[lojban] Re: Language evolution

[Llu'is Batlle i Rossell <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 08:08:58PM -0400, Invent Yourself wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:01:35PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > > A language that conveyed all information unambiguously, say Ferrer
> > > i Cancho and Sol?, would have a separate word for every thing,
> > > concept or action it referred to. Such a language would be
> > > formidably complicated for the speaker: the green of grass, for
> > > example, would be represented by a totally different word to the
> > > green of sea, an emerald or an oak leaf.
> >
> > Sorry.  If I had read this paragraph before I sent it here, I
> > wouldn't have bothered.
> 
> 
> 
> ma naldrani .i le ni sinxa cu tolpabdu'i le jei satci
>
mi'e .ie

Well, it seems to me that kind of language would only use "proper names"; I
mean, labels for each thing that happened in reality. And it would also be
impossible to talk about 'abstract' or mind-related concepts (or contepts
themselves).

I think that "proper names" or labels (like in lojban) allow a language to be
like the one 'suposed' in the paragraph.

What a ugly English I have.

-- 
 "... el quid de la qüestió està en l'educació: en la filosofia didàctica,
  l'opció ignorància hauria d'existir: tu què vols ser? Jo, enginyer; jo, metge;
  jo, ignorant: és a dir, vull aprendre a viure però no vull saber-ho tot."
     -- Pau Riba, entrevista a "Paper de Vidre", núm. 5