Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: LUNATIC again

From:JOEL MATTHEW PEARSON <mpearson@...>
Date:Thursday, November 5, 1998, 1:41
On Wed, 4 Nov 1998, John Cowan wrote:

> > Here I find the term "model language" useful and appropriate. A model > > language is and is not a language in the same way that a model airplane > > is and is not an airplane. > > Hmm, I'm not sure what a model airplane is. Does it necessarily fly? > All the ones I know of (see in the park, etc.) actually do fly, but is > that a *necessary* property of the class? > It seems to me that a non-flying model airplane would be as much an > airplane as a teddy bear is a real bear, whereas an airplane that actually > flies is a real airplane whether small or not.
Actually, it was this kind of slipperyness that I had in mind when I suggested the analogy. To me, the problem seems similar to the question of whether a conlang is a language or not - a question to which I have no real answer. My philosophy is: When you can't solve a problem, reduce it to some other problem and call it a day. :-) Matt.