- From: Jon Awbrey <jawbrey@oakland.edu>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:00:04 -0500
- To: Stand Up Ontology <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>, Arisbe <arisbe@stderr.org>, RDF Logic <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>, SemioCom <semiocom@listbot.com>
- CC: Dietrich Fischer <fischer@DARMSTADT.GMD.DE>, Mary Keeler <mkeeler@u.washington.edu>, Christopher Spottiswoode <cms@metaset.co.za>
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤ We Who Are About To Commence Salute You! Since the very idea that KIF might not be the last word in language seems to have stunned everybody into ineffable silence -- save for that Mailer Daemon on Jim's account! -- I see it as fit to expand on my remarks. I try to be polite about other peoples' languages, especially if I see that they have some dedication to them, or envestment in them, of a sort that would render them feeling naked without them. When it comes to a natural language, there is no sense criticizing it: the dead ones are fixed and pinned in the albums of history and the quick ones will go where they wilt, just as they will. But when it comes to an artificial language, the expectation must be that it will change or die -- I have not kept count of those that I have seen come and go, but, then, I have no wish to speculate on those that are about to die -- and so we must be nimble if we are to be quick, and my only wish is to help with that! Permit me to interject a self-misquotation: | What It Bides And What It Bodes That Maintaining Bodies Maintain What They Do: | The Inertial Momentum Earnestly (TIME) The Original Momentum Evidently (TOME). | | http://ltsc.ieee.org/logs/suo/msg01225.html | http://ltsc.ieee.org/logs/suo/msg02289.html Do I have to remind everybody of the billions of dollars in international enterprizes that have been wasted when this or that space probe crashed and burned on account of the minor "circumstance of syntax" (COS) that our mortal COI's of engineers and physicists happened to be using different systems of measurement, and were blithely oblivious to the fact!? Opportunely, an artificial language, if its "Mantaining Body" is animated, awake, or aware enough, is able to adapt almost yarely to the advancing circumstances of time and technology. Thus, I account it as my bound obligation and my sacred duty to keep on probing, to keep on probating, to keep on proving and trying to improve this "artful dodge about fate & nature" that we augur as the ongoing synthesis of language and logic and that we plan, one day soon, or not, to take as our craft. Now, all of this renders it just a little bit difficult to critically reflect on any of our crafted languages that is ever a work in progress -- if only it keeps crafty enough! -- and that may be seen as a good thing, in a sense, but only up to a point, for if it is designed to constitute nothing more than a shabby trick for escaping its critical testing, then it can only escape into the condition of an acritical constitution, and that is really no ultimate escape at all -- such are the trials of our enterprise, for whomsoever aims at a moving target must navigate these straits of paradox! Till That Time, Jon Awbrey ¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Received on Monday, 29 January 2001 10:13:55 UTC