Re: New Language
| From: | Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, November 20, 1998, 19:21 |
|---|
Didier Willis wrote:
> As another example, one might try define a complex set of particles
> to express distance (here, there, yonder...), but fail to specify
> the scale. What one considers as 'far past'? Antiquity? Paleolithic?
For here/there/yonder, in some languages it reflects the persons. I.e.,
"this" means "this one near me", "that" means "that one near you", and
"yon" means "not near you or me".
> IMO, so-called 'logical' languages can only be logical *in
> structure*, i.e. regular to the extreme.
Depends on what you mean by "logical". I think that every language is
quite logical, since I'm referring to "conforming to an internal logic".
--
"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