Greeks and all the Ancient Hittites and probably elements of Iranina and Armenian Georgian. there are from what i've read a small number - 5%-ish who are mongoloid turks, the remnants of the people who brought the asian turkish language. anyway, i made a set of faces, and thought, if people do mix a little then not only their language, but their race should be affected. like in Madagascar - a mix of an Indonesian people with East Africans, many Malagasys look neither Black nor Indonesian, but somewhere inbetween, rather like some Cambodians do. so this is more like an ambient/cosmetic effect of two groups mixing. ................. so, practical applications: well, how can i express it?! 1. i think each language should be researched like a technology, and translators should be a resource like engineers or soldiers - discuss! 2. pan-nationalism - i think nations who exist in a scenario where the communication plausibility exists, so probably we're talkin modern scenarios, pan-nationalism should be a feature where: a. if counrty A is being attacked by country X, and countries B and C have the same language or a same-laanguage ethic group [should be same for religions too] then the civilians in countries B and C should protest and potentially becom insurgent to put pressure on their govt. to act in support of country A. [this is rather a topical idea, isn;t it!] 3. languages should provide bonuses or handicaps for negotiations, espionage, cultural conquest, pacifying an enemy. 4. language should be a fetaure of an EG which increases it's potential for insurgency/trerrism, and seperatism, and colluding with an enemy. ............................. language effects A. ethnic maps i'd like to see coloured ethinc and language distribution maps, as an overlay, so you can see where they all are. B. dialects, language evolution, language splitting, if your empire is too large and dipersed, then new dialects, languages and hence EG's should emerge - didn't this happen with the Roman Empire?! [it's sort of happened with the British empire too, but only as far as accents really], C. language merger: if you conquer an area with a strong language [i.e. it could be an ethnic groupe divide between many nations but still in total having a large population - take the Kurdish people or the Zhuang in Guanxi for example] then your "governor" language should gradually influence this "governed" language, to create over time a new dialect or language in my own research on this i grouped east asians thus: Sumerians: Sumerians Elamites Tiamat Ki En Gir Tilmun Samarra Semites: Akkadians Hebrews Arabians Phoenicians Shebans Ethiopians Persians: Medians Sarmatians Parthians Kurds Scythians Farsi/Pathans Dari Kassites (boil down to 6 to fit) Indians: Panjabi Romani Sinhala Bangla Nepali Hindi Dravidians: Tamils Kannada Telugu Kolami Tulu Kurux Tokharians: Twyry Gutians Kushans Kucheans Tokharoi Tokhrians Turks: Altai Tatars Kazakh Bolgars Uygur Osmanli Mongols: Buryat Tungus Huns Manchu Khalka Evenki Tibetans: Burmans Tibetans Qiang Chinese Naga Karen Hmong: Hmong Mien Bunu She Biao Bo-Pai Mons: Mon Khmer Bahnar Vietnamese Muong Munda Tai: Siamese Lao Kam-Sui Kadai Shan Zhuang Malayos: Dayak Malagasy Aetas Chamaru Sulawesi Sundanese Paiwans: Atayal Paiwan Tsou Kanakabu Saaroa Rukai Kija: Koreans Dongyi Silla Paekche Koryo Japanese more to come... Chukchi: Koryak Chukot Alyutor Ainu Gilyak [Ket [=Yenisei-Ostyak-unrelated to Chukchi]] [Yukaghir [also unrelated to Y-O or Chukchi]] it needs finishing off a little - the last group is a compsite of unrelated NE Asian aboriginal nomadics. http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...15&pagenumber=5 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ First theres the Categories in the form of an Ethnolinguistic tree: 72 "Peoples" (corresponding more or less to language families), each with 6 "Tribe" names they can split into, and each Tribe with 6 "Nation" names which the Tribers can split into.. these are just automatic names, to make the AI civs evolve over time... more or less like this: Italic People->Latin Tribe->Italian Nation Then there's the Quantifiability in the form of the L scale. L0 - the same language L1 - a regional accent of the langauge L2 - a dialect of the language L3 - a related language L4 - a distantly related language L5 - an unrelated language linguistic variation maps for a particular language can be generated thus: L5L5L5L3L3L2L2L2L2L4L4 L5L5L5L3L1L1L1L1L1L4L4 L5L5L5L1L1L0L0L1L1L1L2 L5L5L5L1L1L0L0L0L1L1L2 L5L5L5L5L5L1L0L0L0L1L1 L4L4L5L5L5L1L1L0L0L1L1 L4L4L4L4L5L5L1L1L1L1L1 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ [IMGhttp://www.lifesci.utexas.edu/courses/mcmurry/spring98/13/map.gif[/IMG] the purpose of languages is essentially mainly for the World-Dawn scenario (yet to be created). As tribe-splitting and merger occurs, particularly splitting, language performs a function of describing an aspect of connection between tribes/civs. it is one part of what differentiates one EG from another, and what connects one to another (or not) Culture (in game terms) is another part. The scale of language performs the function of defining how close or distant that connection is. An offshoot EG from another EG needs to have it's connection and difference from the original EG defined. Initially the difference will be small, over time that difference will increase. The Language scale is one simple way of measuring an aspect of that difference. After some resistence, it turns out that it does have a practical use in the riot model at least. in actual playnig terms this performs a function of affecting behaviour of people, as illustrated in the riots model. There are also some other minor "atmospheric" functions like defining how easy it is to negotiate with, trade with, spy on, and capture technology from other civs. so, i think the purpose of language is probably: a. to define an EG - the term ELG becomes appropriate - and its connection, including degree of connection to another EG. This includes the evolution of new offshoot EGs, as a language evolves through each level every few hundred years. b. to be a factor in how citizens behave, rioting, disrcimination, economic trade, cultural trade. Helping make a more sophisticated social model than exists in any other similar game. c. to add some realism/atmos/tension - a "handicap" to what might otherwise be monotonously simplistic and predictable interactions between EGs and civs. The names are purely to give the AI names to call offshoots from the original "people" or "language group people". Also including the feature of being able to name a new EG or state after a placename generated from a small, but regular vocab list for each of the language groups. They are stratified in a pyramid of 1->6->36, for coding simplicity. And to depict the general trend of "ancient" -> "middle age" -> "modern" that ethnicites seem to go through, simplified and regularised for a game.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

