[Fwd: Tiny lexicon languages]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------C54AAD5C50230CD517F25275
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jim Grossmann wrote:


> IMO, 20 roots is too few for a language meant to be used for everyday >
> communication or diary writing.
> Even if 20 roots and lots of derivation could do the same work as a large
> natlang lexicon, the resulting words would be too similar to one another
> more often.   Which sentence seems easier to read, A or B?
>
> A:   I took a picture with my new camera, and developed the film to produce
> a good print.
>
> B:    I photographed a photograph with my new prephotographizer and
> photographized the photographier to produce a fine photographrand.
>
> I'll take the first sentence any day of the week!
Jim, I think the tiny lexicon would work for very tiny societies,
like birds.  I think it would be ideal for sparrows.  Eat, sleep,
mate, eggs, chicks, fly, perch, feathers, danger, rival, fight, hurt,
dustbath, deadbird.  That's only thirteen, and that pretty much
covers it.


Sally Caves

I forgot "food."  Brings it up to fourteen.  I suppose you could add
"branch."  Maybe "above" and "below."  And "night."
--------------C54AAD5C50230CD517F25275
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Message-ID: <376912F6.3CAC5811@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 08:23:34 -0700
From: Sally Caves <scaves@...>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jim Grossmann <steven@...>
CC: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...>
Subject: Re: Tiny lexicon languages
References: <003d01beb88f$500520a0$af3aa3cd@timg>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jim Grossmann wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> IMO, 20 roots is too few for a language meant to be used for everyday
> communication or diary writing.
>
> Even if 20 roots and lots of derivation could do the same work as a large
> natlang lexicon, the resulting words would be too similar to one another
> more often.   Which sentence seems easier to read, A or B?
>
> A:   I took a picture with my new camera, and developed the film to produce
> a good print.
>
> B:    I photographed a photograph with my new prephotographizer and
> photographized the photographier to produce a fine photographrand.
>
> I'll take the first sentence any day of the week!
Jim, I think the tiny lexicon would work for very tiny societies,
like birds.  I think it would be ideal for sparrows.  Eat, sleep,
mate, eggs, chicks, fly, perch, feathers, danger, rival, fight, hurt,
dustbath, deadbird.  That's only thirteen, and that pretty much
covers it.
>
> As for aUI, the language of space, I used to own a grammar for it.   I use
> that term loosely;   the claims its author made on behalf of aUI were mostly
> laughable.   It does NOT produce precise expressions from its handful of
> roots.
>
> A language with a tiny lexicon would have to be used for some specialized
> purpose;   magical ritual, playing chess, describing feelings;   any
> endeavor involving only a handful of entities and actions to name.
>
> MATHEMATICS might provide a good semantic domain for a tiny lexicon
> language.
>
> And I would LOVE to see if someone could make a tiny lexicon language
> specialized to describe dancing.
>
> But for the present, I'll pass on this challenge, and wait for better minds
> to take it up.
>
> Jim
--------------C54AAD5C50230CD517F25275--