Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Tram-mļöi  hhâsmařpţuktôx

<< < (3/5) > >>

40hz:
And here I was worried that nobody would know what it was. -Arizona Hot (September 16, 2012, 11:25 AM)
--- End quote ---

Nobody?

Here?

This is DoCo! No matter what, that is so not gonna happen. (At least from my experience with this crowd.)  ;D

Note: I found out about Ithkuil some years back when I first got seriously interested in invented or artificial languages. (People into NLP tend to pay a lot of attention to how we use language and words. :mrgreen:) It was part of some background research I was doing for a piece of fiction in which the unusual native language some of the characters spoke became a key plot element in the story. Something Delany used to good effect in his brilliant sci-fi novel Babel-17, which inspired similar treatments of language in other novels.

The texts I used are from the site examples, I didn't make them myself(I don't know how you could do that).

--- End quote ---

Makes two of us. That is the single most convoluted writing system (and complex language) I've ever looked at. Very cool set of concepts. But I wonder just how workable it would be in a real-world setting.
8)

Arizona Hot:
My interest in conlangs is part of my interest in langauge(or at least in how we use language). I'm interested in the problems and alternative solutions of language use. What other conlang do you think is closest to Ithkuil in approach? I have a specific language in mind, the grammar is just as complicated but the spelling doesn't use accented characters or have the cool script Ithkuil does. All languages are complex, the nature of what is said requires it. Languages like Toki Pona which have a small vocabulary and simple grammar can't say easily what you can in English. My favorite language before Ithkuil was Lojban, but it has vocabulary and grammar problems Ith  doesn't. I didn't know DoCoers were so language-esoteric, could I interest them in some other subjects I have links to(below)? What fiction did you write, you intrigue me?

TV’s Most Mind-Bending Shows
Intelligence Brain size matters, but so do connections
A Messy, Exuberant Case Against Being Too Clean

Arizona Hot:
From the Ithkuil Introduction:

Comparison to Other Constructed Languages
 
Those readers familiar with the history of artificial language construction might think this endeavor belated or unnecessary, in that logical languages such as James Cooke Brown’s renowned Loglan (or its popular derivative, Lojban) already exist. This serves to illustrate exactly what distinguishes Ithkuil from such previous attempts. Loglan was published in the 1950s as a spoken/written language based on symbolic logic (formally known as the first-order predicate calculus), an algorithmic system of symbol manipulation devised by mathematicians and logicians. As a result, one might think that such a language is the most capable means of achieving logical, unambiguous linguistic communication. However, Loglan and its derivatives are merely sophisticated tools for symbol manipulation, i.e., the levels of language known as morphology and syntax. It is not within the scope of such languages to address any reorganization of the semantic realm. This means that symbolic logic simply manipulates arguments which are input into the system, they do not analyze the origin of those arguments in terms of meaning, nor are they capable of analyzing or formalizing the structure of the cognitive or semantic realm of the human mind in terms of how meaning itself is assigned to arguments. (Indeed, Lojban derives its roots via statistical “sampling” of the most frequent roots in the six most spoken natural languages, a method virtually guaranteed to carry over into the Lojban lexicon all of the lexico-semantic inefficiencies previously described.) By not addressing these components of language, Loglan and similar efforts fail to address the inconsistencies and inefficiency inherent in language at the lexico-semantic level. Ithkuil has been designed to systematically address this issue.

Edvard:
Something Delany used to good effect in his brilliant sci-fi novel Babel-17, which inspired similar treatments of language in other novels.
--- End quote ---

The first time I really "got" the idea of artificial languages was the first time I read Watership Down.
Richard Adams' casual dropping of Lapine throughout the text struck me as little more than quaint until the climactic battle where Hazel confronts General Woundwort and utters the untranslated line "Silflay hraka u embleer rah!"
At that moment, I fell off my chair in absolute giddiness because it was not only appropriate for that moment in the story, but I suddenly realized I understood what it meant without being aware that I had learned the language.  Ah, THERE was a eureka moment if ever there was one.

Arizona Hot:
It was part of some background research I was doing for a piece of fiction in which the unusual native language some of the characters spoke became a key plot element in the story.
-40hz (September 16, 2012, 11:46 AM)
--- End quote ---

@40hz What was the name of the fiction?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page