TED Conversations

Michael Libres Uy

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

The viability of implementing a logically constructed Language. Namely Lojban.

We are aware of how profound of an effect language has on its speakers, but we still have yet to implement a constructed language that is constructed on the basis of logic rather than history. Lojban is a language constructed on the basis of predict logic by James Cooke Brown and the Lojban institute and can be found here: http://www.lojban.org/tiki/Lojban
This will be a flexible discussion, if you are wondering if your comment is relevant. Post it!

Lojban has a number of features which make it unique:

Lojban is designed to be used by people in communication with each other, and possibly in the future with computers.
Lojban is designed to be culturally neutral.
Lojban has an unambiguous grammar, which is based on the principles of logic.
Lojban has phonetic spelling, and unambiguous resolution of sounds into words.
Lojban is simple compared to natural languages; it is easy to learn.
Lojban's 1300 root words can be easily combined to form a vocabulary of millions of words.
Lojban is regular; the rules of the language are without exception.
Lojban attempts to remove restrictions on creative and clear thought and communication.
Lojban has a variety of uses, ranging from the creative to the scientific, from the theoretical to the practical. and Here we will discuss the ideas of how to implement the language, the problems of doing so, and all the for and against notions regarding language in general.

+1
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • May 14 2013: Comments so far are rather irrelevant. The issue is not math versus the world nor phonemic spelling, nor is it merely familiar words or usefulness for ordinary folks. It is about what a logical language would do for the human mind. Brown had rather expansive dreams in that respect, starting with a dubious version of a dubious hypothesis and proceeding with a language which did not test even that. But the question remains: would a language which unambiguously presented the logical structure of any discourse in it lead to more reasonable discourse. We know already that simply learning logic does not help that much and that there are other factors -- factual and emotional, for example -- which enter into reasonableness and about which Lojban and like languages have nothing to say. Of course, we are probably not too clear about what reasonableness is, but getting a language like a cleaned up Lojban, which meets on part of a possible definition, would be a useful step.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.