Re: Lighting Some Flames: Towards conlang artistry

Paul Edson scripsit:

> Anyone have a language which cannot make such value
> judgments? No "better" or "worse"?
Lojban makes it difficult, since among the core arguments for
"good" and "bad" are purposes:  x1 finds x2 good/bad for purpose x3.
There are words that work more like "good" and "bad" in English,
but what they actually mean is "sinful" and "virtuous": you use
them just when you want to assume a scale of absolute values.

The same relative/absolute split is used for truth: there is
"true by specified epistemology" and there is a completely separate
word for "absolute truth".  Don't believe in absolute truth?
Don't use the word.

--
John Cowan <jcowan@...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_