kingkayvee

I have to say, it's very admirable of you to say:

I've been trying to shift focus to help other language creators get work, but it's difficult. Hollywood likes to work with people they know, or people that are near at hand. It's hard for them to go to a group of people who are uniquely qualified and choose one without a guild or something equivalent.

I'm a linguist, and in no way a conlanger, but I always end up with a few in my classes. My advice is always "well, you can try...but I don't know how realistic it is given how niche it is and how dominated the career is!" It's nice to hear that you are aware of this and it sounds like you are emphatic to members in the community, so I just wanted to say kudos and thanks for that.

As a side note, I'm actually a sign language language documentation specialist, so I'm interested in why you wrote:

There are things you can do with a signed language you can't with a spoken language, and natural signed languages take advantage of that fact.

I don't see them as "can vs can't do" but rather "do differently," so I'd be interested to see how you perceive it.

For example, the fact that you can embed numerals up to ten (maybe even beyond) in ASL signs for WEEK and MONTH as well as future and past tense is something that would never, ever, ever, ever, ever happen in a spoken language.

Is that fundamentally different from other morpheme incorporation and affixation? Maybe I'm just too "in it" but I don't necessarily see them as different.

Iconicity is definitely one that stands out, but I think a lot of people it happens more than it does in sign languages!