Re: Four things: Was: Comparison of philosophical languages

Sally Caves scripsit:

> 1)  And, please remind me what an Engelang is, how it differs from a
> loglang, and what its assumptions are that we "artlangers" are "contentedly
> blind" to.  :)
In short, an engelang is one that is designed to certain criteria, such that
it is objectively testable whether the criteria are met or not.  This is
different from claiming that the criteria themselves are "objective".
For example, the Lojban/Loglan roots are designed to be maximally
recognizable to the speakers of the (numerically) largest languages in the
world in proportion to the number of speakers.  It is not a matter of
taste whether this criterion is met; it is something that can be tested.

> 4)  I am tired of the recent crankiness and fisty-cuffs on this list.  I
> would like to see less heat and more meat, as of old.
Peace and order will return.  And if not, the Strange Powers will be exercised.

--
All Norstrilians knew what laughter was:        John Cowan
it was "pleasurable corrigible malfunction".    http://www.reutershealth.com
        --Cordwainer Smith, _Norstrilia_        jcowan@reutershealth.com

Reply