[lojban] Re: Language evolution

[Invent Yourself <xod@thestonecutters.net>]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Llu'is Batlle i Rossell wrote:

> 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).


In fact, it should have as many words for abstract concepts as it does for
types of green.



-- 
Economic power is exercised by means of a positive, by offering men a
reward, an incentive, a payment, a value; political power is exercised by
means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment,
destruction. The businessman's tool is values; the bureaucrat's tool is
fear.