There are 13 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
From: Rick Harrison
1.2. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
1.3. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
From: Jim Henry
1.4. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
From: Lars Finsen
1.5. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2.1. Re: ANNOUNCE: Constuff Mirroring on archives.conlang.info
From: Jim Henry
2.2. Re: ANNOUNCE: Constuff Mirroring on archives.conlang.info
From: Henrik Theiling
3a. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of infor
From: Herman Miller
3b. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of infor
From: Lars Finsen
3c. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of infor
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
4. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was ...)
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
5.1. Re: Media mortality (< facing your own mortality)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5.2. Re: Media mortality (< facing your own mortality)
From: Mark J. Reed
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
Posted by: "Rick Harrison" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:11 pm ((PDT))
Dana, imagine this scenario. You get an email from a woman who says her
father had once worked on a conlang similar to Sasasek but different in some
interesting ways. Unfortunately he died before he could publish anything,
but she is willing to send you his computer files. You provide her your
snailmail address and eagerly await the package.
When you open the box, you find punch-cards and 8-inch floppies.
If the guy had kept his notes on paper, you'd be able to read them. But
because he used the computer technology of the day, it will be difficult. If
the floppies were stored in a warm humid attic or garage, you probably won't
get any data off of them, even if you can find the needed apparatus.
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 2:35 am ((PDT))
> Från: Rick Harrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Datum: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:11:11 -0400
> Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Dana, imagine this scenario. You get an email
> from a woman who says her father had once worked
> on a conlang similar to Sasasek but different in
> some interesting ways. Unfortunately he died
> before he could publish anything, but she is
> willing to send you his computer files. You
> provide her your snailmail address and eagerly
> await the package.
>
> When you open the box, you find punch-cards and
> 8-inch floppies.
>
> If the guy had kept his notes on paper, you'd be
> able to read them. But because he used the
> computer technology of the day, it will be
> difficult. If the floppies were stored in a warm
> humid attic or garage, you probably won't get
> any data off of them, even if you can find the
> needed apparatus.
I wonder if it would be possible to engrave data
DVDs into some durable metal? That should outlast
both floppies and printed books, provided the
apparatus to read them still exists -- which is
akin to having to know ancient languages in order
to read ancient manuscripts -- not to mention the
technology needed to preserve and handle them.
I have several boxes full of 3.5 floppies and Zip
disks from my Mac days which are for all purposes
lost information, not to mention the three or four
crashed harddisks I've saved. So far I've been
largely spared to have CDs and DVDs damaged beyond
readability...
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
c'est qu'elles meurent." (Victor Hugo)
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
1.3. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 6:25 am ((PDT))
On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 5:35 AM, Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wonder if it would be possible to engrave data
> DVDs into some durable metal? That should outlast
> both floppies and printed books, provided the
> apparatus to read them still exists -- which is
> akin to having to know ancient languages in order
> to read ancient manuscripts -- not to mention the
> technology needed to preserve and handle them.
You would want to store said high-durability DVDs with
an acid-free book that describes how to build a DVD player,
what the DVD format convention is, high-level source code
for DVD player firmware, etc. It might be cheaper to convert
the movie into a series of flip-books; if the printing were
of high enough quality, a future society to could photograph
each page of the book and make it a frame in whatever
film format they use in those days.
(On second thought.... at 24 frames/sec, you're looking
at about 20 seconds per 500-page book, or 360 volumes
for a 2-hour movie. Never mind.)
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/conlang/fluency-survey.html
Conlang fluency survey -- there's still time to participate before
I analyze the results and write the article
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
1.4. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 8:21 am ((PDT))
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> quoting me:
>>
>> Somehow. At least you defy death a little. It's human to like being
>> appreciated. I like to be appreciated. We have all seen how quickly
>> most people are forgotten as soon as they leave this world.
