Do yall spreak Lojban? I remember learning it in uni when I was a wee bit more autistic.
Name:
Anonymous2019-12-04 9:04
No. I've tried to design something different using Unicode symbols and agglutinative words. example:Symbol1+Symbol2+Symbol3 combine like in Chinese to mean X, using 5k*5k*5k symbols you can represent 125000000000 unique 3symbol concepts and 25000000 unique 2symbol concepts for common but unique stuff(English has much less). I hate the idea of e.g. 'set' having like 50 context-dependent meanings. And 5k symbols is on the scale of what you need to learn Chinese, plus they can be easily disambiguated(e.g. ♥️ vs 心(xin) which has minor differences from similar glyphs)
Name:
Anonymous2019-12-04 12:58
Always seemed to me to be saying "Esperanto sucks because it's too Eurocentric, so let's solve that by making a language that's incomprehensible to EVERYONE."
Name:
Anonymous2019-12-05 5:06
Only monoglots think learning a conlang is a good use of anyone's time.
>>6 The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is 100% correct in the form that it's actually been held by Whorf and his supporters. The absolutist version that's been ``debunked'' by the likes of Pinker is a straw man.
Name:
Anonymous2019-12-06 8:58
>>9 but it's the strong version of the hypothesis that is the inspiration for Loglan/Lojban
>>9 Genuinely curious about this one. I always understood it as pretty much the same idea as the rationale for Newspeak in 1984, i.e. if you don't have words for an idea then you can't even think that idea, which is obvious nonsense, look at how many times people will express frustration over not having words to explain what's going on in their head, or outright inventing new words (or repurposing old ones) to express a new idea.
What is the "form that it's actually been held by Whorf and his supporters"?