Re: Language superiority, improvement, etc.

>
>> Amen. It may not be easy, it may take many many versions, but here at
>> conlang we are all blazing the trail of accelerated language evolution.
>
>Speak for yourself. Scott Jann and I are creating pala-kalloejna for
>two specific purposes:
But are you not, by pushing the envelope of language in your desired
direction, indirectly and unintentionally contributing to the definition
of the possible and practical in language design?  I never intended to
attribute to you the goals of a _better_ or more efficient language.
But your results should not go unnoticed by those who are trying to
build a more general structure. Certainly there will be lessons to be
learned from your work that can be applied beyond your niche.

jerry

>
>1) as a work of art, based on our own highly arbitrary and personal
>aesthetics (i.e., we don't think it's beautiful, we think we think it's
>beautiful).
>2) To be easily computable (and thus formal).
>
>It is fit for the purpose of computation, because we're making it that
>way. That DOES NOT mean that it is "better", "more efficient" or whatever.
>Gains we make in some areas (unambiguous string parsing) are losses in
>others (no poetic ambiguity). pala-kalloejna is fit for some purposes, not
>others...kinda like a natlang, huh?
>
>_____________________________________________________________________________
>Christopher Reid Palmer : reid@pconline.com : www.pconline.com/~reid/
>
>