Re: Universal Translation Language

Joshua Shinavier wrote:
>
> > My thoughts exactly, Josh.  The kind of ambiguity that a logical
> > language is
> > going to get hung up on is in the following poem, and I was looking for
> > it
> > at the moment you posted.  It's the kind of punning that's hard to
> > translate
> > into other languages, much less one that has tried to eliminate
> > ambiguity--
> > and punning:
> [snip a poem by Will]
>
> Yeah, that's one fun detail which a logical language lacks.  Lewis Carroll
> and Douglas Adams (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) just wouldn't be the
> same without English ambiguity!   Alas, this kind of humor is lost to a
> loglang -- which, however, makes up for it by being clear and unmistakeable.
> After all, it's the absurdities of an ambiguous language we're laughing at
> when we read this stuff!
Exactly, Josh! and yet it's not absurd, either, but very human.
And very dense!  The economy of that sonnet, and the playful
doubleness and tripleness of meaning get a lot covered in
a few lines.  The poet can address the lady's "intention,"
her "desire," her "lust," and her "sexual organ" all at the
same time, while he commends all of the same of his own.
Including his own name.  It's clear and unmistakable because
each use of "will" makes sense in their multiple contexts.

Sally