3 ms·

> Or would they need to fork the language away from the common base? One does not simply fork a language :-) There must be a strong centrifugal (nationalist, s

> Or would they need to fork the language away from the common base? One does not simply fork a language :-) There must be a strong centrifugal (nationalist, separatist) political force for people to do so. > Nuance and expression are produced by the speakers of the language having distinct experiences and finding distinct ways to express them. Yes. Take a fisherman, a doctor, a frontend web developer, a fashion model, or a homeless beggar. They all have vastly different experiences. They all, however, can speak the same natural language to talk to each other. That language has the power to encompass the experiences and the nuances of all these different groups of people. I would not understand the professional jargon of a fisherman or a fashion model, while the homeless beggar may not understand the professional jargon of a frontend web developer; but we will all share the same grammar and the same core vocabulary, so that we can communicate what we want when we occasionally bump into each other. > Understanding other people doesn’t magically come from having the same language. It requires learning to understand their experiences. I am not sure what this means, and I am not after that kind of understanding anyway. I would be plenty happy if people shared the same native language when speaking at web conferences or writing documentation. Or if I could go to a shop anywhere and buy what I need, without resorting to a ridiculous pantomime; or listen to news, or to stop announcements in the public transport, or chat with a stranger, and lots of other small mundane things that we use our language for. I have no desire to understand the experiences of the most part of the humanity anyway; only some that I am interested in.

zepto 5y ago
> I have no desire to understand the experiences of the most part of the humanity anyway Nobody is arguing that a common language wouldn’t make mundane everyday transactions more convenient. The argument is that a significant range of expression, nuance, culture and even experience would be lost in service of your goal of easier to use public transport, shopping etc. It’s fine for you not to be interested in the experiences of the most part of humanity. Let’s just not pretend that there is a trade-off that many people do care about.
- azangru 5y ago
  I did mention both a mundane case (shopping) and a specialised case (web conferences and technical documentation). Which is to say, I am interested in the experiences of web developers, but not, for example, of naval officers or fashion models. A common language would give me access to a larger pool of web developer experiences, just as is would give anyone who is into fashion access to a wider range of experiences of similarly-minded people. The absence of a common language prevents that. > Let’s just not pretend that there is a trade-off There are several assumptions behind this position. One, that there are human experiences that require a very particular natural language to be expressed. That you need a whole unique system of phonology, morphology, syntax, etc. to be able to express your experience. I am not sure that this is the case. The other is that the co-existence of a multitude of languages allows us to capture and communicate human experiences better. Finally, as the life goes on, and the language — any language — evolves, we lose access to the previously expressed experiences anyway. So one language or many, we won't preserve human experiences.

zepto 5y ago

> I have no desire to understand the experiences of the most part of the humanity anyway Nobody is arguing that a common language wouldn’t make mundane everyday transactions more convenient. The argument is that a significant range of expression, nuance, culture and even experience would be lost in service of your goal of easier to use public transport, shopping etc. It’s fine for you not to be interested in the experiences of the most part of humanity. Let’s just not pretend that there is a trade-off that many people do care about.

azangru 5y ago
I did mention both a mundane case (shopping) and a specialised case (web conferences and technical documentation). Which is to say, I am interested in the experiences of web developers, but not, for example, of naval officers or fashion models. A common language would give me access to a larger pool of web developer experiences, just as is would give anyone who is into fashion access to a wider range of experiences of similarly-minded people. The absence of a common language prevents that. > Let’s just not pretend that there is a trade-off There are several assumptions behind this position. One, that there are human experiences that require a very particular natural language to be expressed. That you need a whole unique system of phonology, morphology, syntax, etc. to be able to express your experience. I am not sure that this is the case. The other is that the co-existence of a multitude of languages allows us to capture and communicate human experiences better. Finally, as the life goes on, and the language — any language — evolves, we lose access to the previously expressed experiences anyway. So one language or many, we won't preserve human experiences.