Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 2 Dec 2000 16:10:39 -0600 (CST)
From:      Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
To:        Peter Lai <PeterL@resnet.uconn.edu>
Cc:        'Cliff Sarginson ' <cliff@raggedclown.net>, "'questions@freebsd.org '" <questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: Tyr'd with all this pronunciation thread
Message-ID:  <14889.29535.565071.169343@guru.mired.org>
In-Reply-To: <9F36E367710D474E9806AA393FE737FB019EF3@resnetnt.resnet.uconn.edu>
References:  <9F36E367710D474E9806AA393FE737FB019EF3@resnetnt.resnet.uconn.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Lai <PeterL@resnet.uconn.edu> types:
>  well with all of us being geeks, i'm sure we could elicit the help of Dr.
> Noam Chomsky from MIT and help build a new international langauge that
> follow precise rules (e.g. that of a computer language) in syntax and
> structures. Something that makes sense to the brain.

Well, that's been done at least once already - that's what Loglan
is. I vaguely recall hearing about a second such language, but never
chased it down.

> Some of its benefits include minimal redundancy (if the context you are in
> definately signifies plural, why attache plural suffixes to the words?

You *don't* want minimal redundancy in a spoken (or written)
language. That's the error detection/correction mechanism of those
systems. Repeating the plurality information multiple times makes it
more likely that it'll get there. If you don't thinks this is true, I
assume your computers all ignore the checksum on network packets :-).

In this case, you *have* to have a plurality indicator for those cases
when the plurality isn't in the context. You then have a case where
the plural version is correct - or not - depending on whether you
think the context "definitely signifies plural", which is the kind of
inconsistency that people complaining about to start with!

Of course, making *logical* assumptions about what is and isn't usable
redundancy is a value call. German provides gender information for
nearly everything. English provides it for things that have
gender. You seem to be advocating not providing it at all. Esperanto
provides a suffix to the object of a sentence, which seems silly to me
(as a native English speaker) but logical to the person who designed
it.

	<mike
--
Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>			http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Unix/FreeBSD consultant,	email for more information.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14889.29535.565071.169343>