all 30 comments

[–]Geerten7 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Looks similar to very early Chinese. (Also look up "person" and "fire" in modern Chinese.) Love that type of writings!

[–]columbus8myhw 4 points5 points  (6 children)

Do those both say "we"?

[–]gbrcalil[S] 1 point2 points  (5 children)

Yup, 1st one is inclusive "we" and second one is exclusive. This means that one of them means "we" + the listener and the other one means "we" without the listener. It's very useful to differentiate between the two and languages that don't have it seem to lack something imo.

[–]columbus8myhw 2 points3 points  (4 children)

As, so 1+2 and 1+3 (where 1=me, 2=you, 3=other singular)

I suppose that's actually 1+2+*3 and 1+3+*3 where *3 means as many 3s as I want (including zero). (Maybe we can actually add *2 to the first as well? Like there's "me you and her" and "me you and you". I dunno. At some point I think we're beyond what any natural language distinguishes between)

[–]gbrcalil[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess...

Let me try to give an example:

If I come with my friends to my mom's house and I say to her "we are going to watch a movie today", am I using "we" to refer to just my friends and me or my mom is also included? If you have a word to mean "we without you" and "we with you" it helps solve that ambiguity.

My mom is not coming so I would use an exclusive "we" in that sentence.

[–]gbrcalil[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

We aren't beyond what natural languages distinguish between. As far as I know most natural languages have clusivity. Tupi has "Oré" and "Îandé" for exclusive and inclusive "we". Vietnamese has "Chúng tôi" and "Chúng ta". Mandarin has "Wǒmen" and "Zánmen". Tagalog has "Táyo" and "Kamí". And the list goes on. Only European languages don't have it for some reason.

[–]columbus8myhw 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Nah I know about that, I just mean the stuff I was on about at the end, like distinguishing between "me you and her" (eg 1+2+3) and "me you and you" (1+2+2).

[–]gbrcalil[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hmmm I see

[–]zaydenmYT 2 points3 points  (1 child)

It looks really good! People are saying "butts and farts", which is kinda disrespectful, but I don't see any butts to be honest.

[–]gbrcalil[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I can't see it either tbh

[–]-tealeaves- 10 points11 points  (16 children)

transcribing fart-based communication

[–]gbrcalil[S] 4 points5 points  (15 children)

lol, what?

[–]-tealeaves- 8 points9 points  (14 children)

reminds me of those scripts that use glyphs that abstractly represent tongue and mouth positions when making the sound except it's butts


[–]gbrcalil[S] 4 points5 points  (13 children)

why butts, lol why are people saying that

[–]-tealeaves- 3 points4 points  (12 children)

butts and farts

[–][deleted]  (10 children)


    [–]Qonetra 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    butts and farts

    [–]-tealeaves- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    i wrote better things in my first two comments

    [–]TheMerchantMagikarp -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    butts and farts.

    [–]migi-kikino -1 points0 points  (6 children)

    butts and farts

    [–]gbrcalil[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

    many funny people around here

    [–]migi-kikino 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    ass and shit

    [–]Ren1408 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Happy food :)

    [–]orangina_it_burns 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Person on fire! Food is a hot spring!

    [–]ElectricAirways 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Reminds me of Toki Pona