What would a perfect language include?
- Thread starter Vimana
- Start date
hexwind
Creepiness Och Terrorism
^ it does for me too. But i think Arabic is more vast and words can describe a specific thought/feelings quite well.. this is what makes it so difficult to learn, but once u are in a good level, it's the best IMO.
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
One thing I think a perfect language would need is multiple words for we. This would help clear up confusion. There would be a different word for each of these meanings.
I + you
I + you (plural)
I + someone else (not you)
I + others (not you)
I + you (singular) + someone else
I + you (singular) + others
I + you (plural) + someone else
I + you (plural) + others
I + you
I + you (plural)
I + someone else (not you)
I + others (not you)
I + you (singular) + someone else
I + you (singular) + others
I + you (plural) + someone else
I + you (plural) + others
Never understood how peeps could get so "confused" or inable to understand whats being said. At least in the States WE take words and use them to mean many things they origionally did not, still seems easy to follow along to me.
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
Yes, I did, but the thing is with English when you start getting into more complexity in what you are expressing it often becomes more and more confusing. Other languages however can create more complex sentences without confusion, without you having to think "oh, that's it" or whatever.
Fenrisúlfr
ὠδÏÏÎºÎ¿Ï Î»ÏκοÏ
Fenrisúlfr
ὠδÏÏÎºÎ¿Ï Î»ÏκοÏ
There are many concept-words which derive from verbs. For example, just by opening the dictionary at a random point, there is ἀεικία & ἀεικίζω, the first meaning 'unseemly treatment', the second meaning 'to treat unseemly'. The pronoun issue is frivolous, however, and in many cases may be solved by using the generic 'one'.
PhantoMPhones
owning your ass since '03
- Jul 19, 2008
- 83
- 0
- 6
Perhaps old Georg'ie boy was onto something with Newspeak...lol.
The interesting thing is that regarding complexity and the like, the perfect language could very well go in one of two polar directions (for example). For example the approach that Orwell proposed in Newspeak, or it could be quite the opposite; the approach it seems you are taking with regard to 'forms' and requiring differentiation between every variation within any given 'root-like' word.
The interesting thing is that regarding complexity and the like, the perfect language could very well go in one of two polar directions (for example). For example the approach that Orwell proposed in Newspeak, or it could be quite the opposite; the approach it seems you are taking with regard to 'forms' and requiring differentiation between every variation within any given 'root-like' word.
BlackMetalWhiteGuy
Manly Man!
English is the only language that I'm proficient with, but there are definitely a few modifications that I would want to make.
(1) CHAPTER ONE: CONTINUITY, CONSISTENCY, REGULARITY, AND PREDICTABILITY
a. Abolish Verb Conjugations
Use the same form regardless of the accompanying pronoun. In other words, don't do this:
b-1. Abolish Irregular Verbs
b-2. Verbs Should Be Regular, Consistent & Predictable
(2) CHAPTER TWO: AMBIGUITY
a. Nominative & Objective Pronouns
I like your idea for multiple forms of "we," but I think other words need multiple forms as well.
you (plural) + someone else
you (plural) + others
they / them (familiar) ex. They (our friends John and Mary) invited us out for dinner.
they / them (unfamiliar / mysterious) ex. You know what they say; an apple a day keeps the doctor away.
My only real issue with having so many words is that while it is less ambiguous, I'm torn as to whether or not I would want nominative and objective pronouns to be separate. If that were the case, we'd have to have equal amounts of "we-s" and "us-es." I think I'd be satisfied to make no distinction though, because English already makes no distinction for "you" and "it," the way it does between "I" and "me," "she" and "her," etc.
One thing that I know I don't want though is separate words for possessive pronouns. Rather than saying something like "it's my idea," or "John's idea," I would prefer to combine the noun and pronoun together to imply ownership.
"It is idea'me," or "it is idea'john."
I didn't capitalize "John" only because I think it looks weird like that. I would still capitalize it in other circumstances though.
b. Unrelated
Also, I would like to minimize the use of "to be," because it's so heavily used already that I think its presence should just be implied.
