> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jens Wilkinson > --- [log in to unmask] wrote: > > > I'd also like to add. > > > > (8) The language will be fully expressive. Capable > > of not just > > common daily speech, but useful in commerce, > > science, technology, > > philosophy, law, etc... > > I don't know, I'd be careful about this one. One > point, I suppose philosophically, is that no language > can be fully expressive. In English people are > constantly making up new words or expressions because > they are not satisfied with what we have, or there is > a need to distinguish some fine point, or they have > forgotten the proper word. The more important point, > though, is, don't you think it scares people off if > you have a huge dictionary? I know you can have simple > ones for travel use, etc., but still. It's not so much an issue of the lexicon, but the language still needs to have a means of expressing things without being too vague. Some of the creations are advocating a liberal word orders by relying on "common sense". I see this as sort of dangerous ground where there's too much room for misunderstandings to take place. There are going to be times when precision is very important. If the instructions on the bottle say take "take two pills four times daily", it could be a real problem if the person reading the label interprets it as something like "take four pills two times daily".