#philosophical language

[dedalvs]

Valyrian is impressively complicated and difficult to learn, is it so complicated on purpose or did it surprise you with how complicated it turned out?

When it comes to complexity and language, any complexity you add to the morphology is complexity you take away from the syntax, and vice-versa. For example, when you learn all the noun cases of Finnish, it buys you having to remember fewer constructions with adpositions—or fewer verb augmentations, if the language went that way.

Syntactically, Valyrian is usually (MODIFIER) NOMINATIVE-NOUN (MODIFIER) OTHER-CASE-NOUN* (ADVERB) VERB. It's quite simple. There's not a lot you have to remember, and things can move around a little bit, if it feels right. You don't have to remember a ton of auxiliaries with different applications and slightly different usages. For the most part the heavy hitters (the nouns and verbs themselves) take care of things rather nicely. This is what complexity within the words themselves buys you: simplicity elsewhere.

The reason you get this is because all languages are doing the same thing: describing human experience. And humans are the same language to language. The other small tidbit is that when creating a naturalistic language—and it doesn't matter what method you use—you are, unconsciously or not, aiming for the lowest common denominator in terms of grammatical complexity. You don't have to do that, but generally if you're trying to create a language for humans with no other goals, you do. With a language like Ithkuil, John was intentionally pushing away from what is standard in human languages, and so there are needless levels of complexity that push beyond the boundaries of ordinary human language.

Now, when I say "needless", this is what I mean.

In Turkish, if you want to say "The girl is reading a book", you say:

Kız kitap okuyor.

Turkish is a language with noun cases, but you only see the nominative here. Why? Because the girl is reading A book. When the object is indefinite in Turksih you don't need to use the accusative case—in fact, you shouldn't. If you wanted to say "The girl is reading the book", that's when the accusative case pops up:

Kız kitabı okuyor.

Okay, with this in mind, you've introduced—just in the nouns—four possibilities:

Nominative + indefinite

Nominative + definite

Accusative + indefinite

Accusative + definite

In a maximally complex language, all of this would be marked. In Turkish, only one of these is marked. (Well, maybe two, if you were to say Bir kız for nominative + indefinite. Turkish has an indefinite article that pops up sometimes.) Certainly there are languages where all of these have some sort of marking, but then those very same languages will have other situations where maximal marking is possible but not present.

Human languages all have this in common. There are areas in the language where more categories could be marked but are not. It doesn't matter what the language is. This is because humans have limits for how much junk they'll tolerate in the language they're using. It isn't long before something that could be inferred from context is inferred from context. It collapses every so often (i.e. too little is marked and so marking pops up), but the unconscious goal is for the language to have a balance between morphological and syntactic complexity and also explicitness and implicitness.

A language doesn't have to do this, though, and so conlangs can be more or less explicit/implicit. Can they work? Certainly, but they may be more than humans will comfortably tolerate, and so humans may not want to use them.

Take Láadan, for example. Had Láadan been created later it might have had a better shot at being used, but this was 1982 before conlangers had started getting together. Láadan primary flaw is that it's trying to be a deep philosophical experiment while also trying to be a language a lot of people speak. That was never going to work. Suzette Haden Elgin lamented that maybe women didn't want a language of their own to use, and so the experiment was doomed from the start. A simpler explanation is she saw an ocean and built a train to cross it.

In Láadan, every sentence begins with one of six speech act particles (copied from Wikipedia):

Bíi: Indicates a declarative sentence (usually optional)

Báa: ndicates a question

Bó: Indicates a command; very rare, except to small children

Bóo: Indicates a request; this is the usual imperative/"command" form

Bé: Indicates a promise

Bée: Indicates a warning

And then in addition to that, every sentence ends with one of the following (also copied from Wikipedia):

wa: Known to speaker because perceived by speaker, externally or internally

wi: Known to speaker because self-evident

we: Perceived by speaker in a dream

wáa: Assumed true by speaker because speaker trusts source

waá: Assumed false by speaker because speaker distrusts source; if evil intent by the source is also assumed, the form is waálh

wo: Imagined or invented by speaker, hypothetical

wóo: Used to indicate that the speaker states a total lack of knowledge as to the validity of the matter

This is too much! Evidential systems in language exist, but they are so much smaller than this, and usually the markers pull double duty—and there's often a null marker.