"It idea'me," or "it idea'john."
c. This Shit Really Bothers Me
One more thing that bothers me about English is that we only have one word to describe two related, but distinctly independent concepts.
funny (intentional) - laughing with
funny (unintentional) - laughing at
d. Gender Ambiguity
I don't think it's necessary to be obliged to identify every single person or object by a gender. "I," "you (singular and plural," "we," and "they" are not gender specific and it has never been a problem for me or probably for anyone ever, and I don't really see a need for the he / she / it distinction, especially considering that dogs' sexes are not distinctive at a distance and some people's genders are not easily identified even at close range. Consequently, I would like a gender-nonspecific pronoun that is not "one," "it," or "they / them."
My suggestion is simply "e," and that as I decided above, it will be both nominative and objective.
"E and I went to the store." "I went to the store with e." (To avoid creating ambiguous sentences when you are talking about multiple people of distinct sexes, you will refer to them by name.)
Words for relatives can still retain their gender specificity (mom, dad, son, daughter, brother, sister, husband / boyfriend, wife / girlfriend) when desired, but it isn't necessary. Cousin isn't gender specific in English, and neither are words like spouse, partner, sibling, and offspring, so I don't anticipate any objections here.
e. Singularity & Plurality
I agree that we should have singular and plural forms of pronouns, because humans are a social species and the distinction is significant in this context. However, when discussing inanimate objects, I would prefer that each word be potentially singular or plural and that the distinction be based on context, or specified by within the sentence.
"I have a fish," vs. "I have many fish."
I'd rather not, but I could settle for a regular form of pluralization such in as the example below.
However, I will not tolerate this bullshit:
d. Unrelated
I also think articles (a / an / the) are mostly unnecessary and would prefer to do away with them, defaulting to the singular form unless otherwise specified.
I'm sure I have more grievances, but I can't think of them off the top of my head and I've already spent over two hours on this post.
"I was so enraged to find out that my new girlfriend already has a daughter with another man, that I killed her."
Who was killed? The girlfriend, or the daughter?
There are several more examples just like this one.
"I shot the guy with a gun."
Did I [use a gun to shoot] a man, or did I shoot [a man with a gun]?
(1) CHAPTER ONE: CONTINUITY, CONSISTENCY, REGULARITY, AND PREDICTABILITY
a. Abolish Verb Conjugations
Use the same form regardless of the accompanying pronoun. In other words, don't do this:
Code:
I go We go
You go You go
He goes They go
I am We are
You are You are
He is They are
Code:
I go We go | I went We went
You go You go | You went You went
He goes They go | He went They went
I am We are | I was We were
You are You are | You were You were
He is They are | He was They were
Code:
Verb: Miss
I missed We missed
You missed You missed
He missed They missed
Verb: Pop
I popped We popped
You popped You popped
He popped They popped(2) CHAPTER TWO: AMBIGUITY
a. Nominative & Objective Pronouns
I like your idea for multiple forms of "we," but I think other words need multiple forms as well.
you (plural) + someone else
you (plural) + others
they / them (familiar) ex. They (our friends John and Mary) invited us out for dinner.
they / them (unfamiliar / mysterious) ex. You know what they say; an apple a day keeps the doctor away.
My only real issue with having so many words is that while it is less ambiguous, I'm torn as to whether or not I would want nominative and objective pronouns to be separate. If that were the case, we'd have to have equal amounts of "we-s" and "us-es." I think I'd be satisfied to make no distinction though, because English already makes no distinction for "you" and "it," the way it does between "I" and "me," "she" and "her," etc.
One thing that I know I don't want though is separate words for possessive pronouns. Rather than saying something like "it's my idea," or "John's idea," I would prefer to combine the noun and pronoun together to imply ownership.
"It is idea'me," or "it is idea'john."
