Re: Non-humanoid langs

On 4/28/05, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:
> Simon Clarkstone <simon.clarkstone@...> writes:
> > On 4/27/05, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
> > > Now that seems like an interestingly bizarre project.  Are you trying
> > > to beat Ithkuil and Qthyn|gai out of the field?
> >
> > Not really.  I don't want it to be too cumbersome.  ...
>
> I must protest!  Qthyn|gai is not cumbersome! :-)
Oops, sorry!

I was thinking about the *enforced* cumbersomeness (?) of Ithkuil,
with its required extreme detail, its vulnerability to interference
(lack of redundancy), and its admittedly ridiculously-closely-packed
phoneme-space (ANADIEW: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xoo>).

Plus, I did not know about Qthyn|gai when I wrote that.

I have a slight advantage over you because my language does not have
to worry about pronounceability of words; any rademes can go together.
 Also, working with a non-human psychology, I can (and want to) use a
far more abstract utterance structure, even *more* like a computer
language (monads will be damn useful to express the naturally
sequential nature of narratives).

This lang (if I get very far) will have redundancy, and (when
"spoken") will reside on top of a TCP/IP-like layer (yes, TCP/IP
("Transfer Control Protocol over Internet Protocol") *is* the protocol
that most of the Internet runs on).  This layer will allow a "Chinese
Whispers" method of longer-distance communication to work with a much
lower error rate, as errors can be detected and rectified.

Reply