Again, though, it's about the goals! This is fine for a philosophical language. And if it was simply a philosophical language, then how many people "speak" it is irrelevant. For example, John Quijada doesn't lament that after twenty years there isn't a community of Ithkuil speakers—indeed, he's baffled whenever he hears of someone who wants to try to "speak" Ithkuil. It's not designed for that, and so the metric isn't a fair one. Based on the structure of Láadan, I'd argue the same: the number of speakers/users isn't a fair metric, and shouldn't have been a design goal. Because while a language like High Valyrian looks more complex, with its declension classes and conjugations, Láadan is more complex in that it exceeds the expectations of explicitness a human user expects from a language.

Long answer to the question, but no, High Valyrian ended up as complex as I intended, and I don't think it's more complex than one would expect from either a natural or naturalistic language.

[hugo-the-inkwell]

i read part of this book several months ago but i don’t remember its title

it’s this book where the author spends a chapter looking up the word for “shit” in a philosophical language only to be too tired to laugh upon finding it

[philosophybits]

Every interpretation hangs in the air together with what it interprets, and cannot give it any support. Interpretations by themselves do not determine meaning.

Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations

[thirdity]

It would hardly be a waste of time if sometimes even the most advanced students in the cognitive sciences were to pay a visit to their ancestors. It is frequently claimed in American philosophy departments that, in order to be a philosopher, it is not necessary to revisit the history of philosophy. It is like the claim that one can become a painter without having ever seen a single work by Raphael, or a writer without having ever read the classics. Such things are theoretically possible; but the “primitive” artist, condemned to an ignorance of the past, is always recognizable as such and rightly labeled as naïf. It is only when we consider past projects revealed as utopian or as failures that we are apprised of the dangers and possibilities for failure for our allegedly new projects. The study of the deeds of our ancestors is thus more than an antiquarian pastime, it is an immunological precaution.

Umberto Eco, The Search for the Perfect Language

[alphabetcompletionist]

i wanna see one of the tumblr girlies write a post sexualizing the library of babel in their absurd way. although i guess it already exists in there

AB DEFGHI LMNOP RSTU WXYZ

21/26

[lingthusiasm]

95: Lo! An undetached collection of meaning-parts!

Imagine you're in a field with someone whose language you don't speak. A rabbit scurries by. The other person says "Gavagai!" You probably assumed they meant "rabbit" but they could have meant something else, like "scurrying" or even "lo! an undetatched rabbit-part!"

In this episode, your hosts Lauren Gawne and Gretchen McCulloch get enthusiastic about how we manage to understand each other when we're learning new words, inspired by the famous "Gavagai" thought experiment from the philosopher of language WVO Quine. We talk about how children have a whole object assumption when learning language, and how linguists go about learning languages that are new to them through either translating standardized cross-linguistic wordlists known as Swadesh lists or staying monolingual and acting out concepts. We also talk about when our baseline assumptions are challenged, such as in categorizing kangaroos and wallabies by their hopping rather than their shape, and when useful folk categories, like "trees" and "fish" don't line up with evolutionary taxonomies.

Click here for a link to this episode in your podcast player of choice or read the transcript here.

Announcements: We have new Lingthusiasm merch!

Imagine you're in a field with someone whose language you don't speak. A rabbit scurries by. The other person says "Gavagai!" You probably assumed they meant "rabbit" but they could have meant something else, like "scurrying" or even "lo! an undetached rabbit-part!" Inspired by the famous Gavagai thought experiment, these items feature a running rabbit and the caption "lo, an undetached rabbit-part!" in a woodblock engraving crossed with vaporwave style in magenta, indigo, teal, cream, and black/white on shirts, scarves, and more!

"More people have been to Russia than I have" is a sentence that at first seems fine, but then gets weirder and weirder the more you read it. Inspired by these Escher sentences, we've made self-referential shirts saying "More people have read the text on this shirt than I have" (also available on tote bags, mugs, and hats), so you can wear them in old-time typewriter font and see who does a double take.

Finally, we've made a design that simply says "Ask me about linguistics" in a style that looks like a classic "Hello, my name is..." sticker, and you can put it on stickers and buttons and shirts and assorted other portable items for when you want to skip the small talk and go right to a topic you're excited about.

Also, there are lots of other designs of Lingthusiasm merch, and we love to see your photos of it! Feel free to tag us @lingthusiasm on social media so we can see it out in the world.

