Ontology:Q1061: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 11:01, 26 August 2025

toki pona but with English 1-1-1

Core characteristics[edit]

item type: S0 1-1-1
pronounced [P] label [string] (L): toki pona but with English 1-1-1
pronounced [P] alias (en) [string]: meta toki pona
QID references [Item] 1-1-1: --
field, scope, or group [Item]: --
sub-case of [Item]: toki pona derivative (proposed; HAS) 1-1-1
case of [Item]: --
super-case of [Item]: en-x-pona; de-x-pona; ja-x-pona; zh-x-pona; ru-x-pona; la-x-pona
consists of components [Item]: --

Wavebuilder combinations[edit]

pronounced [P] pronounced Wavebuilder: forms result [Item]

: --
along with [Item]: --
forming from [Item]: --; --; --

Background[edit]

This is the concept of writing in a language using a highly limited number of distinct words — somewhere from 100 to 150 — in a way similar to how toki pona functions, but without using the set palette of words specific to toki pona. The base language can be anything, such as English, German, or anything else. The key characteristic of a text in this "language" is that it will at some point define every word or cluster of words it uses which has a meaning that is not completely obvious, and thus the meanings of every phrase in a particular text will actually become more precise rather than more vague. The idea is to force languages to become better for talking about ontology through making every single individual term harder to misunderstand without having to make the base syntax of the language particularly complicated just to achieve this purpose.

One motivation for this language is that people have complained about toki pona not being able to change and add new words. When toki pona is turned into a writing exercise instead of its own named language, this is no longer a problem because any particular writer can simply pick the exact set of words that are the most useful. There are approximately two rules: almost all the words should be common words, and the words should be chosen as if the text is novel-length and it's important to pick as versatile of words as possible. Apart from that, proper names are allowed, and jargon words can be used sparingly only if they have been defined in the same text. Some particles and grammar patterns may not count toward the total number of words, at least for the purposes of remaining under 120 words, but you must be able to demonstrate that they can be found in an introductory language textbook.

Toki pona but with German[edit]

When writing in de-x-pona it is acceptable to smash words together into giant compound words as long as each of the compound words is defined in the same text. Each of these compound words is assumed to have no meaning until it has been defined.

Toki pona but with Egyptian[edit]