I didn't capitalize "John" only because I think it looks weird like that. I would still capitalize it in other circumstances though.
b. Unrelated
Also, I would like to minimize the use of "to be," because it's so heavily used already that I think its presence should just be implied.
"It idea'me," or "it idea'john."
c. This Shit Really Bothers Me
One more thing that bothers me about English is that we only have one word to describe two related, but distinctly independent concepts.
funny (intentional) - laughing with
funny (unintentional) - laughing at
d. Gender Ambiguity
I don't think it's necessary to be obliged to identify every single person or object by a gender. "I," "you (singular and plural," "we," and "they" are not gender specific and it has never been a problem for me or probably for anyone ever, and I don't really see a need for the he / she / it distinction, especially considering that dogs' sexes are not distinctive at a distance and some people's genders are not easily identified even at close range. Consequently, I would like a gender-nonspecific pronoun that is not "one," "it," or "they / them."
My suggestion is simply "e," and that as I decided above, it will be both nominative and objective.
"E and I went to the store." "I went to the store with e." (To avoid creating ambiguous sentences when you are talking about multiple people of distinct sexes, you will refer to them by name.)
Words for relatives can still retain their gender specificity (mom, dad, son, daughter, brother, sister, husband / boyfriend, wife / girlfriend) when desired, but it isn't necessary. Cousin isn't gender specific in English, and neither are words like spouse, partner, sibling, and offspring, so I don't anticipate any objections here.
e. Singularity & Plurality
I agree that we should have singular and plural forms of pronouns, because humans are a social species and the distinction is significant in this context. However, when discussing inanimate objects, I would prefer that each word be potentially singular or plural and that the distinction be based on context, or specified by within the sentence.
"I have a fish," vs. "I have many fish."
I'd rather not, but I could settle for a regular form of pluralization such in as the example below.
Code:
dog - dogs
cat - cats
horse - horses
Code:
die - dice
fish - fish
goose - geese
fungus - fungid. Unrelated
I also think articles (a / an / the) are mostly unnecessary and would prefer to do away with them, defaulting to the singular form unless otherwise specified.
Code:
English My preference
"I have a fish." - "I have fish."
"I have many fish." - "I have many fish."I'm sure I have more grievances, but I can't think of them off the top of my head and I've already spent over two hours on this post.
English often violates my plea for unambiguousness. For example:
"I was so enraged to find out that my new girlfriend already has a daughter with another man, that I killed her."
Who was killed? The girlfriend, or the daughter?
There are several more examples just like this one.
"I shot the guy with a gun."
Did I [use a gun to shoot] a man, or did I shoot [a man with a gun]?
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
Articles are not necessary but they have a good function. The definite articles shows that the noun it precedes is a definite member of a group. The indefinite shows that the noun it precedes is any member of a group.
A perfect language however, would have good spelling. Create new letters possibly, or modify them so that we can have a different distinctive letter for all of the sounds. We also have no stress markers in English. I know they aren't as important as in Spanish (compro vs. compró - I buy vs he/she/it/you formal bought) but when learning a new word stress markers and a better defined alphabet are the best ways to know how a new word is pronounced.
I will provide an example of the creation of complex concepts.
Suppose
ki = meaning
mu = more
sa = than
eka = 1
po = the characteristic of the ability
So musakiekapo would literally mean "the ability to have more than one meaning" aka ambiguity. English is rarely a language that possesses this characteristic, instead, we use words that we derive from other languages which makes the learning of technical language more tedious.
Also, regarding genders. I think genders are a great thing to have in a language.
For example in Spanish you can be talking with your friend about your new professor.
Mi nuevo profesor es muy aburrido.
Mi nueva profesora es muy aburrida.
With something as simple as a suffix on the noun and the adjective the gender is already given away. But if people are talking about this in English it would go like this:
My new professor is very boring.
Then next person might ask:
"Is your professor male or female?"
Having to stop for this kind of thing wastes time.
However, Spanish lacks the neuter gender which annoys people. For example: el reloj, the clock, and la silla, the chair. Somehow a clock is masculine but a chair is feminine. Something that has no gender shouldn't just be given a random masculine or feminine assignment, it should just be neuter.
