Should it suit you I'm going to try to write here regularly on the thirteenth, assuming I have thoughts to say which might be of interest. If not just say so, but I believe both of us prefer a slower correspondents, and hopefully in such a format I can better hold up my end of the conversation. Considering the length of this post feel free to ignore any of my questions you feel unworthy.
A criticism of the Elision idea has been influencing which ideas others can express.
I'll attempt to avoid this in the future. It's always better to derive critique from the primary source anyway.
I recently learned one way women in a play would ask nicely for things is to say __amābō__ (I will love (thee)); that's such a complex idea expressed in just one word, and it's beautiful.
I agree, that is beautiful.
I'm increasingly able to translate basic thoughts into Latin sentences, and I'm continually trying more; I've not been reading my book daily, and my progress is pathetic currently, but thinking about it constantly has left me without issue in remembering the declension and conjugation tables, which I recall struggling with in my formal schooling.
I've been meaning to practice sentence diagramming some more to reinforce memory in a similar fashion. While I enjoy practicing it, I suspect not as much as you enjoy Latin.
MALUM SINE NŌMINE (evil without name)
This sounds nice.
MIHI MULTĪ SERVĪ SUNT (To me, many slaves are. / I have many slaves.)
I take it from your translation that this isn't even grammatically consistent. Meaning MULTĪ isn't an indefinite pronoun of quantity in the nominative and SERVĪ isn't in the accusative. Were this the case the grammar would then literally be of the form: "Many are me slaves." as if spoken by a pirate or a celt. I don't particularly like this but I suppose natural languages are organic, and it's good to be able to understand their complexities fully.
There are one thousand dogs but thousands of dogs; interestingly, mīlle is a normal number, but mīlia accepts a genetive plural word, which can be translated as a possessive or with of.
I wonder if the lack of the article unlike "some of the dogs" is due to this same inheritance.
It's returning, although I believe part of it may be my back, and I've made an appointment for this; I believe the pain is different, not being in my hand and wrist, but rather between parts of my forearm and shoulder; I still need to find a suitable speech or sound recognition program I may use.
I read in the logs that you saw the doctor already. Did he indicate a prognosis? I assume you're put off by the complexity of most speech recognition systems.
I'm not particularly good at this aspect of English, either, but learning Latin has helped; most language terms are from Latin.
It's natural to avoid grammar when speaking our native tongue, it's so ingrained (or at least is assumed to be) that there is no reason to consciously think of it (perhaps this is repetition, I can't recall). I still do plan to learn a language to help with this, but I've made virtually no progress in A New English Grammar. I do have some Latin resources collected and it is tempting to learn it now rather than later because you've gained so much, and because there are many people to speak it to. Then again I can be rather stubborn so I may continue the current course.
APL is like Forth, in that once an unknown function be used, and the shape and other data characteristics be unknown, it becomes largely incomprehensible.
That's unsurprising, I'm going to continue to put this off for now.
I'm fine. Don't worry about me.
I even wrote a goodbye letter, believe it or not. My thinking has been slightly peculiar recently.
Related to Serpent, it's odd to me that the user-interface to Pest, which seems rather clearly as if it should be a server protocol, was standardized. At most the IRC interface should have been an optional extension to the standard, even better would be to just have it be part of an example implementation. Your approach to eschewing the arbitrary backwards compatibility in the interface is obviously correct.
I've been intending to implement another language in Lisp, all this year, and still haven't done anything but design and obsess over it so far, because its small core is an unusual algorithm to me, and I was taken in several directions by it, wanting to have nice internals, a nice extension interface, efficiency, and wanting to extend the language in pleasant ways, but this is clearly unreasonable for me to attempt at a first try.
Well, I look forward to this. A healthy obsession to have I imagine.
I know Lisp isn't the best programming language, but I still have something planned I'd like to play with regarding it. The common programming tools are pathetic, and the tools commonly used for Lisp are pathetic.
I agree that existing tooling is bad. I haven't seriously studied many languages outside of the lisp family, my only recurring, and passing question concerning programming languages is: what sort of assumptions and mathematics would allow one to solve the programming language problem. I have no insight to make progress on such a question however. This hasn't always been the case, and I may return to my old interest in the future as I'm forced into more restrictive and less well specified languages.