Re: Politics and the Constructed Language

JQ:�<<�While�Ithkuil morphological and morpho-semantic structures are geared to�prevent�this
sort of vagueness and obfuscation, it is still quite possible to�use�the
precision of Ithkuil to obfuscate and be deliberately vague.� >>��This is
precisely what I meant when I said *can't* it be used in�just this way. This
was, indeed, my impression.��I should note I haven't read Orwell's essay
(or at least no more�of it than you quoted). Our initial poster might have
provided�us with a link. Here's
one:��<http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm>��JQ:�<<�The
only�real difference is that if you want to obfuscate and be vague
in�Ithkuil,�you have to do it overtly rather than covertly.� >>��I
suppose this is an important difference. You can be intentionally�vague in
English, but if one doesn't know the cues, one won't be�able to see how it's
done. In Ithkuil, even if you don't understand�the meaning, one should be
able to tell that the speaker/writer is�intentionally being vague (i.e., this
can't be hidden), and so they'll�be able to say with certainty that they're a
jerk, whereas in English,�it'd be a guess, at
best.��-David�*******************************************************************�"sunly
eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."�"No eternal reward will forgive
us now for wasting the dawn."��-Jim
Morrison��http://dedalvs.free.fr/��On Dec 15, 2007, at 2∞35 PM, John
Quijada wrote:�

Reply