Previously, we discussed the possibility of adding modern words to the dictionary under a new canon level. Opinions have been largely in favor of doing this, so now let's take the next step forward.

The Contributor's Manual will be updated with new guidelines for creating modern words. What these guidelines are is what we need to figure out.

Generally, there are three ways we can approach modern words:

• Loanwords - borrow words from English with corrupted spelling. Automob, Ahrplaan, Fohen, Komputir.
• Compounds - use compound Dovahzul words to make modern words. Yolrod, Geltboviing, Gutinvaak, Lorotdwiin.
• New Words - make entirely new words, perhaps in combination with compounds. Rodozaar, Lokotaar, Viind, Kazniirot.

​Whichever method is picked, I think we should stay consistent.

Beyond this, there's also a question of what this "modern canon" will and won't include. Below are possible kinds of words that "modern canon" could include. Comment below with which you think should and shouldn't be included. I'll list my own thoughts here:

• Modern technologies (car, airplane, phone, computer) - these words are the primary purpose of adding a modern canon, so yes.
• Place names (America, Germany, New York) - yes, though this will require some subjective oversight. I think "basic" place names like country and continent names should have Dovahzul words. I think more specialized place names like states, cities, and rivers should be loanwords and not have dictionary entries.
• People names (Jack, Jane, Todd Howard) - I think these should all be borrowed as well.
• Brand names (Playstation, Microsoft, Facebook, iPhone) - I'd suggest we borrow these as well.
• English slang (swag, lol, etc.) - No, I don't think "modern words" should encompass slang. The language should develop its own unique slang.

A lot of my suggestions here aim for simplicity. For example, names could be invented for every city and town that ever existed. This would just be highly impractical and isn't how real languages work.

What are your thoughts? Once we agree on a set of guidelines for the modern canon, the sooner we can get started!

I forgot to mention we'll also need to find a way to deal with homophones in the regular canon and the modern canon. For example, if Person A makes a hypothetical word "Lokaan" to mean "airplane", then Person B makes a hypothetical word "Lokaan" to mean "horizon", does the regular canon override the modern canon?

I am largely in favor of making relevent compound-words for modern things/ideas, with the exception of the names of people and places, which should be transliterated. And I don't want brand names (save if they be transliterated when neccesary) nor slang. And I think that regular canon should overrule the modern canon.

I like the idea of compound words; it seems more creative to me.

I personally think we should use a mix of New Words and Compounds. I don't care for Loanwords too much, even words like "Kodaav" I still find are a bit too close to English. Also, I think we should steer clear of anyhing specific to our world (ie. country, city, and company names).

I like the idea of a loanword/compound word "mix" for modern concepts. However, I don't think all loanwords should be from English. I'd like to see real life places have their name in the/an official language. For example, <nihon> or <eyspanjol> for Japan and Spain, respectively. Also, some words would just be better suited to come from another languages, like maybe taking the word for click from Zulu or !Xoo or another language with click sounds.

As for homophones between loanwords and native words, I suggest maybe something like parentheses or angle brackets (the latter of the two being used above for Japan and Spain).

Also, are you gonna update the post on the front page to show that this thread is open, paarthy?

I think loanwords should only/primarily be used for proper nouns, like countries and continents. For other words, I think a combination of compounds and new words should be used, with an emphasis on compounds. And regular canon should definitely overrule modern canon.

We should probably stick with transliterated place names for now. Brand names and people names should probably be avoided. Enough to provide for a modern conversation probably about as far as the modern vocabulary should go.

I think we should use compound words predominantly for regular nouns, verbs, etc. However, I think we should keep the spelling of place names (with the exception of C's being changed to k or s ) and just pronounce them how we would if it was dovahzul. I don't know if that would work at all, but that's my personal preference ( I'm obligated to say stuff like this, I'm Canadian ). If not that, then loaned words are the next best choice.

Here's an idea of a point of view for making these modern words.

Laat Dovahkiin is transported through time and space to a different universe, and appears in Times Square, New York, New York, on April 16th, 2014. What words does he string together to describe what he (or she) sees? I think that's a pretty canon-faithful way of making words that are entirely non-canon, like computer, airplane, car, bus, or stoplight. Compound words that describe what the object is.

As for place-names/language names, recall that English is already translated to siirodiilen. Should England therefor be translated as Syrodiil? Just a thought.

websterhamster

As for place-names/language names, recall that English is already translated to siirodiilen. Should England therefor be translated as Syrodiil? Just a thought

I think English is meant to be Cyrodiilic, the TES equivalent of English.

Yup, I think we are going the compound word route.

For real-world names you'd just transliterate them. "England" could be perfectly transliterated as "England", "America" would be transliterated as "Amerika", etc.

Wouldn't "England" be more like "Ingland"?

Transliteraion focuses on preserving spelling rather than pronunciation, as opposed to other kinds of transcription that focus on pronunciation. I would recommend this method as people may pronounce things different ways depending on their accent (or mother tongue), in which case there would be multiple spellings of real-world names floating around.