2 Jun
2010
2 Jun
'10
12:33 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 8:19 PM, <arcarlini at iee.org> wrote:
That sort of idea was one of the inspirations behind Lojban, I think...
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? LiveJournal/Twitter: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508
Liam Proven [lproven at gmail.com] wrote:
Possibly. The thing that is so interesting about them is that in some
cases they use the same word that normally denotes "one" to indicate a
group which in totality is smaller than a single instance of a
comparable entity.
2 small fishes = 1; 1 big fish = 2
So, maybe not. This is why the no-counting claim is so extraordinary.
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:00 PM, ?<arcarlini at
iee.org> wrote:
Let me try again ... they can do 00, they can do 01, then they get
stuck.
That's "sufficiently small" in my book :-) I guess they'd at least be able cope with
binary (at least for
sufficiently small numbers).
Apparently not. missionaries.
The Pirah?'s strictly evidential approach to
life - if you haven't seen it yourself, it's not real, more
or less - has caused Everett to abandon his christianity and
become a rational atheist (good for him!), but also their
One other thing I (think I) remember from the article is that it
is (apparently) impossible assert affect without also stating how
it is that you have knowledge of it: you can say (the equivalent
of) "I saw John leave" or "I've been told that John has left"
but
you cannot say "John has left" without saying how it is you think
you know.
Perhaps we should hire them as politicians? (No expenses scandals :-))