Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ    Attic   

Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of information (was Re: Going NOMAIL: Honeymoon))

Date:Sunday, July 6, 2008, 16:27
> [] On Behalf Of Jorg
> On the other hand, one should indeed have more than one
> going. Otherwise, you are likely to incorporate all your
> in one conlang and thus end up with a kitchen sink language or > whatever. I have several ideas which I wish to try out, but > which I feel have no room in Old Albic. So I apply them to
> conlang projects - some of them diachronically related to Old > Albic, others not.
I agree. A lot of my projects are mainly to experiment with ideas which may or may not find their way into other creations depending on how the experimentation goes.
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 23:14:05 -0400, Dana Nutter wrote: > > > This is why I gave up on that approach a long time ago. I
> > still see value in an oligosynthetic system. At least there > > will be some mnemonics to aid in learning vocabulary. > > Oligosynthetic schemes suffer from many, though not all, of
> problems that weigh down taxonomic schemes. It is not easy to > break down reality to a restricted number of semantic
> and how do you handle proper names and such? You need an
> mechanism" which allows for "importing" arbitrary lexical
> At least that is what I feel to be the case.
No, it's not easy but it's only difficult if you take it to extremes as with AUI or Toki Pona. I have an oligosynthetic project in the works, but there is also a phonosemantic schema that will underly the root morphemes. It's just an idea I'm playing with right now. I don't expect to reduce everything down to 32 roots, though I'd be happy to get it down to the 500-600 range. Proper names will be handled as distinct entities based on pronunciation. There will be a particle to introduce them.