Re: Extrapolating languages

--- Robert Jung <RobertMJung@...> wrote:
> Hi Andrew (and everyone else),
>
> I know what you'd like exactly:
> http://www.xibalba.demon.co.uk/jbr/futurese.html! As
> soon as I read your message I thought of it - it's
> _that_ neat!
>
> --Robert
WOW! An interesting read.  But that raises a question.
 Could a language be designed in such a way as to
defeat Grimm's law.  In other words, is there some
design which, due to its inherent simplicity or
efficienty, would be more resistent to change than a
natlang?

I.e., does change occur just for the sake of change,
or is there some notion of "striving" toward a "more
perfected" form?  And if so, could a more perfected
form be designed which would thus resist change?

--gary