>> Especially if you're a nice guy who did nothing wrong in your life,
>> you will be very quickly forgotten. And being forgotten is to cease
>> to exist completely. But if you are remembered and appreciated, at
>> least something is left behind, although you don't appreciate it
>> yourself.
>
> I know other believe differently, and they are entitled to do
> so, but my philosophy is when I'm gone, I'm nothing more than
> food for the worms whether anyone remembers me or not. Leaving
> something behind means nothing to me.
But does anything apart from yourself mean anything to you at all?
>> Existence isn't all material.
>
> In fact it's not material at all. What we all have is a
> timeline which begins at birth and ends at death, however long
> that may be. Just a serious of moments, of which I intend to
> make the best out of as many as I can, until I run out of
> moments.
Hmm, it can be argues that the material world doesn't exist, along
those lines. But let's pretend that it does.
>> Whether my existence or what I do or make are making the world a
>> better place is hard to tell. Yet, making no difference at all would
>> make life seem very meaningless, wouldn't it? If you think your own
>> self is all that really matters in this world, you wouldn't give a
>> damn whether you continued making a difference after your life is
>> over or not, but I guess most people find there are other
>> things that matter, too.
>
> I could argue that it's somewhat arrogant that what I think is
> so important that it should carry onward after my death. My
> idea of "a better world" may not be the same as the other 7
> billion people out there. Let those who survive me decide what
> they want their world to be like.
Maybe it's arrogant to be alive at all. After all, so many deserving
people aren't. But don't you mean anything to anyone at all? Don't
anybody care whether you are there or not? I'm a bit of a loner
myself and spend quite a bit of time satisfying my curiosities and
whatever other urges I may have. But I feel it would be too lonely to
do only that all of the time.
And as long as you mean anything at all to anyone at all, even if
it's only by your mere presence, you really can't help but surviving
your death to some extent.
> It all comes down to the same thing. "Giving" to gain access to
> "Heaven" or some eternal reward, or escape some eternal
> punishment is still a sefish motive. Unfortunately a lot of
> people tend to think too much in material terms when often the
> motivation is emotional. They either give because they find it
> somehow emotionally rewarding, or maybe it's just to avoid
> negative emotions like guilt. All involve "selfish" thinking.
Except perhaps if they have come to a more or less purely
intellectual decision that "giving" is good for society somehow. The
idea of good and bad is one of several ways to arouse self-
disinterest in people. At first, since we are born completely self-
absorbed, we need a selfish impulse in order to focus on matters
independent of self, like the promise of an emotional reward or maybe
a heavenly one, or perhaps the idea that what's good for society also
is good for self, which in itself practically amounts to cheating.
But once you start focusing on other things than yourself, you learn
it like any skill. Probably we even have a genetic program for it, as
we are social animals.
> Ah, but discovering language is really just learning to use it
> as a tool to get what you want. The first things a baby learns
> to say are words like "mama" and "papa" so they can get the
> attention of the parents who provide for them. Then they reach
> the state where they learn single words, any of which could be
> preceded with "I want ..."
Still, once you develop an interest in anything outside yourself, you
aren't completely self-absorbed. It's the first steps from being only
yourself alone to becoming part of a community. I appreciate
individualists and individualism, but especially when I moved to such
a small community as Redalsgrend, I realised that the individual
isn't all-important. It's easy to forget about everyone else when you
don't see anybody for large chunks of time. But then you come to a
point where self-gratification isn't everything anymore.
Western culture is more individualised than most other known
cultures. Perhaps there's something in our genes, perhaps the local
magnetic fields are influencing our brains, or perhaps the eastern
religions simply have repressed individuality more efficiently than
they have done in the west. Anyway, we probably wouldn't have this
discussion if we were Chinese. Or maybe not even if we were born a
1000 or even 100 years earlier.
Maybe we shouldn't have it at all, as we are wildly off-topic.
