IO - The 7-Word Language Beyond Human Comprehension (Cursed Conlang Circus 3 Submission) 

This video has broken into a whole new level of conlanging. These 7 symbols aren't just words; they're the elementary particles of semantic meaning, which have to be combined into atoms and molecules to come anywhere near describing macroscopic objects.

i finally became fluent in this language after 5 days of studying, and now i've been using it for 92 years! thank you, language-making agent

This is beyond 'A'utism, this is 'B'utism. Great video sir

literally language alchemy

As far as "good" goes- you already described what it means for an object to "want" something: "good" seems like a logical extension of that concept

Binary Lambda Calculus is a more general language, but IO seems really fun too

"The Language of Good" fan:🤓 "The Language of Language" Enjoyer:🗿

The tower of babel event was the one that split one single word into these seven.

Fantastic work- but one question. Don’t < and > function more as Syntax than Words themselves? That would reduce the complexity to 5 words with 2 necessary syntactical entities! Edit: An idea, though its introduction would reduce the cursed-ness of the minilang. Representing bracket contents as levels of exponents (shifting words up) would greatly increase readability while removing the bulk of brackets.

your voice is an inexplicable superposition of human and text to speech

This somehow feels like a sequel to Goptjaam, it breaks linguistics at such a fundamental level that it is genuinely impossible for a human to use this. You could probably use IO to communicate to aliens from an alternate dimension or something.

finally! the language version of Assembly!

This is walking one some thin ontological ice. I know it probably isn't meant super seriously but there is indeed room for discussion about your universal assumptions :)

(Insert giant scroll of IO describing all of another universe's objects)

in most kinds of logics, the inexistence of inexistence is the same as existence (one can use double brackets "" so this is unambiguous) this kinda reminds me of when I tried to define "green" using the universal core vocabulary

I am sorry, i’m not going to watch the video right now because it’s too massive but I’ll try to will watch it when I have time, for the first 8 minutes I have been fascinated trying to process all, I just need to tell you that this is not only a cursed conlang, but one of the 5 greatest conlangs created in the 2020s, even in this whole century (2000-2024), I know this is too much text, but congrats! I wish you win

i take this as a direct challenge and i already have the perfect idea for a 6-sememe language that is extremely biased toward reality

I feel like I'm being unprogrammed

If you could get this all the way down to only 4 words you could then use DNA as a writing medium (with each base being a word)

I love the idea, but the video could be 30 minutes shorter without all the "you puny human" jokes Also, at 39:33 , i disagree , as "hi" is like saying "i acknowledge you exist"

Good: the quality that a lifeform wants to be in a world where it exists, rather than a world where it doesn’t exist

Plants: "Know now the light that I will always reject." Me: "So you are green?

I apologize for repeating the "monkey brain" jokes so much, and making thin video, honestly, unnecessarily longer than it should be. This is also a CCC3 submission and I do not actually claim that this language is "the best"; even if you define "the best" the way I did in the video, you can probably make this conlang better. This was originally purely a minilang, not necessarily an interuniversal one, which is why it has stuff like numbers (which aren't required to exist in other realities) and the vague concepts of + and - like representing future and past even though that doesn't make sense at its base. And I know you somehow have to communicate the instructions on how to speak this language to another universe before speaking it, so no, the goal of interuniversality is only half serious and I don't think it can be achived in any way. I am also sorry for saying too much "you would never understand" stuff. Most of the time, i could have explained it; however, that'd make the video even longer if i had to explain every word's function. I do not claim that only i can understand it or anything like that, i too often struggled with translations and had to simplify the final one, but i did attempt to at least somewhat explain the conlang and how it works, with examples partially broken down. I will attempt to avoid leaving it vague and seeming like i just want nobody to understand anything, and try to break down concepts when it's viable.

You can reduce it to 6 words because X is always a subset of I. There is no reason to distinguish between them

I was thinking of something like this the other day. I envisioned a conlang where any people communicating would chain together hypothetical statements (qualified by the specified knowledge/logic system) and a fundamental part of the language would be the ability to "rotate" though an abstract n-dimensional state space. This would have to be described before any statement it would modify, and then some continuous feature (pitch? color?) or a discrete approximation would allow the person to shift/modify/rotate the statement through the "state space of all possible meanings" relative to an agreed upon metric, sort of like a tensor-based language within David Lewis' modal realism. Your conlang is much more meta, and I have no idea how to actually implement mine, but just thought I'd mention it since we seem to be thinking on similar paths lol

Ich bin sehr stolz auf dich 👏 Ich war mit dir in der Bibliothek 📚 Mache weiter viel Erfolg

for the language it, to speak/writing it more easily to have a character than can be used to define a concept or a unit of text as an id and then use the character and its id to have represent the concept or the object (O), will shorten it significantly. it could prevent constant repetition of the full descriptions

55:20 another idea for proper nouns would be to define the Unicode standard (somehow) and then say that it is the string represented by [sequence of codepoints, which are all numbers] in Canonical [Composed/Decomposed, doesn’t matter, but you would have to specify, pick your poison] Form in the Unicode Standard

Thanks for the language! I thought of doing something similar, but dodn't think it'd come around to do it and I have little to no experiences with conlangs, so thanks!

