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: Just how can a predicate be incomplete? It is what it is (a set of some sort, say). A two-place "go" predicate ("go to", say) may not have everything you might want for your "go" predicate, but it may have all that is needed in a particular case and so, for that case, it is complete. We're into strategy here: is it better to have minimal predicates and expand them at need, or maximal ones leave or cover up pieces you don't need on particular occasions? In fact, Lojban uses both strategies but favors the latter a little because it fudges on the unneeded places: it leaves them blank rather than filling them with what FOPL requires, bound variables of some sort. This results in a small and insignificant ambiguity, but you can be sure that, were that problem taken to be serious and so all insignificant places on any occasion had to be filled, the first system would be far and away the standard one.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.