You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

ChristianKl comments on Linguistic mechanisms for less wrong cognition - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: KevinGrant 29 November 2015 02:40AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (130)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ChristianKl 01 December 2015 07:39:35PM 1 point [-]

Do you think it's just incompetence that has led to existing languages not using every possible short combination of sounds to make words?

Incompetence would assume that the existing languages are designed to be the way they are.

English has 12 vowels (not counting diphthongs) and 24 consonants. Does that mean that English needs 296 different words with two sounds? No, but maybe 100?

Then everything is alright isn't it? The Oxford dictionary contains 100 two letters words. No, it isn't. It contains words such as aa which is Basaltic lava forming very rough, jagged masses with a light frothy texture. Often contrasted with pahoehoe. and a lot of other junk like ki which is a plant of the lily family.

Comment author: Lumifer 01 December 2015 07:51:48PM 1 point [-]

It contains words such as aa

It has been suggested that this kind of lava was named by the first Hawaiian who tried to walk across it barefoot :-)

In any case, this is a foreign borrowed word.

Comment author: ChristianKl 01 December 2015 08:20:04PM 0 points [-]

In any case, this is a foreign borrowed word.

Quite a lot of English is haphazardly borrowed together. But my main point was that a lot of the list of two letter words in the Oxford dictionary doesn't look like "real English words".