I note that with a vocabulary of 1,000 words it is roughly 10x the size of Toki Pona, a conlang which also aims for minimalism.<p>That said, Toki Pona's goal is to help clarify thought, whereas this seems to intend to prioritize communication more highly.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona</a>
I think the concept of "simplest naturalistic language" may be intrinsically broken -- a "naturalistic language" is not simple. Natural languages balance between regular rules (e.g. in English, we often add -ed to make the past tense of a verb) and exceptions especially for common cases ("went", "was", "had", "made", "did" because going, being, having, making, doing are all so common). This tension is partly about how much a language user must know/consider when speaking/listening and how efficiently you can say things.<p>I cannot find a citation quickly, but I recall years ago reading a paper about simulated agents "evolving" a language in a game context where agents had to indicate items to one another, by sending messages which were subject to a noisy channel. Items had multiple attributes (think "small red square", "big green triangle" etc), and experimenters could vary both the noise in the channel, and the entropy of the distribution over items. Naturally if "small red square" is 99% of the things you have to communicate, and there is low noise, agents invent an abbreviation for it. If there's a huge amount of noise and a relatively even distribution over items, then "small small green green triangle triangle" or similar becomes more likely. Languages very naturally reflect both the things people discuss and the environment in which they discuss them.
> The vowels are pronounced like they are in Spanish, Italian, German, and many other languages<p>... ok, this is annoying. Can't speak for Italian and Spanish, but in German vowels are pronounced differently depending on context.
Later, it says the 'o' is meant to be pronounced like in "moment". Moment is pronounced differently in American and UK English. And neither are like Italian "momento" or like German "Moment".<p>> All of the consonants (b d f g j k l m n p r s t v) are pronounced exactly the same as they are in English. Phew!<p>Not helpful.
Reminds me of some similarities to Arabic. Arabic uses root words, usually 3 consonants, that mean many similar things with surrounding letters. K-T-B means writing. Kitab means book. Kitaba is writing.<p>The script is hard, and you have to learn enough of the roots and recognize them to get the meaning. Indonesian is slightly similar: tinju is boxing and petinju is boxer. Prefixes on roots to build up and guess meaning from context.
Redundancy in a natural language is not necessarily a bug. It can be considered a feature. Speach is transmitted over a noisy channel (as everybody knows who has ever tried talking/screaming to a friend on a busy street or a concert), so needs to contain redundancy for error correction purposes. A lot of that is context (there are only a handful of things my friend could be screaming at me at a given point in time), but a lot is that it's enough to hear parts of a sentence to infer what it's about.<p>Many different contexts make use of this redundancy. Air traffic communications is another example where synonyms are chosen to minimize misunderstandings yet still be concise.<p>Minimizing redundancy also minimizes synonyms, which can be undesirable. Another example is poetry.
<p><pre><code> Like Wilkins’ Real Character, a priori languages attempt to decompose the elements of thought into distinct atomic units and build up larger linguistic constructs from those simpler units.
A posteriori languages like Esperanto take a very different approach: rather than starting from scratch with a set of basic concepts, they attempt to pave over the unnecessary grammatical quirks and complications of natural language to create something which is simple and easier to learn.
Mini’s goal is to fully realize both of these visions: to have, at once, a set of linguistic primitives which can be combined to discuss any topic, while ensuring that those primitives are themselves borrowed as directly from natural languages as possible.
</code></pre>
<a href="https://minilanguage.medium.com/mini-the-minimal-language-3f3710e28166" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://minilanguage.medium.com/mini-the-minimal-language-3f...</a><p>Yeah, I don't get it. In Esperanto you don't use particles, but you change the endings of the words, according to their roles in the sentence. How is Mini fundamentally different?
Toki Pona is another one.<p>I made this 4 letter language: <a href="http://move.rupy.se/file/talk.txt" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://move.rupy.se/file/talk.txt</a>
Maybe I'm just dumb but it claims simple phonetics but even after reading the pronunciation ("Say it like you mean it") section I still don't really understand how it's supposed to sound?<p>The singular "a" between verbs and objects, is that a long or short vowel sound - do vowels have short and long distinctions at all? It says all the consonants are pronounced how they are in English - but consonants don't have just one sound?
