The Infancy and Adolescence of

Artificial Languages
By Noah Savage
 The Search for the Perfect
Language
• Umberto Eco’s book The Search for the Perfect
Language covers a multitude of proposals,
creations, and observations regarding “perfect”
languages.
• What the searchers consider “perfect” varies, but
what they all have in common is that cognitive
linguistics has decided the ultimate realism of
what they sought.
• We will use the findings illustrated in Feldman’s
book to evaluate the realism of what has been
found by those language searchers and others.
 Umberto Eco
• Umberto Eco is a professor at the
University of Bologna.
• His career is all over the place—Eco
has been a scientist, a historian, a
novelist, and a lot more. He has
also received more academic
honors than can be listed on this
slide.
• He is the author of the bestselling
novel The Name of the Rose.
• Most importantly to us, he is the
author of The Search for the Perfect
Language.
 Jerome Feldman
• Jerome Feldman is the author of
From Molecule to Metaphor.
• He is Professor of Computer
Science at UC Berkeley.
• His focuses include Information
Technology, Computer Science,
and Cognitive Science.
• He is also focused on helping
underrepresented groups find
opportunities in the field of
Information Technology.
Infancy
 John Dee
• We will begin our story in medias res with
the famous English magician John Dee.
 John Dee
• In the 16th century, the man discovered a
unique primitive unit.
• Dee’s writings have been interpreted to
claim that this primitive is primitive for all
things, the way they are, independent of
personal construal.
• What do you think it is?
Why, It’s this symbol, of course!
 Monad
• This symbol, called the Monad and
introduced in the essay Monas
Hieroglyphica, was touted as means of
generating all alphabets, sounds, and
words, and as they were, rather than how
they appeared to be, to boot.
• In other words, Monad is the ultimate
semantic primitive, from which one
generate all linguistic units.
• The Monad “restores the language of
Adam”, according to Dee.
• (The term “monad” is used in many places
and by a variety of philosophical traditions,
but we’ll focus only on Dee’s symbol.)
 How does it work?
• This is how we get the sound [i]:
 How does it work?
• The average first and second frequencies of the
sound waves produced by vibrating vocal cords
and amplified by the shape of the vocal tract of
the vowel [i] are 300 and 2500. If one adds up
the number of the most salient shapes in the
Monad (4) and multiplies it by the number of
days in a week (7), we get 28, the same number
as the sum of the aforementioned frequencies
divided by 1000.
• The “love” heart can be made by placing the
bottom part of the Monad above the top.
• Etc.
 Did John Dee really believe that?
• No. Dee’s methods were even more
complicated than those in the previous
examples.
• Dee’s specific means of generating
meaning from the Monad involved lengthy
geometric computations, kabbalism, and a
fair amount of self-confidence.
 All of which begs the question:
• Are children born with the innate faculty to
generate sounds, concepts, and letters via
differential calculus performed on the Monad?
• More research is necessary to verify this, but
even if his creation becomes discredited, Dee
deserves credit for finding a way to combine
semantic primitives, objective reality, and
religious mysticism into a single project.
 Ars Magna
• Another project, this one earlier and more
like a language, is Ramon Llull’s Ars
Magna.
• Ramon Llull was a Spanish priest who
believed that he could create a logical
language that would convince the
heathens to convert.
 Ars Magna

• To do this, he drew up a table of 54 words that could be

combined in any which way.
• Llull believed that the heathens would see the logic
behind these combinations (i.e. goodness is glorious)
and convert.
 The Problem Is…
• For one, Llull assumed that linguistic
expressions are processed logically.
Feldman points out that formal logic is
heavily insufficient in explaining linguistic
processes. Thus, given what we know
about language, we have no reason to
believe that a project such as Ars Magna
would convince anyone to convert to Llull’s
faith.
 The Problem Is…
• In addition, there’s nothing terribly logical about Llull’s
creation. For example, speakers are simply not allowed to
make certain combinations. Combination of certain terms
(such as “God” and “bad”) is discounted as “unacceptable”
on account of their falsehood.
