Re: How to minimize "words" (was "Re: isolating conlangs")

On Feb 23, 2007, at 3:12 PM, David J. Peterson wrote:

> Taking a look at the NSM...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Semantic_Metalanguage
>
> ...I see it has a hearing bias, which I suppose can be forgiven ("say"
> is primitive, but not "sign".  Why shouldn't the primitive simply
> be "express", and whether it's done in writing, with speech, or
> with hands be a manner adverbial?).
To me, the semantics of {say} do not limit it to spoken words. An
email, IM, or IRC message can say something, as can a letter or a
billboard. I wonder if that's a dialect/idiolect difference, because
I remember a few times when I said someone "said" something, without
specifying that they "said" it via email, my interlocutor understood
me to mean they actually *spoke* the words to me, and I had to then
explain that it was via email.

> The primes "HAVE" and
> "WANT" are also not uncomplicated, considering that the English
> word "want" comes from a verb which meant "to lack" (and
> which still can, in certain contexts), and that many languages
> have separate notions of "having".
Heck, many languages don't have a word for "have".

On Feb 23, 2007, at 8:41 PM, Eugene Oh wrote:
> At least three native Chinese speakers, I presume. As for the question
> of say vs. express, I think it's because express is a more learned
> concept in that 1) children learn say and its meaning first and 2) it
> isn't a primary word--it's latinate for one, and is composed of a
> prefix plus a primary verb.
Just because the English word is a learned borrowing from a language
in which it is composed of a prefix plus a primary verb does not mean
it isn't a basic concept.