Re: Comparison of philosophical languages
|From:||Andrew Nowicki <andrew@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, January 26, 2003, 1:31|
AN> If you have memorized 180 root words of Ygyde,
AN> it is easy to memorize "money craftsman."
AN> The word "accountant" is meaningless to someone
AN> who learns the English language.
Sally Caves wrote:
SC> If the human brain can learn English, and the
SC> adult human brain can learn Esperanto, how is
SC> it that having only 180 words makes Ygyde any
SC> easier, when finally it's the compounds that
SC> you have to memorize and their vague suggestings?
SC> Not if he knows some Latin via French:
SC> ad + compt + -ant. "One who counts
SC> toward," or "counts up."
To the best of my knowledge the French word is
"acontant" or "acomptant." The problem is that
the person who learns English does not know which
language "accountant" was derived from and he
may not be a polyglot.
SC> "Money craftsman" could be a lender of money.
SC> A banker, a usurer, a maker of counterfeit money.
SC> To get refinements on your words, your phrases will
SC> have to get longer and longer. How is that simple?
accountant = ogaja = "noun money craftsman"
banker = ogaco = "noun money expert"
usurer = owogaco = "noun hungry money expert"
counterfeit money maker = onygaja = "noun false money craftsman"
These compound words are not precise descriptions,
but they give a hint of the thing they describe.
We can argue forever if Ygyde compound words are
easy to memorize, but only a test on students would
give us the answer. I do not remember all the Ygyde
root words, but I easily memorize all the English
descriptions (money craftsman, money expert). The
root words are hard to memorize because they all
sound alike. On the other hand, the compound word
descriptions (money craftsman, money expert) are
vivid and thus easy to remember.
SC> And by the way, calling somebody "conservative"
SC> is an ad hominem attack, Andrew--the very thing
SC> that some conlangers have apologized or been
SC> chastized for when you came on list. You can
SC> call a person's argument conservative, but
SC> calling him a "conservative person" is arrogant.
I am gone.