• However, it is certainly possible to think of such a
combination. Even the Bible holds numerous records of
people’s making this combination.
• Llull’s creation mirrors his individual perspective, which isn’t
the same as that of everyone else.
• Feldman points out that each language promotes its own
conceptual system, or way of understanding the world.
Llull put his own conceptual system into his creation and
assumed that the heathens would see his system as the
one true way to imagine the world.
 So What Happened?
• Llull was murdered.
 “Logical” Languages
• In the seventeenth century, a number of
British scholars began the push for the
creation of a language unburdened by
ambiguity.
• In other words, no polysemy, no
metonymy, no metaphor. A word for every
concept, exactly way said concepts are,
independent of human construal.
 Why?
• Universal communication and its benefits.
• Philosophical and scientific debate would be a
lot easier if the language of philosophers and
scientists described objective reality.
• Logic-based language would also clear up
issues of logic in people’s statements and result
in people’s speaking more logically.
• Thus, these languages are given the title a priori
philosophical languages.
 A Priori Philosophical Languages
• You already know how successful they were.
• They never quite succeeded creating such a
logical language because human cognition does
not operate that way.
• There are 100 trillion neural connections in the
brain. It is not known exactly how each neuron
and neural connection works in the production of
language, but it’s different for each person.
 And so in order to eradicate
polysemy…
• Each person’s experience is different, so the 100 trillion neural
connections are arranged differently for everyone. That’s a lot of
possible combinations! Assuming that there are no constraints on
how connections can be combined (which, to be fair, is a large—and
almost certainly false—assumption), there is a possible 100 trillion
factorial combinations in which a notion may reside. In addition,
individual meaning depends on even more than the arrangement of
neural connections in the brain, as what is encoded in each
connection depends on environment in addition to combinatorial
arrangement; every brain belongs to a unique body. For example,
the encodings of a peasant woman in Medieval England will be
different from her counterpart in modern England, as the two women
will see, hear, and generally experience different things, for reasons
related as well as unrelated to neuron combinations in the brain.
• Thus, in order for a language to be free of polysemy, each concept
must be represented by well over a googolplex terms, perhaps an
infinite number.
 And did the “logical” languages
have that many?
• No.
• They did, however, have a number of
interesting features.
• Here are a couple of highlights:
 Highlights
• Taxonomic lexicon was common throughout the
a priori languages.
• Consider George Dalgarno’s word for courage,
pot.
• The “p” makes the word an issue of sensitivity,
the “o” makes it an issue of “primary emotion”,
and the “t” identifies its individual place among
the rest of the sensitive primary emotions.
• Problematically, it may well be impossible to
explain language and meaning. Thus, this
taxonomy of “courage” is not bound to clear up
any scientific or philosophical issues.
 Highlights
• One language, Solresol, had only seven
syllables: do, re, mi, fa, sol, la, and ti.
• Thus, its phonology is easier than that of
any other language.
• However, just try to imagine the task of
understanding spoken Solresol! Finding
breaks between the words, among other
aspects of understanding speech, would
be unduly hard.
 Highlights
• One language had the following words for
numbers 1 through 10:
• 1 siba • 6 sibra
• 2 sibe • 7 sibre
• 3 sibi • 8 sibri
• 4 sibo • 9 sibro
• 5 sibu • 10 sibru
 Summary
• In short, “infancy” refers to the status of an
artificial language as unworkable due to its
creator’s misconceptions about language and
cognition.
• Many of such artificial languages are languages
created by those who presume that their
personal conceptual system is universal.
• After a while, artificial languages began to get a
bit more sensible.
 And yet
• “Logical” languages live
on!
• Consider Lojban, the
language created by the
“Logical Language
Group”.
• According to a pamphlet
providing an introduction
to Lojban, “Lojban is
designed to be
unambiguous in
orthography, phonology,
morphology, and
grammar.”
