Print

Print


Hallo conlangers!

On Friday 18 January 2013 13:29:32 R A Brown wrote:

> On 18/01/2013 11:27, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > 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.)?
> 
> Being human?   :)

Yes.  Which, of course, includes being capable of using metaphor
and word play, which are off limits in a true logical language.
Life is not an application of formal logic, and I have been
feeling for a very long time that human language and formal logic
serve *different* purposes.  Language is not about mathematically
proving or disproving assertions; it is about sharing ideas and
emotions.

It does not surprise me at all that the Transhumanist movement
is into Lojban.  It just fits those super-rationalist nerds'
pipe dream of superiority over irrational "mere humans"!

On Friday 18 January 2013 14:42:52 Allison Swenson wrote:

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

Yep.  The loglangs I have seen look very bland and technical;
natlangs and naturalistic artlangs are far richer than those.
Speaking a loglang is live living in an apartment without
wallpaper, lit by naked light bulbs, and with furniture made
of unpolished and unpainted pieces of wood coarsely nailed
together.  It works, but there is no *fun* to it. 

> The less flippant answers I can think of is that sometimes ambiguity is
> itself a desired feature in language.

Sure!

>       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).

Just that.
 
> 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.

Of course, one can come up with an untruthful sentence in a
loglang; but as there is no metaphor, such an untruthfulness is
more easily revealed than in a natlang.

All what I have said above about loglangs, however, must be taken
with a grain of salt, as I am not a loglanger ;)

--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
"Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1