messy, but at least most of it's on one thread.

	26-03-2004 09:17									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Actually dress is the first thing that distinquishes a culture..

quote: Chinese and Japanese languages have nothing in common. They are totally different, of different language families. One is tonal, the other is not, the grammars are also totally different. There is also little or no ethnic link between China and Japan, althoug Japan has been greatly influenced by Chinese cult

WRONG! They are totally different languages, true, but Japanese is based (majority) off of Chinese just as English is based (majority) on German. In fact their Kanji alphabet is based directly from Chinese symbols, with almost no variation (any would be so little that a chinese/japanese person would know what it meant). The enthnic link is far enough removed that there is little, although minimum, there (kinda how almost all of europe could be of 1 base group). They also have similar religious and cultural tradtions, espically considering the English we're comparing them to.[/quote]If you were playing as France or Spain and you wanted to eradicate them, desroying their language would be one important way of breaking them. likewise a foreign enemy might seek to provide aid to this ethinc guerilla group to weaken your nation...[/quote]Yes, another would be divide and conquer, another would be genocide, another would be destorying their history

quote: that the bulk of Scots English and French are very similar genetically.[quote]the English are overwhelmingly ethnically Celtic with a Roman and German influnce, much like the French, but i think the French have more of a Germaninc and Roman influence. the Scots having some of the Welsh and Irish influence in addition. [yes i over-summarised france - excuse moi!]

The scotts espically and to a lesser extent the enlgish also have a lot of norse. I can say this as both my parents families are norse clans that colonized scottland near the end of the viking age.

quote: 1. i think each language should be researched like a technology, and translators should be a resource like engineers or soldiers - discuss!