A perfect language however, would have good spelling. Create new letters possibly, or modify them so that we can have a different distinctive letter for all of the sounds. We also have no stress markers in English. I know they aren't as important as in Spanish (compro vs. compró - I buy vs he/she/it/you formal bought) but when learning a new word stress markers and a better defined alphabet are the best ways to know how a new word is pronounced.
I will provide an example of the creation of complex concepts.
Suppose
ki = meaning
mu = more
sa = than
eka = 1
po = the characteristic of the ability
So musakiekapo would literally mean "the ability to have more than one meaning" aka ambiguity. English is rarely a language that possesses this characteristic, instead, we use words that we derive from other languages which makes the learning of technical language more tedious.
Also, regarding genders. I think genders are a great thing to have in a language.
For example in Spanish you can be talking with your friend about your new professor.
Mi nuevo profesor es muy aburrido.
Mi nueva profesora es muy aburrida.
With something as simple as a suffix on the noun and the adjective the gender is already given away. But if people are talking about this in English it would go like this:
My new professor is very boring.
Then next person might ask:
"Is your professor male or female?"
Having to stop for this kind of thing wastes time.
However, Spanish lacks the neuter gender which annoys people. For example: el reloj, the clock, and la silla, the chair. Somehow a clock is masculine but a chair is feminine. Something that has no gender shouldn't just be given a random masculine or feminine assignment, it should just be neuter.
Thats what drove me crazy about French back in high school. Everything had to be masculine or feminine, like I cared... that and the pronounciation of the language seemed gay... sorry I dont need to "roll" my R's and what ever the fuck it is with the L's.
Funny how things have changed just to appease the hispanic population that doesnt belong in this country. My school only offered French and Latin in the 70's, now today Spanish is mandatory but it seems English is not for them.... or the need to obey this countries LAWS
I see the issue with not identifing which, she, they ect. But that is part of the point of conversation, follow along and it will all become clear. The "us and them" political thing always amused me. I remember my father always telling me "there is no us and them" I never agreed... "we" clearly are NOT all on "the same side".
My last girlfriend who quit school quite young, didnt get the mouse/mice thing and always said mouses, it was amusing... always said "I seen", instead of "I saw". English is most likely the mess it is due to centuries of the multitude of local slangs and failure to use "proper" sentence structure. But then those into "proper" cant deal with sentence fragmentation which is one tool more primitive slangs uses to aid in certain identifications.
Funny how things have changed just to appease the hispanic population that doesnt belong in this country. My school only offered French and Latin in the 70's, now today Spanish is mandatory but it seems English is not for them.... or the need to obey this countries LAWS
I see the issue with not identifing which, she, they ect. But that is part of the point of conversation, follow along and it will all become clear. The "us and them" political thing always amused me. I remember my father always telling me "there is no us and them" I never agreed... "we" clearly are NOT all on "the same side".
My last girlfriend who quit school quite young, didnt get the mouse/mice thing and always said mouses, it was amusing... always said "I seen", instead of "I saw". English is most likely the mess it is due to centuries of the multitude of local slangs and failure to use "proper" sentence structure. But then those into "proper" cant deal with sentence fragmentation which is one tool more primitive slangs uses to aid in certain identifications.
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
Spanish isn't mandatory, what are you talking about? In my school students don't even have to take a foreign language. In my old school I think students had to take one but they could choose between Spanish, French, German, and some others I think.
But this argument is best for another thread.
But this argument is best for another thread.
Einherjar86
Active Member
A perfect language would be poetry; the conveyance of pure essence/meaning without uncertainty or doubt surrounding the words themselves.
Not sure of the specifics actually, my daughter just got out 2 years ago and was amounst the bunch in middle school when they raised the credit requirements, so that would have been 8 years ago now. It could be that Spanish was all that was available in her school, but seems to me "must learn Spanish" was what I heard. NY State may be different.
Similar threads