LEF
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
1.5. Re: CHAT: facing your own mortality (as a conlanger)
Posted by: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 9:22 am ((PDT))
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Harrison
> Dana, imagine this scenario. You get an email from a woman who says her
> father had once worked on a conlang similar to Sasasek but different in some
> interesting ways. Unfortunately he died before he could publish anything,
> but she is willing to send you his computer files. You provide her your
> snailmail address and eagerly await the package.
>
> When you open the box, you find punch-cards and 8-inch floppies.
I find some guy that collects antique computers and get him to read them. If
they aren't readable, then no big deal. Yes, it would be interesting to see
the materials but I wouldn't cry over it.
> If the guy had kept his notes on paper, you'd be able to read them. But
> because he used the computer technology of the day, it will be difficult. If
> the floppies were stored in a warm humid attic or garage, you probably won't
> get any data off of them, even if you can find the needed apparatus.
Paper degrades too and yes a faded piece of paper still can somewhat be pieces
together by humans. I suppose if we really want longevity, we could carve
everything into stone tablets. In 1000 years some archeologist will have fun
trying to figure out what it means.
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: ANNOUNCE: Constuff Mirroring on archives.conlang.info
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Jul 3, 2008 4:14 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If anyone else has any conlang/conscript/conhistory to mirror, just
> tell me, I'll add it to the mirroring process as long as my server has
> So, send your URL if you want to be mirrored!
You can mirror my conlang materials from these URLs:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/i/jimhenry1973/conlang/conlang.htm
and
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/i/jimhenry1973/gzb/gzb.htm
This
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/i/jimhenry1973/caligo/caligo0.htm
is primarily conculture material, with a relatively small amount
of conlang material; you may or may not want to mirror it.
> enough storage left. Let's start with a (weakly enforced) 5MB
> limitation per person (I have about 500MB free without having to think
I am reasonably sure all of those together are less than 5MB,
but not absolutely sure; the directories on disk have a lot more
material in them than the equivalent directories on the website
(drafts and old versions of various files, etc.).
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/conlang/fluency-survey.html
Conlang fluency survey -- there's still time to participate before
I analyze the results and write the article
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
2.2. Re: ANNOUNCE: Constuff Mirroring on archives.conlang.info
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 6:15 am ((PDT))
Hi!
Jim Henry writes:
>...
> http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/i/jimhenry1973/conlang/conlang.htm
>
> and
>
> http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/i/jimhenry1973/gzb/gzb.htm
>
> This
>
> http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/i/jimhenry1973/caligo/caligo0.htm
>...
Ok, added. Will add a link from the root page later.
**Henrik
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of infor
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Jul 3, 2008 6:14 pm ((PDT))
Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> The problem is that such taxonomies, outside certain well-defined
> semantic domains such as plants, animals and languages (which can
> be classified genealogically), or chemical compounds (where such a
> taxonomic vocabulary is indeed in use, though with all but the
> simplest molecules, the taxonomic names grow to unwieldy length,
> and - shorter - arbitrary names are used instead), are themselves
> to a large degree arbitrary, and any taxonomy may be obsoleted by
> new discoveries. If you look at the taxonomies used by Dalgarno
> or Wilkins, you will find many things which now appear either
> quaint or even flatly out of date.
Even inside those semantic domains, problems can come up. Take plant
classification: you've got hundreds of unfamiliar groups, and scattered
among those are a relatively few groups that contain the more familiar
plants. Also, these hierarchies can be wildly unbalanced. Ginkgo is a
whole division of the plant kingdom all by itself, while three levels
deeper on the hierarchy, the family Asteraceae has some 23,000 species
according to Wikipedia.
I was browsing around at random on Wikipedia today and ran across a page
on the controversy over the classification of babblers (Timaliidae),
which reminded me of the problems I ran into when making the taxonomy
for Eklektu. At the time, I thought a classification would be useful in
defining the meanings of words and the boundaries between one and the
other, by defining a particular example as representative of the group,
and using the classification to set the boundaries. But then it turns
out that the groups in the classification are not as well delineated as
you assumed.
