Re: Comparison of philosophical languages
|From:||Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, January 16, 2003, 22:19|
En réponse à Andrew Nowicki <andrew@...>:
Just one comment: you seem to have sent this e-mail at the wrong place. The
Conlang list is not interested in Auxlang politics or in the respective "good"
and "bad" points of languages, artificial or not, philosophical or not. Those
subjects are de facto forbidden on this list, since they are mostly questions
of taste and discussions about them always lead to flamewars (and can only so,
_de gustibus non disputandum_).
If you want to compare the different merits of philosophical languages as
auxiliary languages and advocate your own, I suggest you post to the Auxlang
list rather than the Conlang list. On this list a post beginning by stating
that your language is the best of its kind is not going to be well received,
and rightly so.
On the other hand, if you are willing to *discuss* the structure of your
language, devoid of any judgemental statement on its merits over others, then
you are very welcome here. Don't think I'm trying to chase you out of this
list. I just want to make sure you understand the subject of this list, and the
contents of your first mail make me think you have slightly misjudged it.
Now welcome to the list :) . I'll take a look at your webpage (but don't expect
much of it, philosophical languages are not of much interest for me ;)) . I'm
more interested in artlangs, like the majority of people here). Thanks for the
Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.