Having language be good for barriers is fine, having my haveto spend time reasearching other languages is too much realism for me for Clash.

quote: 3. languages should provide bonuses or handicaps for negotiations, espionage, cultural conquest, pacifying an enemy.

No more than culture. Actually why should language even be serperate than EG? But yea i agree with the idea, just that langauge shouldn't have its own special space beyond other stuff in EG.

As to socieites, i guess then a bottom up you would consider an elitist society?

	26-03-2004 19:16									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

LGJ, please read everything carefully, including your own posts and the whole of that debate on the link before you start ranting.

NB:... = , =

Last edited by yellowdaddy on 27-03-2004 at 03:09

	29-03-2004 23:32									#4
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

links;

http://www.sumerian.org/sumlinks.htm
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~histling/hlpublications.html

these guys used a program to find when languages in a lang family split.

	31-03-2004 16:13									#5
	Put an end to popups!

quote: langauge shouldn't have its own special space beyond other stuff in EG

In Wales, language and accent is strongly associated with National identity along with Land Connection.
As there are so many Welsh surnames in England which people don't think of as Welsh: "Jones, Evans, Davis, Thomas, Griffiths, Owen, Bowen, Parry, Barry, Powell, Pritchard, Price, Lewis even Lloyd and Llewellyn!" (the P and B ones are written Ap Owain, Ap Harri, Ap Hywel, Ap Rhisiart, and Ap Rhys but have been anglicised, "Ap/Ab" = "Mac/Mc" in Scottish and Irish), partly a result of the Tudor dynasty.

Language also behaves differnently to the "Culture" things you are talking about. Culture can cross groups without defining them.
Language is mostly specific to a group - you usually either speak it or you don't, even if you use bits of one on top of another, you are essentially still using another language.
Albanians can be at one pont largely Catholic, then Atheist, then Muslim, their Language ermains a constant, an evolving one, but still a constant. Culture fluctuates and is a separate "overlay" if you will, and can cross languages and races, language (as a mother tongue) is invariably linked to a given geographical area, and national or regional identity, and a selection of (historically traceable) racial traits - even in a place like Brazil.

Language and your "Cultural" things can't be treated as one entity, they don't behave like one entity. Language is not separate from EG, language in most cases is EG, along with a connection to a given land area, and an associated Ethnic identity. Culture is a separate overlay which can be part of defining an EG, but only sometimes, Culture can spread across land and languages to encapsulate different EGs - as in the case of the nations which make up the United Kingdom, it's a unified state of a group of EGs who define themselves by their surnames and accents or languages as well as a geographical area, and an ethnic identity (a name for themselves), the Culture and WOL are essentially the same, in parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland, Religion (or rather football team) add an extra layer to that.

	02-04-2004 03:42									#6
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: As there are so many Welsh surnames in England which people don't think of as Welsh: "Jones, Evans, Davis, Thomas, Griffiths, Owen, Bowen, Parry, Barry, Powell, Pritchard, Price, Lewis even Lloyd and Llewellyn!"

But only five main ones, of which you left out Williams.

Cheers

Gareth Thomas look you.

	04-04-2004 00:12									#7
	Remove this text

quote: Jones, Evans, Davis, Thomas,

Yes this definitely sounds like Wales' XV. And Williams should be there too, on both wings.

	04-04-2004 00:16									#8
	Support Apolyton

...not to mention Preece, Pugh, Prosser, Morgan, Hopkins, Jenkins, Meredith, Merlin, Frodo, Bimbo and Gandalf.

	08-04-2004 17:31									#9
	Put an end to popups!

I'd actually read through this thread and thought little of it because of it's size, but of course that's what we're here to fix

I do think that the way *everything* is named ought to be determined by the EG. However, because of the organic way in which EG's divide and change in the Social model, I would consider it folly to stick to RL cultures. In that case should someone should start working on an EG evolution and nomeclature model?