Given that the rules of this language are not fully fixed to the standard rules of the base language and the point is instead to create a simplified language, it would theoretically be possible to take an ancient language with a great amount of information recovered about it and simply start writing in a "pona" version of that language. In a case like this, the writing system does not have to be especially easy to remember as long as the spoken representation of the sentence is appropriately simple. As long as there is a small number of words and it does not take long to learn the spoken grammar it is perfectly acceptable to write sentences in hieroglyphs, especially if using some kind of elaborate writing system somehow makes the meaning of a statement clearer.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{ArticleTitle|toki pona but with English - HAS / S1 / Q1061 |NoContents=y}}
+{{ArticleTitle|toki pona but with English - HAS / S0 / Q1061 |NoContents=y}}
-<includeonly><onlyinclude><dfn class="field_mdem" data-dimension="S" data-qid="1061" data-field="" data-series="" data-work="" data-chapter="" data-tale="" data-object="" data-note="" data-lexeme="">{{#if: {{{1|}}} | [[E:Q1061|{{{1}}}]] | [[E:Q1061|toki pona but with English]] }}<ins class="field"></ins>{{WaveScore|sum=1|quilt=1|ply=1|enddfn=1}}</onlyinclude></includeonly>
+<includeonly><onlyinclude><dfn class="field_mdem" data-dimension="S0" data-qid="1061" data-field="" data-series="" data-work="" data-chapter="" data-tale="" data-object="" data-note="" data-lexeme="">{{#if: {{{1|}}} | [[E:Q1061|{{{1}}}]] | [[E:Q1061|toki pona but with English]] }}<ins class="field"></ins>{{WaveScore|sum=1|quilt=1|ply=1|enddfn=1}}</onlyinclude></includeonly><!-- {{E:Q1061}}
-{{HueNumberPreview|E=Q1061}}<!-- change summary template:  copy fake Item from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|Q1061]] -->
+-->{{HueNumberPreview|E=Q1061}}<!-- change summary template:  copy fake Item from [[Special:PermanentLink/NNNN|Q1061]] -->
 == Core characteristics ==
 <dl class="wikitable hue">
-{{HueClaim |P=item type| {{Template:S1}} }}
+{{HueClaim |P=item type| {{Template:S0}} }}
 {{HueRoster|EP=PPPA/L|lang=en| {{E:Q1061}} }}
-{{HueRoster|EP=PPPA|lang=en| -- }}
+{{HueRoster|EP=PPPA|lang=en| meta toki pona }}
-{{HueRoster|EP=P3| -- }}
+{{HueRoster|EP=P42| -- }}  <!-- en: QID references -->
-{{HueRoster|EP=P4| {{E:Q618/HAS|toki pona derivative}} }}
+{{HueRoster|EP=P34| -- }}
+{{HueRoster|EP=P3| {{E:Q618/HAS|toki pona derivative}} }}
+{{HueRoster|EP=P4| -- }}
 {{HueRoster|EP=P5| en-x-pona | de-x-pona | ja-x-pona | zh-x-pona | ru-x-pona | la-x-pona }}
 {{HueRoster|EP=P6| -- }}  <!-- en: consists of components -->
@@ Line 21: / Line 23: @@
 </dl>
-== [[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand|Prototype]] notes ==
+== Background ==
-<ol class="hue clean">
+This is the concept of writing in a language using a highly limited number of distinct words — somewhere from 100 to 150 — in a way similar to how toki pona functions, but without using the set palette of words specific to toki pona. The base language can be anything, such as English, German, or anything else. The key characteristic of a text in this "language" is that it will at some point define every word or cluster of words it uses which has a meaning that is not completely obvious, and thus the meanings of every phrase in a particular text will actually become more precise rather than more vague. The idea is to force languages to become better for talking about ontology through making every single individual term harder to misunderstand without having to make the base syntax of the language [[E:lojban|particularly complicated]] just to achieve this purpose.
-</li><li class="field_mdem" value="1061" data-dimension="S">[[E:Q1061|toki pona but with English]] / meta toki pona / <code>en-x-pona</code> (motif) / <code>ja-x-pona</code> (motif) / <code>de-x-pona</code> (motif) / <code>ru-x-pona</code> (motif)  ->  the new simultaneously blessed and cursed language I came up with after messing with toki pona and looking at other people's criticisms of it. you write with a palette of 100-150 content words, particles and grammar patterns not necessarily counting toward the limit as long as you can hold up an introductory language textbook they're in, but you use any language you want, you can pick any words as your content words, and the only rule is that you have to stick to the same palette of unique words for the duration of the text. I imagine this would be relatively easy to use for short articles but gets vastly harder as the text gets longer.<br />
-I am just trying to imagine the concept of doing this with several different languages to get a feel for how each language works and idly wondering if I could somehow test every language on earth what my favorite language would then be. I have no idea. I know that the image of writing a summary of {{book|Being and Time}} in this is hilarious to me, partly because some of the words used in it are already superficially simple but then used to express really arcane or unconventional ideas. I wonder how it would look different in de-x-pona versus en-x-pona. I'm going to say you <em>can</em> cheat by smashing words together to make new words, with the only rule being that you and the audience have to assume they have no meaning until you define them. de-x-pona sounds like a fun language that is probably a little clearer than toki pona or en-x-pona, just because the boundaries between words so clearly separate ontological concepts. I feel like zh-x-pona and ja-x-pona would be capable of the same thing if you throw enough hanzi together though. I wonder if one day we'll know enough about ancient languages that egyptian-x-pona would be possible, or sumerian-x-pona, knowing it doesn't have to be fully as graceful as the original language and only has to be easy to learn in its phonetic form. as far as I'm concerned only the spoken language has to be simple while the writing can be hieroglyphs if that somehow makes the words distinct and the meaning clearer.
-</li></ol>
+One motivation for this language is that people have complained about toki pona not being able to change and add new words. When toki pona is turned into a writing exercise instead of its own named language, this is no longer a problem because any particular writer can simply pick the exact set of words that are the most useful. There are approximately two rules: almost all the words should be common words, and the words should be chosen as if the text is novel-length and it's important to pick as versatile of words as possible. Apart from that, proper names are allowed, and jargon words can be used sparingly only if they have been defined in the same text. Some particles and grammar patterns may not count toward the total number of words, at least for the purposes of remaining under 120 words, but you must be able to demonstrate that they can be found in an introductory language textbook.
+=== Toki pona but with German ===
+When writing in <code>de-x-pona</code> it is acceptable to smash words together into giant compound words as long as each of the compound words is defined in the same text. Each of these compound words is assumed to have no meaning until it has been defined.
+=== Toki pona but with Egyptian ===
+Given that the rules of this language are not fully fixed to the standard rules of the base language and the point is instead to create a simplified language, it would theoretically be possible to take an ancient language with a great amount of information recovered about it and simply start writing in a "pona" version of that language. In a case like this, the writing system does not have to be especially easy to remember as long as the spoken representation of the sentence is appropriately simple. As long as there is a small number of words and it does not take long to learn the spoken grammar it is perfectly acceptable to write sentences in hieroglyphs, especially if using some kind of elaborate writing system somehow makes the meaning of a statement clearer.
 [[Category:Constructed languages ontology]]