Re: Comparison of philosophical languages
|From:||Andrew Nowicki <andrew@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, January 21, 2003, 22:14|
Andrew Nowicki wrote:
AN> Ygyde performs well except for the names of flora and
AN> fauna. Most meanings of compound words can be guessed.
Joseph Fatula wrote:
JF> I disagree. Consider:
JF> noun-good-person Saint? Kindly old man? Defined
JF> as "altruist". noun-container-atom I haven't a clue.
JF> Defined as "aluminum". proper-noun-wild-geological-separation
JF> The Rift Valley in Africa? Defined as "South America".
JF> noun-electric-unit Watt? Volt? Amp? Defined as "amp".
JF> noun-cold-animal Penguin? Polar bear? Those little
JF> shrimp that live in cold water? Any Arctic/Antarctic
JF> species? Defined as "amphibian". noun-fast-warm-animal
JF> Horse? Buffalo? Defined as "antelope".
JF> proper-noun-cold-random-country Norway? New Zealand?
JF> Defined as "Argentina". noun-geological-angle Longitude?
JF> Latitude? Defined as "azimuth".
Can you improve these definitions, or would you rather
define all these words as root words? How many root
words do we need to define compound words precisely?
I am thinking of flora, fauna, and words like
insinuation, overwhelming, and embezzlement.