Currently, my favorite Idea would be that the player can start from a scenario (in which the initial EG nomenclature variables have been inserted) and have the model evolve them from there. If he chose to start a new game though, he could choose to either make the new cultures start from random RL cultures, or start from the random generation. The Player's own culture creation would be under his control. This means that he would select either random or would determine all the variables in a GUI screen.

The initial variables would include a set of common names (can be random-generated easily) that wouldn't exclude other names, they'd simply be common; for all of these things there would be exceptions; a common city's name ending (like -grad or - city); how many syllables before the ending in the city's name (can be something like 2-4, probably using standard distribution probability); the name of the culture. Provinces would be named after cities or rivers- rivers being just random syllablic- they don't belong to any culture.

	08-04-2004 18:46									#10
	Got spare money?

Just in case you're interested:
I once had a similar idea and coded a little program that generates random names of people. This prog generates a number of syllables (each consisting of an optional starting consonant, a vowel and an optional end consonant) and appends an ending (-ish, -lish, -ese, -s).
Do you want to know more?

	08-04-2004 19:43									#11
	Support Apolyton

quote: Do you want to know more?

certainly... but I want to see what Laurant has to say... he seems to have come round to accepting a place for language in the game.

quote: should someone should start working on an EG evolution and nomeclature model?

I nominate Stormbeard (and Max Sinister), seeing as though you two seem to have thought about it.

The game is going to have to work on the basis that everything is a scenario, and there is no base game, just a set of models which can be used together in each scenario.

The Global Dawn Of Man scenario has to allow the player to select whether they want the base 72 groups simulating real life (and how many of them), and the completely random ones which SB is proposing. Or a mixture of them. As you've sort of mentioned.

In addition there are those who want to play fixed area scenarios often covering a specific period of history - such as the Punic Wars in the demo, so that has to be accommodated.

for the sake of convenience, I'd like the system to work on the same pattern as stated elswhere:

people -> tribe -> nation
->1------> 6------>36

i based this on averaging the way major language groups split, though very very roughly, as some language families produced more well known names than others (the groups of Indo-European are treated as separate language families).

Did you see page 9 of the Social model thread?

If you get on with some coding, you can then pass on any gfx needs to me and Gattsuden.

	08-04-2004 20:13									#12
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by yellowdaddy certainly... but I want to see what Laurant has to say... he seems to have come round to accepting a place for language in the game.

OK, I'll contact him after the holidays.

quote: Originally posted by yellowdaddy Did you see page 9 of the Social model thread?

Yes.

	08-04-2004 23:43									#13
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I cannot see any place at all for language in the game. Nor can I see any possibility of any coder wasting their (precious) time on it.

Also, I cannot see it having any actual effect on the game, apart from adding one more irrelevant thing for the player to worry about. The game is far too complicated already - we should be seeking ways to simplify it.

Cheers

	09-04-2004 03:08									#14
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

My thoughts exactly. If you really think some aspect is needed, it should be complied with what defines an EG or cultures, even though i still don't think its important for either.

	09-04-2004 15:37									#15
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

GT:

quote: I cannot see any place at all for language in the game. Nor can I see any possibility of any coder wasting their (precious) time on it.

LGJ:

quote: My thoughts exactly.

I couldn't disagree more if i tried (not that I'm trying).

I've already made the case quite thoroughly, and neither of you have come up with any good reason why not IMO - least of all LGJ who's posts on the subject tend not to make a lot of sense to me, and tend not to be coherantly argued or supported with any references.

Further, Laurant's riots model has already found a useful role for language. I think more uses could follow.

Terms like "irrelevant", "precious", "wasting", "important" and "complicated" are rather subjective.
You could apply them as and where you like to any aspect of the game if you really wanted to.

As language is one of the main features that does define EGs in the real world, so it should be in the game, along with Land Connection and Ethnic ID (equiv. to nationalism) and Culture - which should be defined by categories like those on the list of 12 i posted on the Social model page, and be a special category of each EGs attributes and be like an "overlay" ("plague" being the way it behaves, rather than the way it's defined).

This is a simplification, and a clarification.
The current state of affairs is a bit messy (things in the wrong place, and some may not be necessary) and vague, and thus unnecessarily complicated. (I will go through the current ones if necessary and state which ones are the problem.)
This is not about adding more stuff for the sake of it, it's about tidying what's there so it works properly and makes sense.

If there are now some coders willing to code it then great. This game will need to be a "confederacy of ideas" if it's to get completed. That means making something that accommodates the preferences of all without imposing them on everyone.
No-one's asking either of you two to do any work on this, nor imposing it as a game feature that can't be deselected in a preferences menu, so you've no reason to get your backs up about it. On the preferences menu we can have an option saying "languages on or off", and Robert's your mother's brother...

	09-04-2004 17:04									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by yellowdaddy I couldn't disagree more if i tried (not that I'm trying). I've already made the case quite thoroughly (snip)

Hey yellowdaddy. I have read the entire thread and don't see any substantial case for language having been made. You have mentioned a lot of little potential advantages, but nothing that more than a few percent of players would even notice IMO. Below is one set of your proposed game influences of language:

quote: 1. i think each language should be researched like a technology, and translators should be a resource like engineers or soldiers - discuss! 2. pan-nationalism (snip) 3. languages should provide bonuses or handicaps for negotiations, espionage, cultural conquest, pacifying an enemy. 4. language should be a fetaure of an EG which increases it's potential for insurgency/trerrism, and seperatism, and colluding with an enemy.

Number 1 seems overkill, money put into "diplomatic activities" can cover this.

2 is already planned to be covered by the etnicity model. Not perhaps as well as language would do it, but good enough. Same for 3. Same for 4.

So where is the persuasive case? Remember, everything we add complicates the game and the programming needed to make it happen. Nothing above seems to me to be sufficiently important to justify explicit inclusion of language. Remember, we are designing a Game, not a Real-World Simulator, so something being important in the RW is not sufficient reason to include it in Clash. In the fullness of time it may be worth doing language, but that is probably more a Clash 2.0 thing. That factor will tend to make peoples' responses to you on the topic pretty curt. Sorry, but that's just the way it goes. . .

	09-04-2004 20:40									#17
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Number 1 seems overkill, money put into "diplomatic activities" can cover this.

translator units are perhaps - what about some research cost for these generalised "diplomatic activities"? rather than instant communication between alien civs as happens in Civilisation. I want the tension and unpredictability of first encounters which could lead to wars, even between two AI civs, it eliminates predictability and adds to the game atmosphere.

I suspect you'll say no, but then I suspect you're thinking of the historical demos where all civs will already "know" each other, whereas i'm thinking of a Civ style "global dawn of man" scenario where you will have "first encounters".

quote: 2 is already planned to be covered by the etnicity model. Not perhaps as well as language would do it, but good enough. Same for 3. Same for 4.

4 has already been acknowledged by Laurant as a worthwhile category for distinguishing his Macedonians from his Greeks, have you seen that post in the riots model 2?

as for 2 and 3, I think I basically think that the ethnicity model needs amending. I regard my suggestions on that as beneficial "keyhole surgery". Essentially, I'd just like to see Language added to the Basic Attributes.
Corruption, Traditionalism and I.ofReligion should not be there.

They should be in the Moral Code Attributes.
The Moral Code Attributes should be renamed "Cultural Attributes".
Nationalism should encompass a sense of Ethnic ID (Low Nationalism = High Ethnic Pride perhaps)

Some might say that there's a danger of offending or irritating people by having "Corruption" (or in fact either of the other two) in their basic attributes - ethnic stereotypes... I find this somewhat incongruous given the stance on "race".

