On Engineering A Language

People do this all the time. Python, PHP - clever blokes whip together functional languages derived from mathmatics to program in.
In a way, new languages to express ideas come about all the time. CSS. HTML. XML. RDF... especially RDF. I was sitting in the kitchen of my father's house, trying to work out a neat way of saying in RDF triples what a business was, what a customer was, and what a supplier was.

For those who don't know RDF, a triple is a simple sentence like "My Cat is Blue." A triple is generally considered an assertation of a truth, which can be combined with logic to deduce previously unsaid triples.

My Cat is Blue.
I like Blue.

So... do I like or dislike my cat?

It doesn't take Spock to follow that, but transforming English into triples is harder than you think. For instance:

We run a business. We have suppliers, and we are their customers. We are suppliers to our customers. Our customers are not our supplier's customers, only ours. A supplier is always a business. A customer might or might not be a business. Suppliers and Customers are the same thing at heart, except one recieves goods in exchange for money and the other exchanges money for goods.

You already know what a customer and a supplier is, because you understand English. Look at it, however. It's far too much to say that two things are more or less the same. How can we reduce this clutter?

That's when it dawned on me. The reason I'm having trouble with this is because I'm thinking in English. People can generally only remember 8 things at a time, any more any they feel more comfortable turning them into more abstract chunks...
That's why our ABCs are more easily remembered with a song: A-B-C-D-E-F-G.... H-I-J-K LMNOP... QRS... TUV...WX, Y and Z, now I know my ABCs won't you come and play with me.

A 26 character alphabet is reduced right down to 7 letter groups and a line.

Other languages don't really bother with distinguishing between past/present/future tenses on verbs - Indonesian, as one of my ex girlfriends never stopped telling me, is a prime example of this.
Apart from the fact Indonesia isn't currently the leader of the "free" world, I don't see any evidence that Indonesians who are less intelligent that you or I. They've taken one step towards abstraction in their language which means they spend less time talking and more time doing.

English (and other germanic languages), have all sorts of special rules and regulations to modify words depending on how they are used. This is overengineering - making something so foolproof it's verging on the edge of insanity.

In the programming world, there's been a fair bit of hype about languages like Python and Ruby. The reason is because both of these strive to do something once, and do it right the first time - a minimum of fuss. Both are heavily object oriented, but neither is a thing like Java (well known for its object oriented nature).
A project in Ruby or Python is generally much speedier to complete because you are taking shortcuts. A master Java programmer finds Python like a relaxing stroll - all of the work is taken care of.

Why can't we do the same for English?

The advent of the mobile phone almost did this. Unfortunately, it came from an evolutionary process and cultural pressures rather than from a well thought out and tested plan. Letters were dropped as people got lazy and didn't like typing more than "u?". Language became phonenetik (I know, terrible), and because it was poorly structured and clumsy, meaning was lost in countless strings of "huh", "wot", "whoz diz" messages.

I don't advocate a specialized beast that only works in a localized habitat but dies horribly in the rest of the world. I'd love to see a general purpose addition to the English language that is based on logical assertations of truth (triples) without the mess.

Now, before I continue, I'd like to digress. Last night I watched an interesting documentary on Latino and Mexican films in Hollywood. For the first time I found out what the Zoot Suit Riots were. I also discovered that prior to 1960 or so, there was little in the way of latino gang films. By the same token, it wasn't so much of a real world issue. Soon, a movie came out. Then another. Yet more. Latino gangs became a real life reality as people tried to emulate their screen heros and adhere to a stereotype.

Environment dictates thinking processes much more than we realise - I've been hungry and cycling a lot, putting myself under stress. This has resulted in mild depression and a lot of angst related to my job - I sit up to all hours of the night worrying about such things. I didn't connect the lack of food to the angst until I heard someone talking about it on ABC radio (I'd post links but I've forgotten the name, they had a PHD, so they can't be too wrong).

If people are more and more using crippled communication techniques, they impart less knowledge with each other. I don't think I'm wrong in saying that teenagers seem stupider today than they did 5 years ago. The result of not being able to say more than "k" not only makes for boring people, but for ones shaped by their environment to expect failure when communicating.

The tool of language is severly broken for these people. That's why most internet users of some intelligence attempt to seperate themselves from those of you who use the letter z too much. They put the effort into articulation, not because English is helping them communicate much more, but it is more in balance - more delicate and artistic.

What I think we need is an English Lite that has no stigma attached. Something that lets us express complex ideas in a succint and timely manner that prevents waffling. Dual meanings shouldn't exist. Verbs are one word. Language pointers that rely on what you said previously to bring an overall meaning to a collection of statements. Concept based words, like the infamous Crisis is Danger and Opportunity ideogram.

Just think how much more clarified one's thoughts could be if an inner dialogue didn't have to think around the rules of English, but in a framework of truthful(ish) assertations. Simple ones that are optimized for our 8 concept lexical processor - we'd render philosophy faster than an Apple Mac design guru.
Would we be a society of Sherlock Holmes'? Only time can tell.

I intend to pull something together.

If you have suggestions for how to refactor the English language, please feel free to add your thoughts to the meme-pool.