 Claims about Lojban
The following are claims made by
Lojban supporters:
• Lojban is designed to be used by
people in communication with each
other, and possibly in the future with
computers.
• Lojban grammar is based on the
principles of logic.
• Lojban has an unambiguous
grammar.
• Lojban's 1300 root words can be
easily combined to form a
vocabulary of millions of words.
• Lojban attempts to remove
restrictions on creative and clear
thought and communication.
• Sound familiar?
Adolescence
 Adolescence
• I have classified all of the previous
linguistic creations as “in their infancy” due
to their complete lack of development in
terms of cognitive linguistics.
• However, a number of artificial languages
were not created under the assumption
that human cognition can be so easily
violated.
 International Auxiliary Languages
• Beginning in 1879 with Johannes
Schleyer’s Volapük, a number of artificial
languages were developed for the purpose
of serving as an international language
that everyone could learn.
• These IALs were imperfect, but people
could learn and speak them more easily
than a natural language.
 Esperanto
• Esperanto, the most
successful IAL in history,
first appeared in 1887 in the
form of a book written by its
creator, the Polish oculist
Ludwig Zamenhof.
• Zamenhof took notice of the
language-fueled violence
going on around him and
thought to create an IAL
that everyone could speak (
as did many IAL creators).
 Why Esperanto Works
• Simply put, Esperanto works because the
language operates the same way as do
natural languages—in tune with people’s
actual cognition.
• Esperanto does not claim to feature a
universal conceptual system.
• Esperanto is full of metaphor, metonymy,
polysemy, and every imaginable form of
construal.
 For Example
• The Esperanto word for “blink” is “palpebri”, literally
meaning “to eyelid”. Metonymy!
• Exceptional proof of Esperanto’s cognitive realism is its
schematicity, especially for concepts that developed
after its creation.
• Consider the frame in which are found the Esperanto
“reptile words”.
• Reptile words are the six terms for speaking a certain
language when another would be appropriate: reptilumi,
krokodili, aligatori, lacerti, kajmani, and gaviali.
• (Reptile, crocodile, alligator, lizard, caiman, and gharial)
 The Facts
• Because Esperanto is a
cognitive artificial
language, its popularity
has grown. Esperanto
has:
• A worldwide following.
• Spiritual significance for
a number of religions,
most clearly Oomoto
• Its own martial art,
Aikido.
• And Umberto Eco is a
supporter!
 Summary
• Adolescent languages are the languages,
almost all of which are IALs, that are just
as cognitive as natural languages, only
simpler and easier to learn.
• These languages differ from natural
languages without attempting to change
the way that language works.
 Bibliography
• “Ars Magna.” Digital image. Lullianarts.net. 3 November 2007.
<http://lullianarts.net/Ars-Magna/tfig.gif>.
• Barbosa de Aquino, Ildete. “Mi, Esperanto, kaj Oomoto.” Oomoto.or.jp. 5
November 2007.
<http://www.oomoto.or.jp/Esperanto/eoGast/barbosaparolo.html>.
• “Dee Hieroglyph.” Digital image. Wikipedia.org. 3 November 2007.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:DeeHieroglyph.gif>.
• Eco, Umberto. The Search for the Perfect Language. Trans. James
Fentress. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1995.
• “Esperanto: Oftaj Demandoj.” MIT Societo de Esperanto. 6 November 2007.
<web.mit.edu/esperanto/www/reading1.doc>.
• Feldman, Jerome. From Molecule to Metaphor: A Neural Theory of
Language. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2006.
• Feldman, Jerome. “Jerome A. Feldman.” 2 February 2006. UC Berkeley. 2
November 2007. <http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jfeldman/>
• Leite, Milton. “Esperanto Flag.” Digital image. Flickr.com. 5 November 2006.
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/moon316/211745032/>.
 Bibliography
• Lojban.org. The Logical Language Group. 6 November 2007.
<www.lojban.org>.
• “Lojban Flag.” Digital image. Lojban.org. 6 November 2007.