Kore cult (fanatics) lost "Mini" momentum: <a href="https://minilanguage.medium.com/speaking-mini-kore-552f787dbfb1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://minilanguage.medium.com/speaking-mini-kore-552f787db...</a> "minimal" needs criteria given speech coding & compression & associated parameters.
Seems interesting as a project, though I doubt the stated goals can be achieved with any new constructed language. I mean, congratulation for the great work, thanks for sharing this with the world and wish you all the luck to succeed with these goals, sure.<p>Let’s say this is technically the best solution among simplest naturalistic language ever conceived so far to use as an international auxiliary language. This is a ecological niche already largely populated.<p>Providing the best technical solution, as we know, is only the optional cherry on the tip of the iceberg. What really matters for the stated goals is the community. You can definitely attract a few conlang lovers with some elegant proposals, but that’s about it.<p>So what’s the plan for making Mini endorsed by a large sustainable community? What kind of ideals, values and social goals it is attached to? What Mini brings on the table for its aimed community to thrive that no other previous constructed language can also provide for people who don’t have ease of learn as sole and primary consideration?
Interesting, this reminded me of Toki Pona ( <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona</a>), but it has different goals (Toki Pona was not intended to be an auxiliary language)
Conlangs are fun, but what will probably happen is we will evolve more efficient communication protocols as bandwidth increases via multimedia communication, Neuralink, etc.
It tickled me to see a changelog for a language there, so i had GPT write one for English too.<p>Change Log for English Language Evolution<p>Version 1.0: Proto-English (450 CE)<p><pre><code> Initial release of Proto-English, a West Germanic language spoken by Anglo-Saxon tribes.
Basic grammar and vocabulary established.
Development primarily led by "Linguistic Trailblazers."
</code></pre>
Version 1.1: Viking Invasion Patch (850 CE)<p><pre><code> Introducing Old Norse influence due to Viking invasions.
Added Norse loanwords and grammatical structures.
Integration efforts led by the "Language Fusion Guild."
</code></pre>
Version 2.0: The Great Vowel Shift (1400 CE)<p><pre><code> Major phonological update affecting long vowels and diphthongs.
Unprecedented vowel sound migrations across the language.
Executed by the "Phonetic Alchemists Consortium."
</code></pre>
Version 2.1: Shakespearean Lexical Expansion (1600 CE)<p><pre><code> Extensive vocabulary enrichment, drawing inspiration from literary works by William Shakespeare.
Introduction of numerous idiomatic expressions.
Collaborative effort involving "Poetic Linguists Guild."
</code></pre>
Version 3.0: British Empire Localization (1800 CE)<p><pre><code> Localization effort to adapt English for various regions within the British Empire.
Incorporation of local dialects and vocabulary.
Localization project overseen by the "Imperial Language Commission."
</code></pre>
Version 4.0: American Revolution Fork (1776 CE)<p><pre><code> Creation of American English variant with notable vocabulary and spelling differences.
Introduction of simplified grammar rules and new expressions.
Led by the "Patriotic Language Architects."
</code></pre>
Version 5.0: Globalization Update (20th Century)<p><pre><code> English becomes an international language due to global interactions.
Inclusion of loanwords and phrases from various languages.
A collaborative effort by the "Cultural Linguistic Exchange Taskforce."
</code></pre>
Version 6.0: Digital Age Upgrade (Late 20th Century)<p><pre><code> Vocabulary expansion to encompass computer science and technology terms.
Introduction of internet slang and acronyms.
Driven by the "Cyber Lexicographers Consortium."
</code></pre>
Version 7.0: Modern Dialect Divergence (21st Century)<p><pre><code> Increasing divergence between regional dialects due to globalization and migration.
Emergence of unique vocabulary and idiomatic expressions in different English-speaking communities.
Monitored by the "Dialectologists Guild."</code></pre>