Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Natural Semantic Metalanguage

From:Petr Mejzlík <imploder@...>
Date:Friday, November 16, 2007, 17:09
I think what they propose on that page is a bad and hardly feasible
approach to semantics. I've criticized it here:
and also in this ZBB thread:

I haven't read any of their books, I just consider what's on that page.
Maybe there's more to it but this page simply says the words listed there
are "semantically primitive" (but I don't see any way they really are, and
why specifically these words) followed by quotes of "credible scientists"
to support it. The idea itself looks crappy or at least unclear. I don't
know what you all find so amazing in it.

Dne Wed, 14 Nov 2007 23:33:45 +0100 Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...>

> But on that page he does not give the "canonical contexts" which would > exemplify the region of semantic space occupied by each prime, so it > might take > some digging through the published works listed in the bibliography. The > only > problem is the prices of those books. Yikes!!!! > > --gary >
Indeed, I also see this flaw. It looks like an excuse for that the meanings actually don't match. I may be wrong but I wildly guess that by "canonical context" they mean something like central meaning.