How could you define aesthetic in IO? It's a purely human concept that cannot be defined with numbers, it's like a feeling.

This is an experience.

14:06 technically the word for human is... O

My brain just melted.

This is the OTHER esolang-conlang crossover I never knew I needed after AHL.

this needs it's own unicode characters that are symetrical with each other, and being symetrical it implies there should be a back slash and foward slash, so circle, vertical, horizontal, vertical & horizontal, top-left to lower-right, top-right to lower-left, top-left to lower-right & top-right to lower-left, and brackets. slashes could be like superparens, ditto marks, and, or, (i suppose you could just use nand), i dunno

i am going to beam this video into my brain at 2x speed and become one with the universe

Don't tell me this is brainfuck for language

Didnt get to see the whole video, but I'd be interested in the transcript of this video in IO :")

I see no problem with this conlang's perceived limitations, as perception is equivalent to reality, thus making this truly a language of all things. To put it more simply, reality is fundamentally a product of the perception that creates it, as reality must exist as a framework for understanding. Existence can be independent from perception, but must also in some sense therefore be independent from reality. But no being can ever be outside of existence, as to be is to exist, and if one exists one cannot not exist.

TBWTC MENTIONED

funny enough, there's also AHL, a human language

Easier translation for "friend" could be explained with the etymological origin for "faith" which is latin "fides" to describe a promise between people, in beneficial or negative "faith/fides".

You forgot to include every atom in the universe.

You should double check your video editing. Your voice lines very often overlap with each other.

Cough* lisp *cough

You could actually describe up and down i think, you would have to describe a direction first, but that is easy: it is just the object that is a change in the context of "posistion" regarding a change forward in time going from one object to another object. Then you would describe up as the object that an object, the "ground", has as a "direction" towards antother object, the "observer" And ground and observer change depening on contexts.

Isn't it a little biased that you assumed 1 temporal dimension

31:57 Counterpoint: The topological description of the normal vector on a surface is close enough to the idea of "up" that I'd say it's good enough at a planetary scale. Sure it's not the exact direction that gravity pulls in, but I think it is the direction most people mean when they say "up".

this makes no god damn sense to my monkey brain, 10/10

I think it would be better to use reality-biased words (human, time, water, fire) and build up the abstract concepts from these words

How would you define a scalar?

I want an llm that uses it for CoT

Ok, but there were typos in the English... so how much or the Io is wrong?

Shitpost of 2024 award goes to you!

I don't think this is useful. Maybe I'm missing something. What is a "good" conlang, exactly? Like, I get that it's not intended to be practical for humans to communicate ideas, but what _are_ you supposed to be able to do with it? What is the minimum functionality you need to earn the "lang" suffix? I don't understand how you can convey anything specific with this. Like, in every example you give, you can't translate back unambiguously. Real statements about reality _clearly_ do not have a one-to-one map to IO. "To the left of", for example, is indistinguishable from "before", which is also pretty much "smaller than". You can't interpret this. It loses tons of information.

this whole video was just an excuse to shit on toki pona wasn't it

iltam zumra rašubti ilatim

8:45 Bulgaria mentioned 🇧🇬 🗣️ 🗣️ 🔥

i think consistent syntax and grammar is cringe, you can't pronounce it so it's worthless to have consistent syntax and grammar across different "speakers"

Unpractical and Pointless

0:59 Technically, the smallest language is Unary. But good luck writing anything with it!

Ok almost halfway through, would've enjoyed the video if I didn't have to sit through "you mortal monkey brain on rock have monkey brain and are mortal cannot comprehend uncomprehendable universe is incomprehensible" every 2 seconds

7 is a nice number, 7 is the number of days in the week 7 is the number of the universe this language looks like it was inspired by computer language like brainfudge not the human one, or the language of god and I guessed it correctly.. and you use marker 4:02 toki pono 💀 tan seme? bro 10 minutes into the video I got enlightened, and now I can see reality as it is.. thank you sensei

33:38 Energy's description should have a - somewhere, opposing to Matter's description. They are the same thing, only one is occupying space-time and the other is not.