The CBB

I think a meat-only society would be pretty good for a sea-dwelling species. Using coral to slowly build things, for example (though it doesn't sound so viable.) depends on how often they need to build new structures, as opposed to continuing the use of a structure that may or may not be slowly exp...

I had this idea for an anti-vegan society, i.e. they only use animal products, mostly because I thought it was funny. But then I looked at the way that Inuit people live and thought it might be possible. But even Inuits eat berries and almost certainly have medicinal uses for plants and fungi. Is t...

lurker wrote: ↑23 Mar 2024 21:12 A genie, witch, demon, fey, or other wish-granting entity offers mortals the ability to poop solid gold, but they must give up their sight in exchange.

well, that mortal would definately have from that point onwards, assuming they accepted the deal.

Hmm. Say the SVO uses a complicated array of prepositions and relational nouns, and the local cool-speak uses cases suffixes (with suffixaufnahme for good measure) or just subordinate verbs that haven't quite made the leap to adposition, I wouldn't expect the dying SVO to hop aboard to case suffixe...

Hmm. Say the SVO uses a complicated array of prepositions and relational nouns, and the local cool-speak uses cases suffixes (with suffixaufnahme for good measure) or just subordinate verbs that haven't quite made the leap to adposition, I wouldn't expect the dying SVO to hop aboard to case suffixe...

I want to attempt another diachronic language, after the failures of Techomonic and Goidheug. I'm not quite sure exactly what I'll do, though. I know that I want to go off of something that's well-reconstructed. maybe diachronic from one of your conlangs? I'm considering Old Chinese, since it's iso...

Omzinesý wrote: ↑16 Mar 2024 12:23 My lang Xawook is now Xiwook. I originally wanted it to be Xewook but the phonology does not have /e/.

maybe thats an exonym, or was originally thus?

So it's three divinities that are equal in what they are made of, but choose to do different functions? One divinity; as three would be polytheism. Hopefully this will be of more help: in most Christian denominations, Jesus is seen as being both human and divine -- but not half of each...rather, 10...

I was thinking on names in Christianity in general. Again, not a small thing, but I'll give it a try... A lot of what some people treat as divine names in Christianity, are better grasped if you uncapitalise them, whence you can see they are mostly job descriptions, telling what roles that God (and...

Say what? I can't think of any Christian denomination, wherein you could say "the holy name of God's Only Begotten Son is Bob, not Jesus" or "...is Richard Nixon" and not be stared at in disbelief until you walk away. I know. I noted that I realized I was wrong what I said about...

I'm skeptical whether a language would ever have a convention as specific as requiring all nouns to be accompanied by adjectives of material and position in all instances, though. Imagine: "help, a shark is eating my leg!" - "I'm afraid your sentence is ungrammatical child, and so I ...

Everything named has a name etc. Judaism, Islam, and Sikhi off the top of my head care a lot about Names - though each in different ways. I tried to illustrate that a little above - though that wasn't my main point. You claimed it, but you haven't illustrated it. In what way is the precise name we ...

Not trying to go full philosophical here, but couldn't you say that a singular entity contrast with other potential but non-existent entities if the same kind? I was thinking of stuff like "There is only one god and his name is X", which implies that any claim that something with name Y i...

(I posted this here instead of C&C Quick Questions because I’m asking about RL monotheisms.) In a monotheistic religion, where it’s believed only one god exists at all (rather that only one is served or worshipped, as in monolatry or henotheism), why does such a god need a name? (Especially in ...

a priori in the strong sense languages, measure their success by the smallness of their lexicon... No they don't. oh you are adept at the new use of "a priori" for "with invented lexicon", There is less than no reason to be rude about things. note that I specified "in the s...

Whereas in a syllabary you have to learn all of the hundreds of syllable symbols independently. hundreds? what happened to the use of this? __ | -e | -a | -o | b- | t- | n- | Well, that's still 9 different unrelated symbols to learn. ?? Unrelated? The point of such charts, for languages like Hindi ...

I'm sorry if my last post sounded aggressive; I'm just frustrated with myself, because after writing hundreds and hundred of words to explain something that to me seems incredibly obvious and originates in about two sentences on wikipedia, evidently I'm still speaking gibberish that nobody can unde...

I'm sorry if my last post sounded aggressive; I'm just frustrated with myself, because after writing hundreds and hundred of words to explain something that to me seems incredibly obvious and originates in about two sentences on wikipedia, evidently I'm still speaking gibberish that nobody can unde...

In English, the symbolic representation of the SYLLABLE consists of (at least) TWO PARTS. One part represents the ONSET CONSONANT. The other part represents the VOWEL NUCLEUS. The SYLLABLE-SYMBOL can be "decomposed" into two parts - that is, it can be analysed of consisting of two parts. ...

Okay, replying to this before reading your more recent post. Systematic means having a coherent system. So, for instance, if you have the syllable-symbol BA and add a mark to make it BAN, and you have a syllable-symbol PA and add the same mark to make it PAN, that's a systematic relationship between...