<http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-download_wiki_attachment.php?
attId=560>.
• Moshe, Pereg. “Esperanto Stamp.” Digital image. Wikipedia.org. 8
November 2007.
<http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Esperanto-PM.jpg>.
• “Oomoto.” Digital image. Oomoto.or.jp. 5 November 2007.
<http://www.oomoto.or.jp/Images/kapalogo.gif>.
• “Ouroboros.” Digital image. Wikipedia.org. 4 November 2007.
http://<upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Ouroboros.png
>.
• “Overview of Lojban”. 2000. The Logical Language Group. 6
November 2007. <http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-
download_wiki_attachment.php?attId=89>.
 Bibliography
• Ruch, Allen. “A Short Biography of Umberto Eco”. The Modern
Word. 22 March 2004. 2 November 2007.
<http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_biography.html>.
• “Sky.” Digital image. Flickr.com. 7 November 2007.
<http://farm1.static.flickr.com/68/222320192_a3c99087f3.jpg?v=0>.
• “Steven Seagal.” Digital image. Self-defender.net. 5 November
2007. <http://www.self-defender.net/aikido4.jpg>.
• “Umberto Eco.” Digital image. Umberto Eco. Britannica.com. 2
November 2007. <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-
9031922/Umberto-Eco>.
• “World Flags.” Digital image. Solar4power.org.
<http://www.solar4power.com/images/world-flags.jpg>.
 Maturity
Gjerojŋ Adoltsano
 Maturity
• We have seen how artificial languages fail
to grow due to their creators’ cognitive
misconceptions.
• We have also seen how artificial
languages can achieve cognitive realism.
• But let’s take it a step further.
 Maturity
• The basis of this project is a theory developed
for the better part of a century by
neuroscientists, biologists, and cognitive
linguists.
• Feldman references this as “linguistic
determinism”.
• The following is a look at a project that explores
some possibilities, positive and negative, of
artificial languages that make use of linguistic
determinism.
• First, the negative.
Prodzjekt Oroboros

• 1-grad spraaksajnzksajŋeɱ besoitstaal Oroboros,

sjeturov jeststaal dal ksajŋeθ k go zir gzæʎɟ goɟuʃʎ
kastjumæt tsabweθ dzjenerativistθa.
• Translation: A language scientist of the highest
perceived use to the state created a language,
whose genesis has been observed by the
government and whose future is likely to be
ongoing, that has and will be for the “best people”.
The dirty tricks of the generativists belong to a
weak and immoral nation that deserves to be
crushed by ours on account of its weakness and
will continue to do so until its scheduled
conquering.
 Where’s the Determinism?
• Feldman documents that every language’s
lexical structures drive the way its
speakers understand the world.
• Thus, lexical items are reduced and
expanded for cognitive effect.
 Lexical Examples
• The English “nation” or “country” says
nothing about the perceived deserved fate
of said nation, while Oroboros does.
• Xɔʎɟ, staat, wrjeʎ, cʎenc, and gzæʎɟ.
• Meanwhile, there are no separate terms
for maturity, mean-spiritedness, and
domination.
• There is a 5-point scale for “good”.
• Oroboros vs. spraak.
 Grammatical Examples
• Felman invokes several “neo-Whorfian” studies
that prove a relation between grammar style and
thought style, so Oroboros’s grammar is
designed to influence thought.
• For example, each word’s place on the 5-point
graded scale determines many aspects of each
sentence.
• (1-grad, 2-grad, 3-grad, 4-grad, and 5-grad)
 Grammatical Examples
• The most important aspects go first in terms of
sentence structure.
• 1-grad subjects appear only in SVO sentences,
5- and 4-grad subjects appear only in OVS
sentences, and 3- and 2-grad subjects appear in
either order, depending on the status of the
object.
• The time system is based on the speaker’s
understanding of the government’s knowledge of
the action being described. The tense marker is
attached to the item highest on the 5-point scale.
