| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Whenever you search in PBworks, Dokkio Sidebar (from the makers of PBworks) will run the same search in your Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, Gmail, and Slack. Now you can find what you're looking for wherever it lives. Try Dokkio Sidebar for free.

View
 

Conscional , Phenomenoglossa

Page history last edited by Matthew McVeagh 1 year, 7 months ago

Conscional / Phenomenoglossa

 

Matthew McVeagh | my conlangs

 

A language that expresses everything from the point of view of a person’s consciousness, rather than supposed objective reality.

 

This would, in essence, be a philosophical language – in the sense that it would try to illuminate issues that philosophy discusses.

 

It would be a language aiming to represent experience of things as our consciousnesses have it, rather than an assumed consensual objective reality in 'the world'. Rather than talking directly about things and people having qualities and doing things, it would express the self's awareness of each thing it's aware of - sensory input, memories, thoughts, feelings, imaginings, intentions, one's own being. Anything 'in the world', like other people, physical states and events, can only be referred to as part of sensory experience (e.g. the self seeing something happen) or of imagination, perhaps on the basis of inference or someone else's communication.

 

It would include evidentiality features, but in fact go much further than them. It's almost as though every sentence would start with "I..." or "There is awareness that..." Every sentence would in effect be a statement, as questions and commands involve interactions with and elicitations from other people, which are things that can only be reported on in this language. The grammar would be radically different from 'normal' grammar, even abnormal normal grammar.

 

I don't think this 'conscional' language would be any good for communication, in general. Perhaps a reduced and modified version might be good for clarifying people's individual experiences and take on things, to each other. To break out of groupthink, mainstreamist and normalist assumptions and tendencies. The full-blown version, however, would only be good for allowing individuals to express (not communicate) the inner version of their perception of things, including supposedly objective matters (including, ultimately, maths and science), but where the nesting of all the objective matter is within a subjective and intensional frame, the purpose of which is to remind the user of how ultimately everything expressed and discussed is done from within that individual personal consciousness.

 

Repeated use of the language might well lead a person to become more and more aware of what they're actually directly experiencing, which is the point. By making absolutely explicit the fact that all "in-the-world" issues are only experienced within a frame of inner awareness, this language would force the user to face the fact that they have an individual consciousness and mind, that they are a particular person, and that their experience of external things and other people might not correspond so well to the nature of any external reality – including other people's minds. It might, in other words, help develop Theory of Mind and empathy.

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.