It might seem kind of empty rn but here's list of all my academic works in linguistics.
Even though I dabble a lot in conlangs, most of my work is available here.

A typological study of Star Trek's klingon. (in french)
I wrote this dissertation as the final for my first year master's degree in linguistics (in France, most master's last 2 years). As the title implies, I tried my hand at giving a typological classification to klingon. Since this is only a first year's work, I could only focus on a few elements of syntax: basic word order in the main and subordinate clause, as well as a few considerations about relative clauses. The work is divided in 2 parts: gathering the a priori grammar written for klingon and then comparing it to a real text (the wiz of oz translation).
In hindsight, I have a lot to say about this workd.
1) the theorotical framework of linguistics typology is not really my jam anymore (really a matter of taste tbh).
2) i got kinda lazy, resulting in a lackluster analysis, based on very little data (the wiz of oz is not a big book and couldnt bother exploiting it to its fullest extant)
3) analysing syntax on its own is not something i vibe with anymore, nor do i vibe with some of the theoritcal bases of this kind of linguistic typology (it strikes me, for example, as being very euro-centered (more so than the rest of linguistics) in that languages are analyzed on the basis that european languages (having been the first studied) are the synctactic and logical framework of language as a whole (the subject function, obvious and omnipresent in french and english, really doesnt exist in chinese or japanese, and the forccing of S V and O constituant on these languages makes for a lot of inconsistancies, both to the individual description of these languages (inserting subjects in a language that lacks the disctinction) and of description as a whole (dilutes the meaning of subject by chagning its definition to fit in languages that lack them, rendering the subject function tenuous and unclear as a whole, while it is relatively evident in french or english)). This issue is not entierly resolved by talking other languages first, bringing the same issue, just in reverse (i.e. just because some native american language mark evidentiality morphologically doesnt mean french or english verbs lack evidentiality markings)).
Anyways, im just rambling now, maybe ill make a neater posts about my thoughts that's actually researched and not pulling shit out of my memory of someting i did more than a year ago (at the time of writing (28/02/2026))