Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Comparison of philosophical languages

From:H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>
Date:Tuesday, January 21, 2003, 14:08
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 09:56:47PM +0800, Florian Rivoal wrote:
> >I do not know Chinese, > >but I guess that it may be good at coining new words too. > >Too bad it is so hard to pronounce. > It is extremely difficult to pronounce. to an european speaker. koreans, > tai, vietnamese.... find it rather simple. on the other hand, chinese > would have lots of problems with reknown IAL(esperanto), or with yigide.
[snip] Exactly, which is why I keep going back to the point: it's easy relative to who? *I* think tonal languages are the way to go, because you can get so many more root words into a single syllable. Plus, tones are so darned easy to learn! After all, if *I* have no problem with it, why would anybody else? But just because I think this way, doesn't mean it works for everybody. OTOH, do please take a serious look at Joe Fatula's proposal. I think he has hit a few very good points, which is actually worth consideration. T -- A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems. -- P. Erdos


John Cowan <jcowan@...>