Re: Comparison of philosophical languages
|From:||Keith Gaughan <kmgaughan@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, January 16, 2003, 22:18|
Andrew Nowicki <andrew@...> wrote:
> Philosophical languages are defined as conlangs which do not
> derive their root words from other languages.
No, that's an "a priori" language.
> They are my
> favorite international auxiliary languages because they are
> not hampered by the flaws of existing languages. A perfect
> language should be easy to pronounce, easy to understand,
> and easy to learn.
Dude, you really ought to read Umberto Eco's "The search for the perfect
language". I think it'd be a real eye-opener for you.
Ceci n'est pas une .sig.