Return-Path: Resent-From: cbmvax!uunet!PICA.ARMY.MIL!protin Resent-Message-Id: <9107011733.AA29777@relay1.UU.NET> Date: Fri, 1 Jun 90 9:40:34 EDT From: "Arthur W. Protin Jr." (GC-ACCURATE) To: lojban-list@snark Subject: Re: Re: help wanted Message-Id: <9006010940.aa05213@COR4.PICA.ARMY.MIL> Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jul 91 13:07:06 EDT Resent-To: John Cowan Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jul 1 15:52:30 1991 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!PICA.ARMY.MIL!protin > Of course, there is a tradeoff here between cultural neutrality, > simplicity, and precision; the most culturally neutral design would > be to ignore the issue and let each speaker use the words in the most > natural manner for that speaker (with a little more dialog or precise > technical words needed if the ambiguity is important); precision would > pick one culture's model and establish that as The Definition. Or one > could require technical terms at all times, possibly encumbering the > language with too many possible words for `arm'. While I care little about "pure cultural neutrality", and can probably accept any of the discussed definitions for 'arm' and 'morning', I find this argument to be faulty. There is communication only if the listener receives approximately the same image as the speaker started with, and if the meaning of the words are highly speaker-frame-of-reference oriented, then every listener has to know the speaker's frame of reference. The boundary/limit/extent issue is by no means trivial. I am reminded of the humorous skit I heard: A couple looking for a night's lodging, go into a motel that advertises unbelievable rates, confirm the rates, commit to renting a room, and then find out that walls for the room are an extra cost option. An abundance of terms, each with slightly different connotations, should be an asset, not a liability. English, the leading international language, has the worlds largest vocabulary due to absorbing the vocabularies from a couple of other languages. Maybe the success of English is inspite of the size of its vocabulary, or maybe it is because of it, or maybe it is just independent of it. I am culturally biased to not support frugality of vocabulary. thank you for this forum, Arthur Protin