I'd also like to see the building of cultural wonders like "Alphabet" - this can have research, econmic, and cultural significance. If you're going to have "portable wonders" and natural ones (which seem to me to be prime examples of Eye-Candy), and the religion/philosophy spreading. I would regard the various alphabets as somewhere inbetween those two; as wonders which spread and compete for domination, with some of the effects of religion.

I can't remember seeing anything which specifically addressed the bits in "3."
When I put "pan-nationalism" I think I meant "pan-ethnocentrism" (Slavic unity FE, with Ethnic-Cleansing as a potential precipitating event).

"good enough" and "sufficiently important" are again, entirely subjective terms.
The only curt replies are from Gary. Gary I can understand (usually). LGJ seems to flit from one point to another contradictory one - Without wishing to wind him up, I have occasionally wondered what his first language is...

The remaining point is, if "Stormbeard" and "Max Sinister" want to code this, why discourage them? Have an open mind and see what comes of it, it can't hurt, can it.

	09-04-2004 22:24									#18
	Put an end to popups!

First of all, I agree that everything I'm saying are just subjective judgements. Calls on how far to go in determining how real-world to make a game model are Always of that sort.

quote: Originally posted by yellowdaddy 4 has already been acknowledged by Laurant as a worthwhile category for distinguishing his Macedonians from his Greeks, have you seen that post in the riots model 2?

I didn't see any ringing endorsement of Language from Laurent. The following seems to sum up his feelings:

quote: Originally posted by Laurent So to sum it all again: I want something (I'd call it culture for lack of better word) which lets me have families of cultures. Language is certainly part of culture, and race too, but neither is the whole of it. And I need a function which lets me tell whether two of these cultures are near or far one from another.

quote: as for 2 and 3, I think I basically think that the ethnicity model needs amending. I regard my suggestions on that as beneficial "keyhole surgery". Essentially, I'd just like to see Language added to the Basic Attributes. Corruption, Traditionalism and I.ofReligion should not be there.

The more culture-based ideas you are proposing should go in the social model thread so that they can be considered in context. I don't know what "I.ofReligion" means.

quote: When I put "pan-nationalism" I think I meant "pan-ethnocentrism" (Slavic unity FE, with Ethnic-Cleansing as a potential precipitating event).

I want to see that also. You Don't need Language to do it! A concept of "culture families" would suffice. Therefore your desire for such a feature is not a justification for Language.

I understand that you are trying to get something into Clash that you think is important. I value the input, but disagree on the assessment that Language is particularly important to model in the game. You are of course free to spec out a language model and any other modifications to the Social model you care to. I just want to make sure you know that there is no guarantee your mods will make it into the game. As has been said, if a coder should show up that is as hot for it as you are, it may well happen. In terms of the overall discussions all I'll say is: Do not take silence for assent. I've already commented here more than I feel is a good investment of my time for overall progress of the project.

Cya,

Mark

	10-04-2004 02:02									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

i don't see how a zealous and passionate "ringing endorsement" or "persuasive case" is a pre-requisite for including something.

i'm making a calm, sensible case, which has had slow and considered thought put into it. i've presented it saliently and cleary and backed it up. none of the 4 of you who'd displayed absolute resistence (there are at least the same number who have displayed some enthusiasm) have really out-argued it really.

sorry, wrong thread "culture families"