In this month’s bonus episode we get enthusiastic about the word "do"! We talk about the various functions of "do" as illustrated by lyrics from ABBA and other pop songs, what makes the word "do" so unique in English compared to other languages, and the drama of how "do" caught on and then almost got driven out again

Join us on Patreon now to get access to this and 80+ other bonus episodes. You’ll also get access to the Lingthusiasm Discord server where you can chat with other language nerds.

Here are the links mentioned in the episode:

Wikipedia entry for 'Indeterminacy of translation'

Wikipedia entry for 'Inscrutability of reference'

Wikipedia entry for 'Word learning biases'

Wikipedia entry for 'Swadesh list'

Wikipedia entry for 'Morris Swadesh'

The Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus

Tumblr thread on how there's no such thing as a fish

Lingthusiasm bonus episode 'Is X a sandwich? Solving the word-meaning argument once and for all'

Monolingual fieldwork demonstration by Mark Sicoli on YouTube

You can listen to this episode via Lingthusiasm.com, Soundcloud, RSS, Apple Podcasts/iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. You can also download an mp3 via the Soundcloud page for offline listening.

To receive an email whenever a new episode drops, sign up for the Lingthusiasm mailing list.

You can help keep Lingthusiasm ad-free, get access to bonus content, and more perks by supporting us on Patreon.

Lingthusiasm is on Bluesky, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon, and Tumblr. Email us at contact [at] lingthusiasm [dot] com

Gretchen is on Bluesky as @GretchenMcC and blogs at All Things Linguistic.

Lauren is on Bluesky as @superlinguo and blogs at Superlinguo.

Lingthusiasm is created by Gretchen McCulloch and Lauren Gawne. Our senior producer is Claire Gawne, our production editor is Sarah Dopierala, our production assistant is Martha Tsutsui Billins, and our editorial assistant is Jon Kruk. Our music is ‘Ancient City’ by The Triangles.

This episode of Lingthusiasm is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license (CC 4.0 BY-NC-SA).

[faeriekit]

FMA fic I'm never going to write:

Hoenheim's lifespan and continued existence is entirely tied to the hundreds of thousands to possibly millions of dead his soul eats off of, slowly leeching life from the dead kingdom of Xerxes.

...It stands to reason, then, when begetting life, that spiritual artefacts make themselves known in the begotten sons of the dead. There are only four that can claim true heritage of Xerxes— the immortal, the synthesized man, and the heirs to the memories of a long-gone people.

Or. Well. Gone in body, certainly. But that's hardly stopped anyone from wanting to step up and parent.

[blahaj-blastin]

I am going to try and put this in as few words as possible, because my roommate and I spent an hour talking about this today; but there is truly nothing more incredible to me than human creativity.

Like, you’re telling me someone made this? You’re telling me this art came from someone’s own hand? You’re telling me this story came from someone’s mind? You’re telling me that someone as flawed and mortal and lost as me made this?

There is a beauty in math and in science, I am not here to argue that. But mathematics existed long before us. Science will exist long after us. And while the knowledge we have is a wonder, it is not ours. We did not make one and one equal two, we only learned and accepted that it did.

But our art is not universal. Our music was born through us. Our writing will die with us. And there is so much more beauty in knowing that we have made something. People have language and culture and poetry not because it was fact, but by our own whim and design.

This is something AI can never fulfill. An algorithm cannot create, it can only compile. A computer generated image has no link to us, to human emotion. To human flaw and struggle and passion.

Art is beautiful, and creation is the most powerful thing a person can do. Your stories, your art, hell, your fanfic and original characters, they exist not because of universal laws of math and physics, but because of your mind and skill; and if that isn’t the most amazing thing in the world, then what is?

[logophilist1982]

I may think of you softly from time to time. But I'll cut off my hand before I ever reach you again.

-Arthur miller ( the crucible )

[freakinator]

sometimes i get so shocked utterly flabbergasted when zam reads my chats as if im literally not one of his regular chatters 😭

[gingermintpepper]

Day 5: Orpheus

Interpretation notes and trivia under the cut!

