Because equality is the usual the null hypothesis.

This means that a claim of "more/less" is more egregious than a claim
of "equality" and needs to be more aggressively challenged.

But as you note, it's still an issue of measurement, and personally, I
prefer to say that languages are "incomparable" for certain
properties, and I do generally try to be careful to express it that
way.

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

I'm not talking about "capable", I'm talking about "more". Can't you
say "Peter is more able to sing than Paul", meaning that he's a better
singer?
No.

You can say that Jane is better at singing than Mary.

But as long as both have intact, functioning vocal apparatus, they are
equally able to sing.

If one of them doesn't, then she is unable -- not less able.

Oh, then English is different from German here - or is it my idiolect? When
I say "Peter ist gleich fähig zu singen wie Paul", ("Peter is equally
capable of singing as Paul" I imply that the capabilities are comparable by
a metric, and in this case, the values are equal.

The same argument holds for "complexity of languages". It doesn't help if
linguists answer a claim like "language A is more complex than language
B" with the statement "no, all languages are equally complex". Yet that's
the typical linguist answer I recall from this group.

Because there's no evidence otherwise

In article <d6c9ddbb-844f-4021-b3ff-645d2b853a7a@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
bulkington63 <john_66044@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 19, 8:15=A0am, blackhead <larryhar...@softhome.net> wrote:
What would be the properties of a cutting edge language if all the
best linguistists got together and created one?
Which language today most closely approaches this?

Thanks

What is a cutting edge language?
All languages are equally capable of expressing the speakers ideas. I
haven't seen any example of a created language that comes near to what
a 'natural' language can do (maybe esperanto).

John

We certainly differ on what it means to express ideas.

You claim all languages are adequate, and I claim none
are. Certainly some are more capable of expressing some
ideas than others are.

At any point of time, languages
are adding and subtracting; that means that they are not
fully adequate or fully optimal.

In article <1c904e83-22e2-4ce9-846e-6f170a8cc8e1@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
blackhead <larryharson@softhome.net> wrote:
What would be the properties of a cutting edge language if all the
best linguistists got together and created one?
Which language today most closely approaches this?

Thanks

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".

Joachim Pense wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:

I'm not talking about "capable", I'm talking about "more". Can't you
say "Peter is more able to sing than Paul", meaning that he's a better
singer?
No.

You can say that Jane is better at singing than Mary.

But as long as both have intact, functioning vocal apparatus, they are
equally able to sing.

If one of them doesn't, then she is unable -- not less able.

Oh, then English is different from German here - or is it my idiolect?
When I say "Peter ist gleich fähig zu singen wie Paul", ("Peter is
equally capable of singing as Paul" I imply that the capabilities are
comparable by a metric, and in this case, the values are equal.

It wouldn't occur to me to use "able" or "capable" in English at all for
such a comparison. Either "Peter sings as well as Paul" or "Peter
doesn't sing as well as Paul".

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1c904e83-22e2-4ce9-846e-6f170a8cc8e1@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
blackhead <larryharson@softhome.net> wrote:
What would be the properties of a cutting edge language if all the
best linguistists got together and created one?
Which language today most closely approaches this?

Thanks

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".

What can't you express in English?

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".

What can't you express in English?

Harlan Messinger wrote:

Joachim Pense wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:

I'm not talking about "capable", I'm talking about "more". Can't you
say "Peter is more able to sing than Paul", meaning that he's a better
singer?
No.

You can say that Jane is better at singing than Mary.

But as long as both have intact, functioning vocal apparatus, they are
equally able to sing.

If one of them doesn't, then she is unable -- not less able.
Oh, then English is different from German here - or is it my idiolect?
When I say "Peter ist gleich fähig zu singen wie Paul", ("Peter is
equally capable of singing as Paul" I imply that the capabilities are
comparable by a metric, and in this case, the values are equal.
It wouldn't occur to me to use "able" or "capable" in English at all for
such a comparison. Either "Peter sings as well as Paul" or "Peter
doesn't sing as well as Paul".

Indeed "gleich fähig" sounds quaint in German for that reason.
Would you say "Peter is equally capable at singing as Paul" at all?

In article <67435tF2ltg13U2@mid.individual.net>,
Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removethis@comcast.net> wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1c904e83-22e2-4ce9-846e-6f170a8cc8e1@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
blackhead <larryharson@softhome.net> wrote:
What would be the properties of a cutting edge language if all the
best linguistists got together and created one?
Which language today most closely approaches this?

Thanks

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".

What can't you express in English?

Answering the question would be expression, denying my
assertion.

However, there are expressions in other
languages which are not really translatable into English,
such as the French "savoir faire", which I can translate
literally, but know that that translation is inaccurate.

