Talk:Proposed language

As far as I can tell, proposed language is a neologism. I've never heard it used in historical linguistics, and from the article it seems there is no significant difference between a "proposed language" and a "proto-language". Since WP isn't in the business of propogating neologisms, this page should be merged with proto-language. See also my comments at Category talk:Proposed languages. --Angr/undefined 20:09, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page should be either deleted or renamed to something like Hypothetical language, Reconstructed language, or Unattested language. If it is merged, the retained content should be renamed. But I am not convinced it has anything of value to be merged. Perhaps the value might be in excluding the idea of a pidgin or known parent language (like Vulgar Latin of the Romance Languages), which some editors of Proto-language include in that topic. In any case the name Proposed language is not appropriate. --teb728 20:58, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There are two additional meanings of proposed language as distinct from proto-language -- but in senses not presently found in the article. One is in the sense of a conjectured language such as Proto-World language. The other is in the sense of an invented language such as Esperanto. --teb728 1 July 2005 22:51 (UTC)