quote: Laurant: Back to my initial Spartan scenario: -If I have language I can make the distinction between Greeks and Macedonians on one side (all using dialects of Greek) and Persians on the other. -This is not so useful as religion in my scenario is also shared among Greeks and Macedonians and different from Persians. -Racial traits don't help much. There would be some difference if we modelled all the traits, but I can't think it's really relevant. I said elsewhere that I thought people would breed freely unless there was discrimination of another kind, and that this discrimination thing is what I need to model. -Terrain could make a difference between Macedonians and other Greeks to some extent, as there are more forests in Macedon than in Sparta. Or maybe not and my geography is quite poor. Also Athens would be more coastal than Sparta, so this can help make a difference inside the Greek group. -Technology: I could consider that Greeks shared philosophy that Macedonians didn't have at the times of Philip, but then did Sparta have philosophers the way Athens had some? Other options: -Social class setup: Quite different in Sparta and the rest of Greece? Or not? They had a strong nobility, but the divide slaves/others was probably the same everywhere. -Having been part of a civ/subject to a preferred nationality for a while. -Government/regime. Since I haven't finished regimes, I won't go further, but many French left French Republic for Russia during the French revolution of 1789, and some Russians left Russia for France during the Russian revolution of 1917 for instance (rather a monarchy than a republic / rather a republic than communism ways of thinking). All in all, all the various points seem correct, but I tend to believe that the difference between Greeks and Macedonians was quite arbitrary. It could be modelled by technology or terrain... Having the following, I think I could make a better fit of "which civ am I going to revolt for?" when people are unhappy enough to take arms: -1) Check if there's a civ whose name is my nationality at war against those I don't like. -2) If none exists: List civs whose dominant Ethnic Group (EG) have the same language. If they don't discriminate against my religion, are at war with the opponent, then: -3) Among the candidates, check which one most closely fits this EG's culture, as defined by the following: terrain type (coastal areas more likely to ally with Athens than Sparta), tech, social class setup, maybe also existing government. As an option, I could go back to step 2 by softening the language filter once (language being not equal but related) if no fitting civ has been found. If nothign works, create a subciv of my choice nationality at war with the opponent. If the nationality doesn't exist, then use the civ I'm revolting against as the choice civ (like civil war or feudal units).

I of Religion (importance of R) is on the Clash website, social model page - i was referring directly to the Attributes which define an EG.

I don't think that the concept of culture families is not really defined by anyone as yet

quote: Culture families would certainly help me with Spartan rebels. I'd like to discuss more about it to get something fleshed out that's consistent with the rest of the model and all, but can't be coding it anytime soon...

- and it seems rather a tricky and comlpicated one to define. I'll wait to see what Laurant means specifically.
Using language is a lot simpler.

i don't think i'd use the word "important", I would say "simple", "effective", "useful" and even "atmospheric",
i've tried to think carefully about what function language can perform, and how it can be defined. there seem to be other features in the game which are similarly "unimportant" and "complicated", but i understand the purpose their presence is to add interest and atmosphere.

I don't think I've ever given the impression that I took silence as assent - quite the opposite.

maybe I don't quite understand the resistance to the idea.

perhaps that's because theres no response to my less irrelevant points - like the clear criticisms i've posted before your reply about the EG attributes.

	14-04-2004 00:42									#20
	Increase Your PM Length

I confess to being somewhat confused now.

An area of human behaviour can be included in the game at any of many levels.

As an example, smiling is quite important in human terms. To argue that it, therefore, should be included in the game is presumably valid. The issue then becomes how is it to be included.

In the case of smiling it would be included by making any character images smile in suitable diplomatic situations. So, smiling will have two components: a graphics component and a number derived from the civilization's reaction to the situation, indicating whether smiling occurs.

In a similar fashion, language, as such, has no impact on the game. In a scenario in which all parties speak the same language there is no effect. Where language becomes important is where differing languages cause misunderstanding and hence conflict between civilizations. Offhand, I cannot think of any instance where this has actually occurred in history. At most it might mean that there is a kind of distance measure between civilizations, making understanding more or less likely, but I feel that there are much greater influences on misunderstanding than language.

Even if language were to be included, it would merely be a single nemeric value, or small number of numeric values, within the cultural model.

Cheers

	14-04-2004 00:52									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

It occurs to me that I missed one impact of language in my last post.

This is where ethnic groups, within a civilization, speak different languages. This may lead to friction, with consequences in the riots model.

Again, I feel that language differences are a very minor component in inciting riotous behaviour. Such behaviour requires much more significant causes. There is also the factor that clashes between ethnic groups with the same language can be even more vicious than between people who do not understand each other.