• Knjazn gjerjoɱec vs. gjeroɱæc ʎe
 Should
• English has one word for the concept “should.”
• Oroboros has five, each coinciding with one of
the points on the 5-point scale of “good”: gjero,
rtuʃʎ, kurag, rviθ, and taʃju.
• For example, “Knjaznɨk gjerostaaʎ rtjektjuajeʎ
ɰar Spraaksajnz 409 k kuragstaaʎ rtjektjuajeʎ
ɟan Spraaksajnz 201.”
• “He should have taken LING 409 and should
have taken LING 201.”
 Projekto Ksilofono
• We’ve seen a example of how artificial
language can rearrange people’s
conceptualizations in a negative way.
• The following is a positive artificial
language.
 Lexical Points
• Growth is an embodied concept, so every language has
terms for it.
• While the terms for growth in Oroboros are related to
mean-spiritedness, those in Ksilofono are related to
good-spiritedness.
• Many vices, bad decisions, and general ills are
expressed in terms of maturity.
• I.e. drug use is “droga infanputro”, (loosely) “drug
childishness”.
• To do drugs is “infaniĝi droge”, “to be a child drug-ly”.
• Etc.
 Grammatical Examples
• The maturity inherent in the action is
encoded into verbs.
• Kiu estas li? (neutral/mature)
• Li estap ŝtelisto. (immature)
 Grammatical Examples
• In Ksilofono possessive constructs, the
group goes before the individual.
• La organizo de la viro (the club of the guy).
• La organizo ur la celo (the club’s
objective).
 Concept Harmony
• For concepts that we want people to associate but don’t
necessarily want to combine into one word, Ksilofono
suffixes (based on basic-level and embodied concepts)
adapt to fit the category.
• Esperanto has a number of suffixes that affect word
meaning. Gramatikeco (grammaticality) and fieco (evil),
vortaro (dictionary) and monstraro (collection of
monsters).
• However, Ksilofono concept harmony acknowledges
these concepts differently.
• Gramatiksano (grammaticality) and fiputro (evil).
• Vortfamo (dictionary) and monstrobando (collection of
monsters).
 Controlled Conceptual Metaphors
• It is not possible to prevent someone from
describing one thing in terms of something
else, but the meanings of the source and
target domain can indeed be controlled to
point where certain notions are difficult to
express.
• For example, the metaphor ANGER IS
STRENGTH is difficult when the ideal
“strong” figure is cool and level-headed.
 Controlled Conceptual Metaphors
• In English, there are also a number of
conceptual metaphors that are usable but
uncommon.
• For example, ANGER IS POISON is a realizable
conceptual metaphor, but it is relatively
uncommon. Most often, anger is related to heat.
• The most promoted metaphors in Ksilofono are
those that are constructed to produce the most
beneficial mental connections.
 Should
• Just like in its negative counterpart, there
are multiple words for “should”, each tied
to a measure of maturity/good-
spiritedness.
• Adolta, afabla, agrabla, egoema, and
infana.
• Ri adoltiĝus preni Lingvistikon 409 kaj
agrabliĝus preni Lingvistikon 201.
 Conclusion
• Artificial languages have stayed in their
infancy for a long time, mostly due to
incorrect theories of language. In fact,
there are still artificial language projects
that work on false assumptions about
human cognition.
• Esperanto is a relatively mature artificial
language, but there’s no reason to stop
there.
 Conclusion
• The first linguistic conceptual systems were
those of tribes fighting each other over
resources.
• Societies evolved, as did their languages, and
modern languages have adapted to fit modern
civilization.
• However, there is no compelling reason to
believe that the conceptual systems maintained
by modern languages are beyond improvement.
That many languages retain unnecessary tribal
characteristics is evidence for this.
 Conclusion
• Artificial languages have a lot of potential
in modifying people’s conceptual systems.
• Ksilofono is an artificial language designed
for the purpose of promoting an ideal
conceptual system.
• I recommend that such a project be
implemented in the future.