Re: what is a loglang?

"Mark P. Line" <mark@...> wrote:
>
> Finally, I have found that the best way to support reasoning
> of the _conceptual_ kind is to define an ontology (or several,
> as long as they work together). That's the approach in my
> upcoming Waldzell Conlang: define an upper ontology (i.e. a
> consistent set of definitions that form the "highest", most
> abstract layer at the top of a potentially unlimited hierarchy
> of lower ontologies) and map it directly onto the conlang.
> Construction of lower ontologies then requires nothing more
> than lexicalization.
>
> Yes? No?
>
I think it's a good idea - if it can be done (even though I don't
understand what you mean by "conceptual reasoning").  I'm curious about
what your uppermost ontologies will look like.  Can you give us
something more specific?

BTW, I thought you started Waldzell several years ago???


Regards,

Rick Morneau
http://www.eskimo.com/~ram

Reply