Re: Most developed conlang

Hi!

Herman Miller writes:
>... a lot of interesting stuff ...
So your main criterion would be predictability of semantics?  If
predictable => no new word, if not predictable => new word.  This
seems, well, very reasonable for composing a lexicon.  Of course there
will be difficult cases, but let's ignore them for now.

This means that for counting a conlang's words, we probably should:

  - also count phrases ('bubble sort algorithm') and idioms

  - not count lexicon entries that are due to irregular forms
    ('saw' cf. 'see')

  - count polysynthetically constructed words several times,
    excluding structures that are semantically clear operations,
    but counting all irregularly derived concepts

This seems quite reasonable.  Do you also think it's a good way of
counting?  It also looks undoable since the lexicons are generally not
structured like this.

**Henrik

Replies