Bryan Maloney:
> --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, And Rosta <a.rosta@L...> wrote:
> > Bryan Maloney:
>
> > > Ah, but carrots are not tubers! Carrot should have a "rooty"
> > > component
> >
> > Okay, though tubery would do for me, since to me tubers and root
> > vegetables are the same
>
> Please demonstrate that your personal semantic prejudices are
> necessarily universal
>
> > Why? Its oranginess and rootiness are its most salient properties
>
> Please demonstrate that your personal semantic prejudices are
> necessarily universal
I would expend the effort in the quest to find the ideal most
carroty word for carrot, but not in a fatuous effort to win an
argument with you.
> > We're trying to map conceptual space here, not objective reality
> > The idea is not that the wordshape should give you the equivalent
> > of an encyclopedia article on carrots. The idea is that the
>
> No, "we" are not.
The "we" refers to those who espouse the ideas that you were
engaging with but misinterpreting.
> You are trying to do hard-core advocacy of the
> "superiority" of your language concepts over natural language. Take
> it to Auxlang, where that sort of talk belongs.
Somehow you managed to grossly misinterpret what I said. You needn't
fret, for I certainly wasn't trying to to do hard-core advocacy of
the "superiority" of my language concepts over natural language.
> If you want to talk
> about the technical issues of constructing a language, then this is a
> fine place for it, but evangelizing a language is for Auxlang
This is correct.
--And.