[HN Gopher] Mini - The Minimal Language
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Mini - The Minimal Language
        
       Author : aethertap
       Score  : 69 points
       Date   : 2023-07-19 16:13 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (minilanguage.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (minilanguage.com)
        
       | bmacho wrote:
       | 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.
       | 
       | https://minilanguage.medium.com/mini-the-minimal-language-3f...
       | 
       | 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?
        
       | abeppu wrote:
       | 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.
       | 
       | 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.
        
         | cjs_ac wrote:
         | Irregular verbs (go/went, and so on) congugate (change
         | according to tense and subject) using rules just like regular
         | verbs, except that they have different rules. The irregular
         | verbs use Germanic conjugations (cf. man/men, child/children)
         | whereas the regular verbs use grammatical constructions from
         | other source languages.
        
           | abeppu wrote:
           | In every language, for every word, there will be some history
           | and source. And one can always declare a "different rule"
           | around exceptional cases ... but that's kind of vacuous, and
           | speakers have to remember which words are subject to a
           | minority "rule", so claiming they aren't "exceptions" seems
           | disingenuous.
           | 
           | But if you look at the words in English for which we have
           | "different rules", and you look at which words in other
           | languages which have "different rules" ... they typically
           | line up with frequency. You'll note that the small list of
           | verbs listed above also happen to be irregular verbs in a lot
           | of languages.
        
         | jonahx wrote:
         | Your general point is a good one but I don't think irregular
         | verbs are the best example of error correcting redundancy, or
         | evolved shortcutting. In most cases they are just a relic of
         | genealogy, and don't serve those purposes:
         | 
         | > Most English irregular verbs are native, derived from verbs
         | that existed in Old English. Nearly all verbs that have been
         | borrowed into the language at a later stage have defaulted to
         | the regular conjugation.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_irregular_verbs#Develo...
        
       | coldblues wrote:
       | I don't think many conlangs will ever succeed because of the
       | relatively huge popularity of Esperanto.
        
       | wilg wrote:
       | Conlangs are fun, but what will probably happen is we will evolve
       | more efficient communication protocols as bandwidth increases via
       | multimedia communication, Neuralink, etc.
        
         | riku_iki wrote:
         | LLMs will talk to each other using embeddings.
        
           | Rhapso wrote:
           | FTR LLM embeddeds are a lot less efficient than ASCII for
           | communication and are likely to stay that way.
        
       | relyks wrote:
       | Interesting, this reminded me of Toki Pona (
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona), but it has different
       | goals (Toki Pona was not intended to be an auxiliary language)
        
       | Conlectus wrote:
       | 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.
       | 
       | That said, Toki Pona's goal is to help clarify thought, whereas
       | this seems to intend to prioritize communication more highly.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona
        
         | hedgehog wrote:
         | There's an extended discussion about the relationship and
         | differences between the two here:
         | https://minilanguage.medium.com/mini-the-minimal-language-3f...
         | 
         | "The spark that led me to create Mini was realizing that a
         | micro-language like TP could actually work: there's no reason
         | in principle a language with a limited word-count couldn't have
         | a simple, complete, and unambiguous grammar alongside a
         | vocabulary based on intelligible word roots designed to handle
         | most aspects of everyday discourse...."
        
         | Y_Y wrote:
         | Though if you speak Spanish and English you'll probably be able
         | to guess most of the words, so you may find it easier to read
         | initially than Toki Pona.
        
       | eggy wrote:
       | 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.
       | 
       | 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.
        
         | zogrodea wrote:
         | I like Arabic's diacritic system which makes pronounciation of
         | a word you've only previously read predictable.
         | 
         | I remember once pronouncing "stoic" as "stoyc" instead of
         | "stow-ik" once in English for example. My limited knowledge of
         | Arabic indicates that one diacritic produces "aah"-like vowels,
         | another produces "ooh"-like vowels and another "iih"-like
         | vowels, and even though some other modifiers come into play
         | later, it's still predictiable how a word is pronounced just
         | from reading it. Would be happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
        
       | nateb2022 wrote:
       | Mini's logo appears to be the M from MIT's logo.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | (2020)
        
         | ChrisArchitect wrote:
         | More writeup from the dev when they did a Show HN:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24386863
        
       | its_ethan wrote:
       | 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?
       | 
       | 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?
        
         | jprogr wrote:
         | Vowels sound a bit more like in Spanish. The dictionary has
         | pronunciations https://jprogr.github.io/buku-name/
        
         | anyaya wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
       | chadams wrote:
       | https://github.com/chadams/mini-lang
        
       | mahoro wrote:
       | I'm excited about the language but it's impossible to google
       | anything about it :(
        
       | roetlich wrote:
       | > The vowels are pronounced like they are in Spanish, Italian,
       | German, and many other languages
       | 
       | ... 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".
       | 
       | > 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!
       | 
       | Not helpful.
        
         | bmacho wrote:
         | > > The vowels are pronounced like they are in Spanish,
         | Italian, German, and many other languages
         | 
         | > ... 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".
         | 
         | I listened all four (UK/US English, German, Italian), and the
         | 'o' in moment sounded the same to me.
        
         | tsuujin wrote:
         | The article doesn't say it, but the pronunciation is identical
         | to Japanese, which I am fond of in general.
         | 
         | In college Japanese class we were taught the phrase "ah, we
         | soon get old" for a, i, u, e, and o respectively. I found it to
         | be simple and satisfying.
        
         | jprogr wrote:
         | I think the best way to see it is like this: vowels like in
         | Spanish and consonants like in English. The Duolingo Stories
         | have pronunciation with a TTS engine
         | https://duostories.org/mini-en and the dictionary has
         | pronunciation with an actual human voice (mine)
         | https://jprogr.github.io/buku-name
        
       | boredumb wrote:
       | Reads like an invalid trying to speak spanish and italian
       | simultaneously
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-19 23:01 UTC)