Anti-specific language?

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

I was just messin around with some fictional writings,
and was makin up a language called ‘global’,
which had a similar structure to the c+ programming language when written. Assignment operators and reverse order…

To top it all off, it was anti-specific.
There were classes and catagories of action or state,
that were thought and expressed.
Basicly, instead of saying you want to do 1 thing for someone,
you say you want to “unite” with them,
and you are saying that you are their freind,
and it implies all mutual or symbiotic actions and thoughts.

Then, the use of names for specific things,
such as names for specific people or objects,
each was adopted words that entered the “global” language,
and filled the need for specific labels.
This addition of specific, was names and words of any and all languages.
The species who spoke global, naturaly had a photographic and perfect memory, and would learn the names of all visable and specific things of any language quickly with a bit of communication.

Any comments?
Does anything like that already exist in any culture?

2

11110011

3

lol

4

There are some things that cannot be put into language, but I can’t tell you what they are…

5

sure dan the man…maybe in a few years people will be totally bored with English and then they’ll try to implement your creativity by converting to this language.

6

“When forty winters shall besiege thy brow,/ And dig deep trenches in thy beauty’s field,/ Thy youth’s proud livery so gazed on now,/ Will be a tattered weed of small worth held.”

How would you put this into a c++ source file without making the computer shout in desperation: " what the…?"

7

ERROR in
script number 1
of ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/po … y&t=146944
for all

Unknonw variable point.

^(just kidding :smiley: )

In global, your poetic blabla would be:
“youth; ref jin; jin; ref ageing;”
In global, “jin” incompasis all waste, destruction and weakening.
Speekers of “global” are not species that can experiance “old age”,
so “youth” and “ageing” were adopted english specifics or sub-catagories of status.

Poetry is not possable in global…
In some programming or verbal langauges some things are possable,
whiles others are not.
Its not possable to be so whimsical or poetic in global,
and its like a naturaly optimized script.
Often poets add extravagant and even abstract add-ons to the truth and direction of modern status catagory.
Also, in global, someone would not tell you you were ageing unless you didnt already know it.

ok, heres a joke:
{
//C+ poetry, written by TehPoETIK 12/16/2005
life+=(20.5);
//alas, i saw thee only but once,
//and as this vision peirced my spirit
//it did not hurt for an instant.
//What is life, and what is love?
//and why swallow each with such sarrow?
//But id be willing to be blinded now,
//by what truth and lie i was born to,
//as i see my erotic fates before me.
//Soon the lost two will be the three, and create the one,
//just as blindly as life itself, and minds and time.
}
reproduction, life+=(20.5);
and…
i dunno if its funny or just babbling useless crap that is…
always besides and apart from the simple, pure facts of life…?

aah, i remember my point now.
all of the crap that has a “//” to the left of it,
that line of the code is a comment and not executed.

Perhaps “global” would be purely objective language,
with a bigger focus on destiny of status, instead of specific modern status,
and cant be spoken in a excessive or “artistic” mannor.

(gunnu head on down to the “mundane babble” section now n just soak it all up!)[/b]

8

A combination of ones and zeros is a byte,
consisting of 8 bits(cant remember the exact number now)
which represent a numberal or digit.

so
“hi im 120 yrz old would be:”
10010110 01110010 00010011 01110010 11101010 00010011 10001010 101000101 00010011 10011110 10101000 01110101 00010011 11101111 10001010 11010011 11110110 00111111 00010011 11010011 010110011 11100100

Which are posative and negative electron combinations?
(* re-enters the matrix *)
hey smith! piss off!
wpsh! smach! paf!

9

I fear the day when all that we do will be explicited in mathematical equations. How can someone be ironic in such a language ?.. Alas, poor Yorick…

10

128 64 32 16 8 4 2 1
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0

So, if you like brevity you can say I’m 120 yrs old with a simple 01111000. Now that’s short and sweet and really gets the old point across.

11

lo…
wutsa “yorick” ? :smiley:

12

Yeah we’ve seen how effective constructed languages have been, take Esperanto as an example. It’s useless and restrictive because it tries to make language more efficient. Planned languages simply don’t work; we humans love our irregular spelling, evolving grammar, and bloated vocabulary!

13

Instead of simplicity and truth?

14

This is not a claim on human nature just an observation… I am willing to bet that there is enough evidence to suggest that we don’t behave “simply” or “truthfully.” If this is the case then why would anyone assume our language should be structured with simplicity and truth in mind?

Also who would get to determine what the standards of simplicity and truth are?

Those who would want to reconstruct human language to the restrictions of logic are the people who are afraid of disorder and the possibility that there isn’t an objective truth. The very fact that your “global” would rule out poetry as an “excessive” form of speech rules “global” out as primary means of human communication. How would such a language deal with expressing an emotion; would emotions be ruled out as excessive? Anything that used such a language as their primary means of communication would certainly not be human.

Its a great idea for Sci-fi novels, but it doesn’t really offer anything beyond that.

15

11101110110101*

*sarcasim?