Re: Bootstrapping a cooperative conlang

MorphemeAddict@WMCONNECT.COM wrote:

> Her explication of "mouse" is so long because the meaning is so complex.  A
> picture of a mouse could also mean lots of different things, such as just
> "animal", or "pest", or the color of the mouse (if not black and white).
>
> For the explication of a word in this new language, they need not have all
> the detail of the corresponding English word.  The detail could be added
> separately.
>
> stevo
There's not enough context in one picture of a mouse to infer a meaning
of "pest". A picture of a mouse infestation in a grain warehouse might
be a better clue, but for a word like "pest", you'll probably need a
whole set of pictures including cockroaches, zebra mussels, etc. to get
the idea.

"Animal" is another word that a single illustration isn't enough for.
The main page of the Tree of Life web site has a picture of what looks
like some kind of worm as the illustration for animals. Even if your
language doesn't put worms in the same category as mice, at least a few
pictures of different kinds of animals (e.g., ostrich, gecko, turtle)
would be needed to get the idea across. Also, a few examples of things
that aren't animals may be needed. An illustration of the Minza word
"nara" might include a shark and a butterfly, but not a jellyfish,
because jellyfish aren't considered as "nara". Having a picture of a
jellyfish labeled "nara de" would make this more explicit (along with
other examples to make it clear that "de" is a negative modifier).

So assuming that words like "animal" or "pest" would need to have other
illustrations to clarify the meaning, the most obvious meaning to attach
to a picture of a mouse is something in the general range of "mouse",
"rodent", or whichever specific kind of mouse is illustrated.

Reply