> How it confounded my work was that I thought that a classification
> (something like DDC, though I had some ideas that went beyond that,
> but it still was a classification) would actually be useful for
> building web search engines. Such classifications of course have
> a venerable tradition in libraries, but that was before the digital
> age, and pigeonholing the vast range of topics that exist in this
> world into such a classification is no mean feat. Perhaps the
> idea I had was not completely worthless, but I found that I was
> running into difficulties which I had not foreseen when I started
> the project.
>
> ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Yahoo used to have a classified index of web pages (and perhaps still
does; I haven't used it in a long time). I found it useful for finding
pages when I was trying to learn Japanese. Wikipedia's categorical index
can also be useful, although it can be haphazard in places. I still use
categorical word lists for my recent languages, which can be useful for
later clarifying the intended meanings of words if you weren't careful
enough in the first place, or finding words of similar meaning.
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of infor
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 12:48 am ((PDT))
Den 4. jul. 2008 kl. 03.12 skrev Herman Miller:
>
> I was browsing around at random on Wikipedia today and ran across a
> page on the controversy over the classification of babblers
> (Timaliidae), which reminded me of the problems I ran into when
> making the taxonomy for Eklektu. At the time, I thought a
> classification would be useful in defining the meanings of words
> and the boundaries between one and the other, by defining a
> particular example as representative of the group, and using the
> classification to set the boundaries. But then it turns out that
> the groups in the classification are not as well delineated as you
> assumed.
I also made use of some classification in the early stages of
developing Urianian. In fact, I bought my English Thesaurus just for
that purpose (no Norwegian thesaurus existed then). Thesauruses
provide rather detailed classifications of words. However I found
this one messy, so I made my own. Can't refer to it in detail now, as
I'm not at home. But will later, if it's of any interest to the list.
LEF
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of infor
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 2:25 am ((PDT))
Lars Finsen scripsit:
> Den 4. jul. 2008 kl. 03.12 skrev Herman Miller:
>>
>> I was browsing around at random on Wikipedia
>> today and ran across a page on the controversy
>> over the classification of babblers
>> (Timaliidae), which reminded me of the problems
>> I ran into when making the taxonomy for
>> Eklektu. At the time, I thought a
>> classification would be useful in defining the
>> meanings of words and the boundaries between
>> one and the other, by defining a particular
>> example as representative of the group, and
>> using the classification to set the boundaries.
>> But then it turns out that the groups in the
>> classification are not as well delineated as
>> you assumed.
>
> I also made use of some classification in the
> early stages of developing Urianian. In fact, I
> bought my English Thesaurus just for that
> purpose (no Norwegian thesaurus existed then).
> Thesauruses provide rather detailed
> classifications of words. However I found this
> one messy, so I made my own. Can't refer to it
> in detail now, as I'm not at home. But will
> later, if it's of any interest to the list.
IME even a buggy and mostly arbitrary
classification like Roget's can be useful in
vocabulary building if only because it is readily
available to everyone. BTW I think Roget put more
thought than e.g. dalgarno or Wilkins into his
classification. To have a rather limited and broad
scheme was one Good Thing. Having a limited and
well-defined purpose was another. Not to claim
that he got *the* final and perfect classification
of everything was a third.
WRT classifications getting outdated with advances
in knowledge that certainly shows itself in the
Swedish library classification system: 25 top
nodes(*) labeled with the letters of the alphabet
(minus W) isn't very flexible. I for one think
that information technology should nowadays merit
its own to node, but instead it must be buried
somewhere under Technology, inspite of having
ramifications into several other top nodes.
(* Actually you could say that there are a number
of implicit super top nodes without labels, since
related subjects got adjacent letters, e.g. C
Religion, D Philosophy (to which psychology was
added in an afterthought) E Education, F Language
and linguistics, G Literary criticism, H Fiction.)
