h a l f b a k e r yGood ideas at the time.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Lately, I have dwelled on the idea of a simple language, which I call the perfect language. I questioned whether to post it here and just kind of waited for the whole idea to come to grips. I just finished my semester exam (english) and I'm REALLY, pissed off andthe idea is rip roarin in my head.
This
is the Easiest Language in the World. There is no such thing as plural meanings in this language. One does not use the word 'Tank' as both a name for a vehicle, and a name for an object.
The language is simple. Everything, is straight forward. Spelling is different to. Consonants modify only the vowels in front of them. You don't have the 'r' modifying the 'e' and end up with an 'errr' sound. You don't end up with 'semi meanings'. For example Y cannot be a vowel and a consonant, it can be one or the other. There is no such thing as 'conditions of conditions'. Where under some condition, "this word sounds like this, but this word means something totally different under another set of conditions". For example that sentence I just wrote. The 'this' refers to the first word, and saying 'this' with an 'and' before it does not mean another word. You can't just patch together random letters and get a word that sounds like a word under the most extensive, and extreme conditions.
For example the Planet Kashyyk, from Star Wars. The 'y' sounds like two 'e's, or an 'ick', but nobody really knows because the conditions are so extreme, and so vague or numerous that you just say it however the heck you want to say it.
A class of one word cannot be a class of another. Such as the word 'can', can, can be a verb, just like that, but it can also be a noun, as in a 'tin can'.
Words are not named after letters, so if you said each letter in a particular word you can't get a particularly strange phrase. 'You' is not a pronoun for 'that person', 'oh' is not an interjection, 'gee' is not an interjection, and so and so forth.
Like this?
http://homepage.ntl...llHumour/Spoofs.htm
[Ling, Jan 20 2006]
Another version
http://www.atlantaga.com/eu.htm
[Ling, Jan 20 2006]
[link]
|
| |
This is a good idea, and one that I was thinking of posting myself. I actually came up with a whole written alphabet, several years ago. Mine had 10 vowels, one for each vowel sound. For instance, the letter "A", as pronounced in the word Ace, has a separate character than the letter "A" as pronounced in Can. Also, there is no letter "C" because it just substitutes for "S" or "K" so it's redundant. And the letter "Y" can only be pronounced like it is in Yo-Yo. It's not a vowel because it's redundant, like "C".
++++++ |
|
| |
If I can find a scanner, I'll e-mail my alphabet to you. I had different characters for every letter. |
|
| |
And by the way, you spelled /kashyyk// wrong, it has 3 "y"s: Kashyyyk.
Yes, I know I have some nerdish tendencies. |
|
| |
So this is just the phonetic alphabet, and all synonyms removed from the language? It sounds a lot like newspeak to me (but without the intent of narrowing people's thoughts). I agree that English is an incredibly strange and wierd language, but that only adds to its charm. The range of meanings enable you to be poetic and intelligent, and give subtle nuances of meaning which the language would be boring without. |
|
| |
Baked in the form of Newspeak, Esperanto, Multilingua and the many other artificial languages in the world. |
|
| |
The problem is that your language involves "no such things" that already exist. |
|
| |
There are two fish in a tank. One says, to the other: "I sure wish I could drive this thing." |
|
| |
//What is the square of Pie?// The square of Pie is much harder to cut equally. What does it have inside? |
|
| |
This sounds rather like Esperanto. That
has unambiguous pronunciation rules. It
wouldn't surprise me if there was a
similarly careful approach to word
meaning. |
|
| |
Propose that two animals called fish
reside in a [receptacle for keeping
aquatic life in | armoured mobile heavy
armament vehicle]. One of the
aforementioned animals evolves the
ability to speak and enunciates in a
language called "English": "how do you
drive this thing*"? (*where the absolute
pointer to 'this' remains unspecified, as
does the resolution of the label 'thing').
The other animal says nothing - either
because it hasn't evolved, or because
the joke is now so funny that all life-
forms in the vicinity have died laughing. |
|
| |
I agree with dbmag9, this shares one of the basic features of Newspeak. The intent may not be to narrow people's thoughts, but that is what would happen if children were brought up in such a language. How, for instance, could one write poetry without words having multiple meanings? How could comedians survive without puns? Then there is the question of change. Language changes, new meanings are always piled onto old words, so either (a) the perfect language would have to be frozen by law at its original state, or (b) a city full of Ministry of Truth functionaries would have to be employed to keep inventing new words (or eliminating old meanings). Would you invent a new word for, e.g., a (computer) printer, leaving the old word to mean only a human printer, or would you suppress the old word, which would require you to burn all the dictionaries and replace them every year, and make all literature more than 15 years old unreadable? Perfect languages are like perfect leaders... |
|
| |
Sounds more like a list of nots than a list of dos. I therefore call this a rant. |
|
| |
[EP], do check out esperanto. That language needs guys like you. |
|
| |
I've never taken the plunge into Esperanto. Is it worth it? |
|
| |
I've always wanted to run a program that abstracts the most likely sound out of the most dominate languages for certain things & then detrmine if there is a reason for that. |
|
| |
If you can tie in a new written language that uses sound and shapes of letters to harmonize with each other and still lure acceptance, I'd name a God after you. (I hope to get there first some day). |
|
| |
Esperanto... kial fari ne vi veni al via senco
Vi havi been out riding fences por tiel sopiri nu |
|
| |
\\I'd name a God after you\\.
And the great lord EvilPickels didst descend unto our land and he did spite the wicked English language.
A small murmur filled the crowds as the lowly hidden truths did spake:
"I'm actually quite fond of the English language as it is, warts and all. It may be complicated, and at times irrational. But this only adds to its depth and beauty and complexity."
But, being a great god for some reason, EvilPickels didst not really give a shit. |
|
| |