Re: Bootstrapping a cooperative conlang

In a message dated 11/18/2007 9:47:58 PM Central Standard Time,
hmiller@IO.COM writes:


> If you've identified a group of potential collaborators who are all
> familiar with Wierzbicka's work, and who have the time and level of
> interest to write definitions in that style for all the words you're
> going to need, that could be an interesting thing to try. I just think
> that having to learn a technical set of words for basic meanings, and
> how to use them, is likely to be intimidating to just about anyone who
> might want to participate.
>
What do you mean by "a technical set of words for basic meanings"?
NSM uses only the simplest words as the basis for definitions (actually
explications, a sort of scenario explaining the meaning).
Everyone already knows the semantic primes, just not that they *are* semantic
primes.

I would like to create a language derived from the English primes, but
without reference to any other English words.  English grammar would be defined in
terms of these primes as well.  New words would be formed to conform to English
sound rules (phonotactics?).  No words would be borrowed from anywhere, at
least until much later after the language was essentially robust.
It would be a case of building English from scratch from the bottom up.

stevo
   </HTML>

Reply