If the language is going to be good, it will have to
convey precisely what people mean by "democracy".

It
is easy to give the literal meaning, but you will find
few who are willing to accept the consequences of that.

So we need appropriate words.

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:02:37 -0400: Harlan Messinger
hmessinger.removethis@comcast.net>: in sci.lang:

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".
What can't you express in English?

Practical questions from nl>en fellow translators indicated that a lot
of things that can be said in Dutch is difficult to express in
English. The same is true in the opposite direction.

Nathan Sanders wrote:


Because equality is the usual the null hypothesis.

So if someone tells you "I can run faster than you", you'll answer "no, we
run exactly at the same speed" because equality is the null hypothesis?

But as you note, it's still an issue of measurement, and personally, I
prefer to say that languages are "incomparable" for certain
properties, and I do generally try to be careful to express it that
way.

I wouldn't have objected to that.

In article
nsanders-1CC9EA.12245520042008@AClermont-Ferrand-256-1-26-64.w90-0.abo.wanado
o.fr>,
Nathan Sanders <nsanders@williams.edu> wrote:

Consider English "there are three books on the table". This sentence
is literally true even if I know that there are in fact four books,
because I can go count the three books are on the table. (I didn't
say "only three"!)

I believe that most people would say that if you want
to include the possibility that there are four books
on the table, you would say, "at least three".

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <67435tF2ltg13U2@mid.individual.net>,
Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removethis@comcast.net> wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1c904e83-22e2-4ce9-846e-6f170a8cc8e1@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
blackhead <larryharson@softhome.net> wrote:
What would be the properties of a cutting edge language if all the
best linguistists got together and created one?
Which language today most closely approaches this?

Thanks

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".

What can't you express in English?

Answering the question would be expression, denying my
assertion.

Surely you have a feeling for something you've wanted to express at some
point in your life, that has completely frustrating you on account of
your unsurmountable inability to express it.

However, there are expressions in other
languages which are not really translatable into English,
such as the French "savoir faire", which I can translate
literally, but know that that translation is inaccurate.

Why do you feel it's impossible to come up with wording in English that
expresses the same thing? "Facility in social situations" comes to mind.

If the language is going to be good, it will have to
convey precisely what people mean by "democracy".

The fact that a concept is fuzzy is not the fault of the language in
which one might choose to express it.

It
is easy to give the literal meaning, but you will find
few who are willing to accept the consequences of that.

If you and I disagree as to who the world's best actor is, it's because
we don't agree on the concept of quality as it applies to acting and we
don't have a common basis for measurement, not because of any difficulty
with language. Language is not responsible for aligning people's thinking.

So we need appropriate words.

It isn't a matter of the words.

In article <6746bvF2mu6itU1@mid.individual.net>,
Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removethis@comcast.net> wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <67435tF2ltg13U2@mid.individual.net>,
Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removethis@comcast.net> wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1c904e83-22e2-4ce9-846e-6f170a8cc8e1@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
blackhead <larryharson@softhome.net> wrote:
What would be the properties of a cutting edge language if all the
best linguistists got together and created one?
Which language today most closely approaches this?

Thanks

Consulting linguists will not be adequate; users will
have to be consulted first. I know of no language in
which I would be able to express "everything".

What can't you express in English?

Answering the question would be expression, denying my
assertion.

Surely you have a feeling for something you've wanted to express at some
point in your life, that has completely frustrating you on account of
your unsurmountable inability to express it.

However, there are expressions in other
languages which are not really translatable into English,
such as the French "savoir faire", which I can translate
literally, but know that that translation is inaccurate.

Why do you feel it's impossible to come up with wording in English that
expresses the same thing? "Facility in social situations" comes to mind.

This is too "low level"; it means more than that.

Others have posted to this group about the problem of
translation, in that the words are not there, or even
reasonable phrases.

If the language is going to be good, it will have to
convey precisely what people mean by "democracy".

The fact that a concept is fuzzy is not the fault of the language in
which one might choose to express it.

It
is easy to give the literal meaning, but you will find
few who are willing to accept the consequences of that.

If you and I disagree as to who the world's best actor is, it's because
we don't agree on the concept of quality as it applies to acting and we
don't have a common basis for measurement, not because of any difficulty
with language. Language is not responsible for aligning people's thinking.

No, I think the problem is largely that we have no remotely
accurate words is the problem.

If we had them, we could
still disagree, but we could discuss the situation far more
intelligently than we can now.

I believe that politicians
would not want such words, so that they would have to make
things clear, instead of being so vague.

So we need appropriate words.

It isn't a matter of the words.

It certainly is.

The lack of an adequate vocabulary hinders
the transmission of ideas.