Print

Print


The flippant answer is that it's a whole lot more interesting.

The less flippant answers I can think of is that sometimes ambiguity is
itself a desired feature in language. Ambiguity allows one to decieve
without telling untruths, for example. It helps people save face, because
they aren't forced to reveal their motives or opinions. It allows for
clever wordplay and subtle references (which I suppose goes along with
Leonardo's "poetry" response).

Actually, though, I suppose you could lie quite easily in a logical
language. There's not really any part of natural language that *forces* us
to lie (or even be ambiguous), is there? We simply choose to do it. So we
could choose to lie in a loglang as well. Still couldn't decieve without
lying, though.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Leonardo Castro <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> The only advantage I see is in poetry.
>
> Até mais!
>
> Leonardo
>
>
> 2013/1/18 Mathieu Roy <[log in to unmask]>:
>  > What are the advantages of speaking a less logical language (a
> language with grammar rules with a lot of exceptions, a lot of words with
> ambiguity, etc.)?
> >
> > -Mat
>