So, here I believe that the impact of language, as such, is negligible.

Of course it is possible to claim that my comments are subjective. This is true, but it is also true of every other opinion in this thread (and most of the others in the whole forum). To produce objective evidence, it is necessary to cite cases. Any criticism of my comments, on the grounds that they are subjective, is pointless unless the criticism is supported by some kind of objective evidence. None has been presented here.

Of course I tend to skip over long-winded posts, and may have missed something...

Cheers

	14-04-2004 01:06									#22
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

After a comment in the scenarios thread, I feel that a comment on names is appropriate.

Names are used to refer to things, be they civilizations, cities, mountains, ethnic groups, or people. It is only in this restricted sense that they are used for communication. Accordingly I do not see them as part of language, in the sense intended in this thread.

They are certainly essential in a game such as Clash. There are several reasons for having realistic sounding names.

• They should be easier to remember than, say, numbers
  
• They add flavour to the game, at essentially no cost
  
• They can give an indication of the likely behaviour of the inhabitants
  
• There is a coder (me) prepared to implement a method of culturally flavoured names (I already have the code -- somewhere)
  
• It may give others some amusement to compile the base data for different name flavours, this is relatively easy and only affects scenarios, not the game itself
  

	20-06-2004 18:55									#23
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Hi Gary,

Thanks for taking the trouble to reply.

I'm glad you have seen some of the admittedly minor applications of language in the game.

I think you're not alone in seeing them.


I agree that the names part is the most useful application of language, and was in the first instance the main point of them.
I understand that in the nature of the game is to be an "engine" which can be dressed with myriad "chassis" to suit, and as such my initial post on the subject which included lists of ethno-linguistic groups and familys of groups is less important, however I would say that as we all live on Earth, I suspect that there will be enough players interested in playing a game with historically semi-accurate tribes and EGs.

What baffles me is the way the idea of using "language names" is so resisted when, Laurent frequently posts posts which ask for ways of showing the differences between EGs.
It strikes me as blindingly obvious that it's better to opt for "Boii" and "Aedui" rather than "Celtic EG 1" and "Celtic EG 2", and that it follows that if the aim is to veer towards historical accuracy, while avoiding an unweildy and varying range of names that we go for a fixed number - I chose 1 dividing into 6, each dividing into 6 again. To allow each initial group to have equal potential to spawn loads of others.

So in conclusion, I think I'm misunderstood..
I'm not going to argue about the significance of the effects of language. I don't dispute what you've said in your last couple of posts. And I take your point about smiling - and it might well be a popular feature, as it exists in Civ 3.

For me I see language as one of the obvious factors which differentiates one EG from another. It doesn't have to have any actual effect, it's just a definer, like a colour.
My face generator was received well, though it clearly attempts to split humanity into some racial categories - or rather groups of face parts are assigned to each EG, should an image of one of them be desired.
Like language they don't have to have any effect, they are essentially cosmetic, and designed to add atmosphere. They also act as ways of telling the difference between one tribe or EG, and another. Hence I regard it as:
a. fundamental - to the way EGs are defined or differentiated.
b. clarification - at the moment I don't know what the difference between one EG and another might be really.
c. simplification - the list of things that define EGs is rather vague, has inconsistencies and errors, and isn't really particulalry straightforward. I look at the solution as creating defining elements of an EG which are easy to assign a number to or categorise.


Language also has a role to play in providing names for things, which match expectations or are convincing.

The initial post did contain a reference to each language group having a fixed vocab for generating names for people and places.
eg;
Civitas
When EGs split and evolved a new language then the name could change:
Citta - Italian
Citate - Romanian
Citad - Romansch
Cidade - Portuguese
Ciudad - Spanish
Cite - French

I dunno how you feel about this, is it along the lines of what you were thinking of?
re:

quote: "There is a coder (me) prepared to implement a method of culturally flavoured names (I already have the code -- somewhere)"

(please don't anyone argue the toss over the definitions of the words, you surely know what I mean)