Re: LUNATIC again

David G. Durand wrote:
> I don't think that communicational adequacy is that hard, actually, because
> _people_ will solve whatever problems they find within a system, and make
> themselves understood, given even a little bit of ground to stand on.
A great example is creoles.  Pidgins (well, most pidgins) are inadequete
for communication, but once they become creolized, they are as capable
of communication as any other language - their usually limited
vocabulary doesn't impede that at all, since compounds and other methods
are used to extend it.  I suspect that even most "incomplete" conlangs
could be fleshed out by actual use (even if that fleshing out takes the
form of borrowed syntax from the native langs of the users).

--
"It has occured to me more than once that holy boredom is good and
sufficient reason for the invention of free will." - "Lord Leto II"
(Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert)
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files/
ICQ #: 18656696
AOL screen-name: NikTailor