Re: experimental crocodile phonology questions
|From:||Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...>|
|Date:||Monday, November 1, 2004, 3:27|
Partly OT ....
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:56:03 -0300, Pablo Flores
>On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:57:03 -0000, caeruleancentaur
>> I am presuming from the context that, by "sentient," you
>> mean "speaking" as opposed to ordinary crocodiles that cannot speak.
>> In reality, the word "sentient" does not mean that. It means
>> either "conscious" or "experiencing feeling or sensation." Thus,
>> ordinary crocodiles are, indeed, sentient.
>I've seen the word "sentient" used as a synonym of "self-conscius",
>i. e. "aware of _ego_" a lot. That's common use in science fiction,
>along with the much less common "sapient".
>> P.S. When the Buddhists speak of the Buddha saving all sentient
>> beings, they are not referring just to humans, but to all animate
And, for some Buddhists, plants and minerals etc. are included indirectly,
since life and environment are said to be basically unified.
>I was thinking, "how can a non-self-conscious animal be saved?",
>when I realized that reaching salvation (Nirvana) implies abolishing
>self-consciousness. Could you elaborate?
I don't see a reply. I'm not clear about that variety of Buddhism. Do you
mean becoming unaware of self or becoming aware of non-self?
>I'm also remembering the character in (Delany's?) _Babel-17_ who
>had no awareness of self (or the 1st/2nd/3rd person split for that
>matter). Has somebody tried a conculture/conlang without that
Not yet! All of my *current* projects are supposed to have personal
affixes/pronouns at some point. But a *new* project perhaps ....
I think the Butcher *did* make a distinction, using some kind of sign
language (although perhaps not consciously) and eventually learned how to
use personal pronouns (that passage in chapter IV of part 3 is amusing),
despite Babel-17 not making the distinction.