Personally, I am one to enjoy instilling order into things. One thing I am very interested in at the moment is semantics. What I have been thinking about is a form of "procedural semantics" in which a mere set of rules and minimum starting information could produce a map or set of derivations or links between semantic items, from nouns to verbs to grammatical words like adpositions and tenses. While we have no idea if it is possible, the thought of having such a resource would be unimaginably useful to many.
I am by no means qualified to attempt this properly as I have no formal linguistics education, but after some discussion on the unofficial CBB Discord server, I though it would be much more interesting and valid to offer this challenge to the CBB as a whole, leaving it open for everyone to contribute to.
So the challenge is simple: Create a set of rules or some form of system that will automatically* produce a set of links and derivations across vast swathes of semantics, essentially linking everything.
So er... Good luck.
* automatically as in it can work without a human having to make any decisions for it.
Procedural Semantics
Re: Procedural Semantics
A genius in the past thought that five years will be needed by men selected to achieve such a project ...
Re: Procedural Semantics
Not much of a genius then, because if he or she had gotten all that selecting and organizing done then we'd have the whole thing finished by now.
Re: Procedural Semantics
Another later genius thought he did... even if he proved he couldn't...
The Lord works in mysterious ways....
Especially in conlang attitudes...
The Lord works in mysterious ways....
Especially in conlang attitudes...
Re: Procedural Semantics
clawgrip wrote:Not much of a genius then, because if he or she had gotten all that selecting and organizing done then we'd have the whole thing finished by now.
But back to the main point:
Whether or not it is possible, think of how many weird and wonderful ideas that could be created in the process!
Maybe the solution lies in some form of "smallest component" - like physics: Matter > Molecules > Atoms > Protons/Neutrons/Electrons > Quarks > Energy
Maybe what we have in language is just the first bit of such a thing: Language > Sentences > Words > Semantic "things" > ??
Semantic pieces go together to form the words we speak, but are these formed from some smaller, more primitive bit of meaning that is shared among all words? Maybe that's 2 or more steps down.
What if it can be broken down into a very countable number of parts that can comprise all of semantics?
Re: Procedural Semantics
>Sememes>SemesOTʜᴇB wrote:Language > Sentences > Words > Semantic "things" > ??
It is difficult to go further down, but I think that another step might be possible. By definition seme should be the fundamental semantic unit, but the way it is used suggests that we have not hit the limit yet
e.g. of semes (taken from the Italian wikipedia page, the English one is surprisingly lacking)
Both bull and ox have [+bovine, +adult, +male], but bull has [+fertile] and ox has [-fertile] (as you can see, this is very similar to distinctive features in linguistics)
But bovine surely doesn't give me this sense of "semantic unit", nor does fertile
Native: | Intermediate: | Basic:
Studied: (+all of the above)
Willing to study: :heb:
(Linguistic noob, fear not to correct me)
Studied: (+all of the above)
Willing to study: :heb:
(Linguistic noob, fear not to correct me)
Re: Procedural Semantics
This is interesting. Are there any resources on Semes that you recommend? I'd love to learn more about them.G64 wrote:>Sememes>SemesOTʜᴇB wrote:Language > Sentences > Words > Semantic "things" > ??
It is difficult to go further down, but I think that another step might be possible. By definition seme should be the fundamental semantic unit, but the way it is used suggests that we have not hit the limit yet
e.g. of semes (taken from the Italian wikipedia page, the English one is surprisingly lacking)
Both bull and ox have [+bovine, +adult, +male], but bull has [+fertile] and ox has [-fertile] (as you can see, this is very similar to distinctive features in linguistics)
But bovine surely doesn't give me this sense of "semantic unit", nor does fertile
Re: Procedural Semantics
I propose semantic primes... (whatever you want to put in it...)
For myself, I chose mine and I don't use anything else (neither words, sentences...) for language...
(but still far away from the genius' project...)
For myself, I chose mine and I don't use anything else (neither words, sentences...) for language...
(but still far away from the genius' project...)