Re: [lojban] Re: thoughts on numerical language

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/4/2001 8:52:28 PM Central Standard Time, thinkit8@lycos.com writes:

I'd think of it as a superset.  If you define something numerically,
you can do both the language stuff, and the illustration, which is
not a "linguistic description".  Sure you can do that now, but you
get rough boundries between them.  A rough example is binary
encoding in newsgroup texts...it's a hack at best.

Your binary code as a superset of a language.  Not quite, since it does not now contain the language as a part, only a code for it.  Again, you are being remarkably opaque in what you are talking about.  Do you mean a language or do you mean a code.  If you mean a language, then the pictures have no place in it; if you meqn a code, then the linguistic stuff you've been throwing around have no place.  Apparently.
A set of principles seems called for.  What are you talking about?  What goals do you have in mind? How does your numerical whatzit proceed toward those goals?
What is a numerical language?

This looks like material for LoCCan3 -- except for its negligible connection with Lojban/Loglan.