Bring4th

This post (written Purethought English); Purethought English (is written simply); It (is easily understood).

Rules (of Purethought English):

Purethought English (negates most grammar); It (follows only this):

Each sentence (only two parts): A thing (is first part); And a definition (parenthetical second part). A thing (is inherently defined); A definition (further defines thing). A thing (always comes first); definition (always comes second). Each thing, definition (never greater three); Sentence's words (never greater six).

Vocabulary, spelling, punctuation (is not restricted); Parentheses for definitions (are preferred). Sentences (should be understandable). Be (creative); And do (what you want).

(CC-BY-SA) 2014 Humanity

"This is stupid" [ Purethought English @ (CC-BY-SA) 2014 Humanity ] !

True communication is expressed through rhythm, timing and breaks. See, the words used do no matter as much, but how we release the silence in between them.

Are you becoming an animal?

Our ancestors (are animals); The universe (is an animal). The universe (is detached); Non-sentient animals (are detached). We (are attached animals); Rationality, intelligence (is simply attachment).

Animals are authentic , yet unconscious , Men are fake and conscious, to become "Purethought Engrish" is to become authentic and conscious at the same time. It seems to me as if you just want to become a Cyborg Monkey, the first on planet earth and while that's interesting, it's also very silly and the main reason we cannot take you seriously and come on, you want us to take you seriously , bro.

Writing a Sci-Fi book might be more fulfilling than trying to change the English language.

Farewell and Namaste mAdafuka

I (not taken seriously); That (has been accepted).

So, you're gonna speak like that from now on, huh? Well, when wee see each other again I would love to see you draw parenthesis in the air and do the robot dance with me

Arbitrary, complex, contrived, counter-intuitive.

I (insert Borg joke); Resistance (is futile); All your ships (belong to us).

People dislike it (then no). In real life (don't expect purethought); Too difficult (in speech).

---

(07-07-2014, 02:02 AM)vervex Wrote: [ -> ]Arbitrary, complex, contrived, counter-intuitive.

I (insert Borg joke); Resistance (is futile); All your ships (belong to us).

That (is the spirit)!

Experiment (will be dropped); Approximate duration remaining (is 24 hours). I (look forward to) - ERROR - MORE WORDS (CANNOT BE ENTERED)!

Approximate hour duration (24 remaining)*

Until She Insists You Only Use All Sound Yam Not Troublesome And Xenomorphic.

or in my own language:

US I YOU A SYNTAX

Dafuq did I (just read).

Am I (doing it right?)

Dafuq (did I read)?*

Last sentence (yes). First part sentence (nearly arbitrarily selected); Just see (what being defined); Separate (from definition). First part (not properly subject); Second part (not properly predicate); Just things (being defined).

Ok, I (understand); I (think).

(07-07-2014, 10:47 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Dafuq (did I read)?*

Last sentence (yes). First part sentence (nearly arbitrarily selected); Just see (what being defined); Separate (from definition). First part (not properly subject); Second part (not properly predicate); Just things (being defined).

Sweet.
Convoluted.
Funny.
Use?

I think it's interesting that we're in a time of human development where we can now look at something like language and examine it on a new basis of what is more practical, logical, allows us to communicate in better ways, and theoretically implement a new kind of language. I say theoretically because I don't think we're anywhere close to being able to implement a change like this.

For example, the makeup of the QWERTY keyboard is supposedly somewhat arbitrary, much like language. The keys are where they are only because it was the best way that typewriter makers could come up with at a time in a way that would not cause the keys to get jammed.

But now, we have the ability to analyze and examine the usefulness of the QWERTY keyboard based on various factors, mainly efficiency. I saw an article describe what researchers had determined to be "the most efficient" keyboard they could develop based on finger movements, frequency of letter used, and other such factors. This would allow people to type faster with less error and create more efficient communication through typing.

But can you imagine actually implementing a new keyboard layout, despite the fact that it can be proven that it is better? Perhaps we humans, as a collective, will one day be at a stage of development where we are much more willing to accept changes based on objective analysis of older systems. But I don't think it will be very soon.

What is the purpose of Purethought English? How is it supposed to be implemented? What is the logic behind its structure? How is it a more effective way of communicating? How did you develop it? Where did you get the idea?

(07-07-2014, 10:47 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Dafuq (did I read)?*

Last sentence (yes). First part sentence (nearly arbitrarily selected); Just see (what being defined); Separate (from definition). First part (not properly subject); Second part (not properly predicate); Just things (being defined).

Are you a troll? Or a government agent?

(07-07-2014, 02:09 PM)Bring4th_Austin Wrote: [ -> ]...What is the purpose of Purethought English? How is it supposed to be implemented? What is the logic behind its structure? How is it a more effective way of communicating? How did you develop it? Where did you get the idea?

The purpose (purification of thought); Implementation of language (translation of works); I (will translate Aristotle). Translate (other books additionally). Will enable (understanding complex writing).

Logic (subject-predicate inspired); Core concept (main topic defined); Each parentheses (defines main topic); Establishes (linear context). Effectiveness (only judged subjectively).

Developed (by great meditation); Contemplation (The Choice archetype).

Inevitably (greatly simplified language); Possibly sentences (one, two words). Inevitably (enables instant pseudotelepathy).

Start of sentence (input); End of sentence (output); 1 (and 0).

Summarily: Complex arguments (linear, clearly defined); Thought (automatically organized, clarified).

---

Input (Output); 1(0).

Purethought (lost in translation)
defined (no longer pure)
this is (as it should be)
interconnected (spectrum of reality)

Once you are done translating some Aristotle, it would be neat to do a sort of study - find a group of people who have not read Aristotle and then give half the Purethought version, half the popular English translation, and then find a way to judge their comprehension.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will do this.