Hallo conlangers!

On 17/05/19 21:05, And Rosta wrote:

> On Fri, 17 May 2019, 15:44 Jörg Rhiemeier, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hallo conlangers!
>> [...]
>> I think it would be an extremely unlikely coincidence if the text made
>> sense in two completely different languages, so unlikely that it can be
>> rejected out of hand! It is this very unlikeliness which makes
>> deciphering extinct written languages possible - otherwise we couldn't
>> know whether the language found in which the text makes sense is the
>> right one or not!
> "Coincidence" hardly seems the right word when one of the languages is
> invented specifically to fit the text.

Only so much:

I don't want to be drawn into an epistemological quagmire here (you seem
to like epistemological quagmires; I don't). In empirical science, you
are *always* dealing with probabilities - you have made the same
observation so many times, so you'd expect it to go the same way the
next time, but there is no sure way to exclude the possibility that it
goes another way then next time, so you can't be sure. Yet, if you
insist on excluding statements that are based on observations like this
and only expect statements that can be *proved*, you'll fall back into
scholasticism and won't arrive at any meaningful results.

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf