> Some things that popped up in a few recent posts made me squirm uneasily
> and wonder what it is exactly that we all think a loglang *is*.
_Loglang_ is polysemous.
In one sense, it is an obsolete synonym for 'engelang'.
In another less redundant sense, it is strictly a 'logic(al) language',
& I interpret that as being a language whose grammatical rules specify
an explicit mapping from surface (phonological) forms to logical
forms (propositions), with 'logic' understood as propositional
and predicate logic or some analogue of it.
If someone were to ask "Why fetishize logic by singling it out so",
I would respond that it is an especially important ingredient of
the syntagmatics of semantics, and that it could reasonably be said
that by 'logic' what we really mean is the 'syntax of semantics'.