Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

170777Re: Plan B variations

Expand Messages
  • R A Brown
    Mar 6, 2010
      Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
      > Hallo!
      >
      > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 07:16:17 +0000, R A Brown wrote:
      >
      >> Salvete omnes!
      >>
      >> Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
      >>> Hallo!
      >> [snip]
      >>
      >>> The FrathWiki page on X-1 is still pretty much up to date, and I
      >>> have no intention to abandon the self-segregation scheme as I feel
      >>> it is at the core of the language. The idea behind X-1 is "Plan B
      >>> done right"; without that self-segregation scheme, it would no
      >>> longer be the same project.

      Very true.

      >> Oh yes, self-segregation is a must in such a project.
      >
      > For an oligosynthetic language, however, it is sufficient that no
      > morpheme is a prefix of another morpheme, i.e. there are no strings
      > A and B that both A and AB are morphemes. If that condition is
      > fulfilled, the text can be segregated on the basis of a simple list
      > of morphemes.

      Yep - on http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Exp/Appendix2.html
      I write:
      "Our experimental conlang achieves this [self-segregation of
      morphemes] quite simply since each hexagram, i.e. each CV
      syllable, is a discrete morpheme (if the language is written
      with Roman letters, then each consonant-vowel combination is
      a discrete morpheme)."

      And on http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Exp/Appendix3.html
      I write:
      "My experimental conlang has only 64 morphemes; none of them
      will be used as grammatical affixes. Therefore, the syntax
      of Plan B and Plan C (which have the same syntax) cannot be
      used for this conlang. The language will be strictly
      isolating; but the syntax has yet to be decided."

      >> I also
      >> had the idea of "Plan B done right", but quite frankly the
      >> more I looked into Plan B the more I felt like that little
      >> kid looking at the "Emperor's new clothes.' :)
      >
      > Yes. It is neither a loglan nor a loglang, only a relex of English
      > with a phonology that is both naive and bizarre, and a self-segregation
      > strategy that is original but unwieldy (and not even done logically,
      > as 1111 0011 ... counts as "6 consecutive ones" while 1111 1100 ...
      > does not!)

      ...and a morphology that provides suffixes to show the
      precedence of each word its the parse tree.

      Certainly it is not a loglan in the sense we now use the
      word, nor even a loglang. It would seem that when Jeff
      Prothero composed Plan B in 1990, he was using 'Loglan'
      really to mean much what we mean by 'engelang' today.

      But does 'A near-optimal engelang' have any meaning in
      itself? Surely one has to ask: "Optimal for what?" In the
      case of Plan B, the answer must be what Jeff himself wrote:
      "[i]s simple enough to be parsed by a couple of hundred
      lines of straightforward C."

      By providing a relex of English with suffixes to show the
      precedence of each word in the parse this is, of course,
      achieved.

      > X-1 is meant to be "Plan B done right", but I now feel that
      > there is no way to do it right at all,

      I think Jacques Guy spotted that way back in 1992 with his
      'Plan C' ;)

      > and I have quietly abandoned
      > that project. (I have just removed the "work in progress" remark from
      > the FrathWiki page, and instead installed a "This project has been
      > abandoned" sign on the top of it.)

      ...and my effort has transmogrified itself into something
      different, which at the moment is still in progress.

      >> [...]
      >>> I dimly remember such a page, but I am not sure. I think it is
      >>> worth putting back online.
      >> I've now done so.
      >> http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Exp/Appendix2.html
      >
      > Thank you! It may have only historical relevance to what the project
      > has transmogrified into, but it definitely interesting to read.

      Thank you. I've also, as you will see from above, put online:
      http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Exp/Appendix2.html

      This likewise has only historical relevance to my present
      project.

      [snip]
      >> As you know, I
      >> gave up on the loglang idea. In any case, Plan B is not a
      >> loglang or a loglan, as we now understand these terms. It
      >> would seem that way back in 1990, the term Loglan was being
      >> used basically to mean what we now call an engelang; and
      >> Plan B is certainly an engelang (whether 'optimal' or not is
      >> debatable).
      >
      > I don't know how the terms were used 20 years ago. _Loglan_ started
      > as the name of a particular language, and I think the Loglan Institute
      > has always used it that way, and would have objected to Prothero's usage
      > if they had noticed. The Lojbanists use _loglan_ (with a lowercase L)
      > in the sense of 'a language based on the principles laid down by J. C.
      > Brown', and have been using it that way since the 1987(?) paper titled
      > _Lojban: A Realization of Loglan_. No Lojbanist would have ever
      > recognized Plan B as a 'loglan', I think. At any rate, today we have:
      >
      > _logical language_: a language based on a system of formal logic
      > _loglang_: short for _logical language_
      > _loglan_: a language based on the principles laid down by J. C. Brown
      > _Loglan_: the original language developed by J. C. Brown
      > (sometimes called _TLI Loglan_ to distingish it from other
      > loglans such as Lojban)

      Exactly.

      [snip]
      >> The main reasons for slow progress on it are:
      >> - I still find that not all browsers will display the Yì
      >> Jīng hexagrams;
      >> - I seem to be busier in retirement than I ever was when
      >> working!
      >
      > I know what you are talking about (I am too young to retire, but I have
      > been unemployed for years). The more time you have at your disposal,
      > the more will the various things you care of expand into it.

      Yep - nature sure does abhor a vacuum :)

      --
      Ray
      ==================================
      http://www.carolandray.plus.com
      ==================================
      Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
      There's none too old to learn.
      [WELSH PROVERB]
    • Show all 16 messages in this topic