2010/5/20 Jorge Llambías
<jjllambias@gmail.com>
A human parser will either recognize the word, ... or (most likely)
they won't recognize it, in which case they will say "ki'a" whether
Not so with the names. As they are "arbitrary label", they always are "known", without a recognizing.
Are you saying that with the current grammar ... I will attempt a
possible correction ... whereas with the change ... I will not. Is that the point?
That is. Under the current syntax, names are always clearly labelled, so, listener knows, that here will go something, not expected to be known in advance to understand.
After the change, listener will never be sure, if he should look up the next word in the memory, or just use the letter sequence, it hears, as the name.
So, I'm not sure, if the current syntax complexity is really needless.
I don't understand what you mean by that. Trying to read what aloud
would push the language towards...
So, when we'll got big enough user base, taught on the text with enough unlabelled names, they will tend to use that names in speech, and will tend to shorten the required pause to zero, as it annoys a lot. That will result in a lot of misunderstanding, causing a language drift.