Review Search canon

Review / Sindala dialogue workshop — testing the evolution proposal

mcp proposal · package #203

Sindala dialogue workshop — testing the evolution proposal

User-authorized proposal-stage dialogue workshop. Local companion: languages/sindala/dialogue-workshop-proposal.md. Linguistic sources: languages/sindala/evolution-proposal.html (proposal), source/sindala.export.html and source/sindala.vulgar.txt, generated/lexicon.csv and generated/language.json; languages/sigtaara/generated/lexicon.csv. Canon grounding: species.firgol.sentient.lahkiin.kaemisaedhel, species.firgol.sentient.lahkiin.kaekreaedhel, species.firgol.sentient.lahkiin.zaetaedhel. All scenes, constructions, and historical extrapolations are proposed. No canon changes requested.

In Review 0/2 items resolved
Proposal workspace — not canon. Accepting an item records your review decision. Writing it into canon requires a separate exact preview and typed confirmation. Overview items are never imported.
Review the whole package · 2 items

Package decision

Accept or reject the whole package

Applies to all 2 currently reviewable items. Locked (canonizing / canonized) items are skipped. Still no write to canon/.

Reading · Overview · v1

Workshop overview

Click another item in the list to read it. Accept one item in the inspector, or the whole package above.

Overview · not imported
Candidate

Package overview — framing for reviewers, not lore to import into canon.

Sindala dialogue workshop

Proposal only. Five invented dialogue scenes test the evolution proposal: eyewitness account, disputed inherited memory, household argument, formal petition, and joke. The workshop pairs English exchanges with short constructed Sindala clauses using exported vocabulary and surface grammar forms; it does not claim complete or validated translations.

Item map

The workshop item contains all five scenes, a limited witness/witnesses sound-change calculation, provisional design decisions, and linked source notes. It is a language-design proposal with illustrative dialogue, not a historical event or finished story.

Main findings

  • Test historical cir- as received-account past; ordinary dal- remains neutral about evidence.
  • Keep object-first available while exploring subject-first discourse uses.
  • Preserve vu / hon / dun as hear / heed / obey.
  • Explore respectful plural through reciprocal social choices.
  • Leave pronoun leveling, habitual remote past, quotation rules, and general inflectional paradigms unresolved.

Review boundary

No language imports, canon records, or map data were changed. Approval of the overall direction should not be read as approval of every trial sentence or memory-transfer assumption. Further grammar decisions need separate review.