Orfeu meu amor <333 Honestly this could be my longest ever set of notes or the shortest because unlike literally any of the other Apollonian figures in this, I have never once had to waver from what I wanted with Orpheus and that's an Orpheus without Eurydice. I know that sounds kind of strange, Orpheus and Eurydice have always been completely synonymous with each other but like, Orpheus is kind of completely batshit as a concept and I'm tired of pretending the most interesting thing about him is his love life?? His love life is cool, don't get me wrong, but we, collectively, as a group of people don't pay nearly enough attention to the fact that Orpheus was singer and musician so gifted that he made trees and rocks bow to him and he could stir even the gods to grieve from his songs. This is the guy who's song was so beautiful that not only did he outsing the Sirens, they also killed themselves upon hearing his song?? This is the man that was pulled apart but his head just?? Kept on singing??? So the Muses just???? Added his perpetually singing decapitated head to their choir??? There are depictions of Apollo using said decapitated head to help him teach people???? And we're gonna focus on him trying to get his dead wife back?????? Really?? Miss me with that nonsense, Orpheus is the witchest witch to ever witch and if no one else is gonna make him the disgustingly powerful bard he was in myth then I guess I'll have to do it myself. His femme appearance is mostly inspired by the highly ornamental raiment of kithara players and he consistently has some of the fanciest clothes of the cast apocalyptic hellscape be damned.

Some assorted trivia:

Son of Apollo and Calliope - was accidentally conceived during the period when Artemis had forbid Apollo from fraternising with mortal creatures in penance for him orchestrating Orion's death and so Calliope and the other Muses hid him away in the court of King Oeagrus. Didn't know Apollo was actually his father until quite a bit later.

Not a demigod as that would imply he's half human. Orpheus isn't exactly mortal either but he certainly cannot be harmed by most normal methods. There's no formal name for something half god, half muse and not deathless so Orpheus prefers to identify as the Son of a Muse rather identifying strongly as something strictly divine.

Older than Heracles! One of Apollo's oldest children still kicking about, actually, but he's treated like the youngest due to how fragile he'd been after Eurydice's death. Is generally better now than he used to be, but still tends to have depressive episodes every now and again.

Horrifyingly powerful. Orpheus' words are so potent that he does his best to not speak at all for fear of influencing the people around him accidentally. Has the uncanny ability to transmit his own feelings through his songs which can be both fantastic and awful. The Twelve had Apollo put a seal on his tongue when he was grieving so his song would stop completely disrupting the world. The seal's since been removed as Orpheus has had a lot of help working through his feelings. Now he paints whenever he thinks about Eurydice which is much more productive for everyone involved.

Argonaut, storied traveller, speaker of many languages, healer, teacher and storyteller. Teaches occasionally at the Parnassus Institute for Gifted Children and tends to be a favoured teacher whenever he drops by. Is responsible for a lot of very important people knowing some form signed or gestured language.

Has no set 'home' and wanders from temple to temple, sanctuary to sanctuary. His worldly belongings like his clothes and old paintings are currently with Asclepius and his family. Apollo has some of his stuff as well, but they're mostly special instruments like the holy lyre he used on his journey on the Argo.

Never keeps any money on him and is usually fed and clothed by the townspeople wherever he goes. Hasn't had to actually pay for something in decades. Has absolutely no concept of money because he'd forgotten it's a thing people need day to day.

Had a brief fling with Heracles while he was still mortal and the two remain on good terms even now. Heracles tends to visit him every now and again for a stint in some springs and good music.

Favourite colour is maple orange, favourite food is roasted pheasant with rosemary and thyme. Allergic to specifically pale yellow mead but is fine with raw honey and honeycomb. Aristaeus has been trying to figure out what causes his reactions for years now.

[sapphiccyranodebergerac]

every single day it boggles my mind that jean jaques rousseau is like a famous historical figure and philosopher. imagine ur a philosopher in late seventeenth century france who was never remembered past your lifetime because some misogynistic, uneducated, random loser with mommy issues and low self esteem randomly got famous for takes that weren’t even original or good.

yes ill concede that jj did write the social contract which was like somewhat good but also most of what’s in the social contract was also already written by john locke like 100 years ago. his other books are just “men should be educated but not women” which was not a new take and “i’m still thinking about the moral ramifications of things that happened to me in the fifth grade”

like if you read “confessions” (his autobiography) it literally sounds like a youtuber book. if this post gets any traction at all i will do side by side comparisons of youtuber books with jj rousseau quotes because it’s genuinely uncanny and it drives me marbles.

[silvermahagony]

I love you because the entire universe conspired to help me find you

- The Alchemist; Paulo Coelho

[philosophybits]

Grammar does not tell us how language must be constructed in order to fulfil its purpose, in order to have such-and-such an effect on human beings. It only describes, and in no way explains, the use of signs.

Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations

[rivilu]

One side effect of the autistic sense of justice for me is going insane over justice and vengeance as concepts in themselves whenever applicable in media.

Which unfortunately means that thinking about justice dragon age for too long (especially with the post inq takes on spirits) makes me want to rip my hair out.

[rrcraft-and-lore]

The Monkey King - Sun Wukong who first appears in Chinese stories (Journey to the West) during the Ming Dynasty period 1368 to 1644 CE, well after the introduction of Buddhism to China in about 206-220 CE.

But, was he inspired by another Monkey hero/character of myth?

The prevailing and dominant theory among Asian scholars is ...yeah, likely.

That character, Hanuman, king of the monkeys (the monkey people -Vanaras- of Vedic myth!).

The story follows a Buddhist monk who is accompanied by Sun Wukong and others to travel west to India to obtain sacred Buddhist sutras. Many of their powers and personality traits are similar as well.

We know that Vedic god such as Indra have made their way as far as Japan to take root and be worshipped because of the spread of Buddhism.

As I've talked about before and is shown in texts such as the journey's of Ibn Battuta / Ibn Fadlan, storytelling was a weapon and powerful tool for idea transfer--propagation. Philosophy was huge in the old world - and places such as Nalanda - the first residential university in the world - invited scholars from all over such as Greeks from the west, and the Japanese. Buddhism became a vehicle for trading things such as: martial arts information, medicine, sciences, and of course, myths and stories.

However, as with stories, people usually altered/coopted elements and molded them to better suit their cultures and fancy. That's a thing as old as time. I've shared how the panchatantra stories and jatka tales are thought to be the inspiration for nearly 30-50 percent of all nursery rhymes, ballads, "fairy tales".

Anyways back to this theory - Chinese Indologist Professor Liu Anwu of Peking University has dedicated chapters to the comparisons (in one of his works) to further break down this theory focusing on consistent and or similar depictions of beats in Journey to the West that of Rama's story in Ramayama and the Buddhist sutras.

Even though today the story of Sun Wukong is a wholly Chinese story - it's important to note the power of oral storytelling and how it travelled evolved over thousands of years, and, just as important, the vehicles it used to do so. Not just storytellers and philosophers and travelers but religion! Philosophy!

This is a theme heavily commented on and shown in Tales of Tremaine, which is my love letter and sort of self PhD. in comparative storytelling, mythology, and story foundry through an Asiatic lens (hence a silk road analog) stretching along a similar route the silk road did from damn near as far as you can east (complete with the oceanic routes) to as west as old venezia, portugal, and spain.

Also note: this is the most popular theory atm, but the operative word is theory. Experts likely far better than you, Internet, so chill before you comment, are still debating this. I know last week some of you were doctors in sociopolitical relations, the music industry before that, and then you were leading virologists before that. Spare us simpler folks from your mighty genius just now and sit down.

The point here is the beauty of stories and their ability to travel and morph and comment on themes/points ideologies important to cultures while being entertaining and showing that humans like certain universal moments, beats, archetypes, tropes, and progressions in tales.

Now, is that because we've naturally been predisposed liking them, or the opposite in that everyone went, yo, i dig this, took it home and someone else went, this is cool but needs to be more US (insert culture) and retold it. And thus...timemachine noises speed up. Here we are today?

You might not know that about 35,000 Chinese words ( I said this instead of Mandarin because they don't just show up in one language) are derived from Sanskrit as well as Pali (a Middle Indo-Aryan Liturgical Language -- meaning language of sacredness/religious use, in this case connected to sacred Buddhist texts). It is important to make the distinction, because, Internet!

Sanskrit did not SHAPE the Chinese languages. They evolved on their own. This is just a commentary on how words/stories shaped over travel in this case strongly through the spread of Buddhism.

Religion was the mover.

Back from quick bathroom break. Going to add again - INSPIRED is the keyword here.

INSPIRED.

Sun Wukong is his own mythos/character. Influence doesn't nor can claim dominion over everything in a later tale. Sun Wukong has gone on himself to inspire legends and characters Outside of China - re: most famously and legendary?

Son Goku - who is openly a Sun Wukong inspired character.

...hell, tbh, he might be the most famous monkey inspired super powered character now. Dude makes soccer stadiums air his fights. @_@.