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
c'est qu'elles meurent." (Victor Hugo)
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was ...)
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 6:39 am ((PDT))
Hallo!
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:12:55 -0400, Herman Miller wrote:
> Even inside those semantic domains, problems can come up. Take plant
> classification: you've got hundreds of unfamiliar groups, and scattered
> among those are a relatively few groups that contain the more familiar
> plants. Also, these hierarchies can be wildly unbalanced. Ginkgo is a
> whole division of the plant kingdom all by itself, while three levels
> deeper on the hierarchy, the family Asteraceae has some 23,000 species
> according to Wikipedia.
Yes. The taxonomy of living beings is unbalanced because nature
is unbalanced, too. A taxonomy that mirrors these unbalances may
be good for scientific purposes, but not for everyday usage. Also,
there are often more useful criteria than phylogenesis. I mean,
how important is the fact that apples and pears belong to the same
family (Rosaceae) as roses in everyday life? The distinction
between 'fruits', 'vegetables', 'flowers' etc. is more useful, even
though it cuts across the scientific taxonomy.
> Yahoo used to have a classified index of web pages (and perhaps still
> does; I haven't used it in a long time). I found it useful for finding
> pages when I was trying to learn Japanese. Wikipedia's categorical index
> can also be useful, although it can be haphazard in places. I still use
> categorical word lists for my recent languages, which can be useful for
> later clarifying the intended meanings of words if you weren't careful
> enough in the first place, or finding words of similar meaning.
Sure, classifications (at least if done well) _are_ useful.
But classifying documents automatically throws up all sorts of
problems, and there are always things a classification misses.
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:24:39 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> Lars Finsen scripsit:
> [...]
> > I also made use of some classification in the
> > early stages of developing Urianian. In fact, I
> > bought my English Thesaurus just for that
> > purpose (no Norwegian thesaurus existed then).
> > Thesauruses provide rather detailed
> > classifications of words. However I found this
> > one messy, so I made my own. Can't refer to it
> > in detail now, as I'm not at home. But will
> > later, if it's of any interest to the list.
>
> IME even a buggy and mostly arbitrary
> classification like Roget's can be useful in
> vocabulary building if only because it is readily
> available to everyone. BTW I think Roget put more
> thought than e.g. dalgarno or Wilkins into his
> classification. To have a rather limited and broad
> scheme was one Good Thing. Having a limited and
> well-defined purpose was another. Not to claim
> that he got *the* final and perfect classification
> of everything was a third.
Classifications and thesauri are indeed very useful to
conlangers for vocabulary building. Keeping your words
in a thematic dictionary like this one:
http://www.zompist.com/thematic.htm
is a great way of coming up with a well-rounded vocabulary.
With an alphabetically sorted word list, it is difficult
to see whether there are gaps in some fields of discourse.
A thematic dictionary, in contrast, gives you an instant
overview on which lexical fields still need more work.
Of course, if you forget something in your classification,
you will end up with a blank spot in your language's
vocabulary.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5.1. Re: Media mortality (< facing your own mortality)
Posted by: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 10:07 am ((PDT))
This thread has got me thinking not about conlangs carrying on after me, but
about the tinkering I had done in the past which is still may have on those old
5.25" Apple II formatted floppies. A couple years back, I noticed a few people
selling working Apple IIc's for $25-50 on E-Bay so I may just get one to
transfer my old stuff to disk images. I have some good emulator programs to
use them, and they run considerably faster than the original computer. I could
always sell the computer once I've finished transferring my files.
Messages in this topic (66)
________________________________________________________________________
5.2. Re: Media mortality (< facing your own mortality)
Posted by: "Mark J. Reed" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 4, 2008 10:35 am ((PDT))
You might have better luck getting an Apple external disk drive and a
special cable that lets you hook it up to a modern PC.
Messages in this topic (66)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
