Zompist Bboard Again

I really like Toki Pona. It's one of the few conlangs I've ever bothered to learn and use on a regular basis. But there is something about it that bothers me.

Let’s say I want to write a shopping list for someone. I need four zucchini. I check my Toki Pona dictionary, and find root number twenty seven, kili, which stands in for any fruit or vegetable. Of course, I need to specify zucchini, so I keep searching, but alas and alack, there is no official translation. Many speakers of Toki Pona would say that’s the point. It would defeat the purpose of having only a hundred and twenty roots if compounds were their own lexical unit, so only the basic roots are official words with unpredictable or arbitrary meanings, and all other combinations are logically derived. This means that there is no “name” for any specific vegetable. Every attempt to differentiate them is an ad hoc description. In practice, this is clearly not true, as some customary combinations are understood as belonging to a specific type of produce. Therefore, I couldn’t write kili palisa laso, “long green fruit,” as that would be understood as “cucumber.” Besides the hypocrisy, there are obvious pitfalls of comprehension. Kili loje, “red fruit,” is apple. Never mind the fact that most apples aren’t red. But strawberries are kili loje lili, “small red fruit.” So if I write “strawberry” on the shopping list, will I get tiny apples? The worst is cherries, which are often described as kili loje tu or kili lili tu, literally “two red/small fruit,” which clearly refers to the customary clip art of a pair of cherries rather than any actual product for sale in a store. Many fruit are described based on their color, which makes it pretty difficult to ask for green bananas or yellow limes. And no distinction is made between fruit and vegetables, so you may think you’re asking for a tomato, but receive a persimmon instead. Without official lexical entries for each item (and consequently “incorrect” combinations that are not allowed), it is nearly impossible to make yourself understood.

That’s fruit, but imagine the consequences in other fields. A safety manual in Toki Pona would be downright dangerous. Does seli pi tenpo ike mean “warning light” or “catastrophic fire?” Do we expect technical writers to ad-lib terms for “gasket,” “operating system,” and “emergency?” Sure, these are not situations where anyone is really trying to use Toki Pona. But this is by far the most successful conlang for actual day to day communication invented in the last hundred years. Its syntax is conducive to borrowing, and it already has a dedicated user base. Toki Pona, of all conlangs, is in a great position to absorb new terms and become a functional international language. The only obstacle is the artlang premise that revolves around a paucity of unique lexical items. Maybe we could create a two-tier system. The original 120 roots should theoretically be all you need to start using Toki Pona, and then there is a semi-official corpus of borrowings that are unregulated but freely used in specialized situations.

Is it just me? Does anyone else wish Toki Pona could become less of a personal thought experiment and start borrowing new words?

Well, my understanding is that Toki Pona was created as an experiment, to see if a completely oligosynthetic language could work in practice. As you’ve discovered, yes it can… but only through lexicalisation of compounds, which means that actual Toki Pona is no longer 100% oligosynthetic. Either way, borrowings would completely defeat the purpose of transparency of all compounds.

(Disclaimer: I’ve never used Toki Pona, and know nothing about it apart from its motivation and what you’ve said in your post.)

I'm not sure who you're clashing with (Sonja herself? a Toki Pona forum somewhere?) but my guess would be that this struggle would be like trying to convince an Esperantist that Esperanto is not the ideal and only possible auxlang. The simplicity of Toki Pona is a large part of its charm, and having a thousand-term technical vocabulary would be to admit that the 120-words-max concept is limiting.

To only barely expand on what Zomp is saying...TP is - for some - the pinnacle of what a conlang is supposed to be, but for others, it's a silly little project. I can honestly say that I gave TP a chance, but I find its limitations to be less than appealing. It's not meant to be the best conlang out there, and I think Sonja would readily acknowledge that. Most of the TPists I've come across are willing to admit that it's not for everyone, but that it appeals to as large an audience as it does speaks to its design and it achieving its goals.

I think, most of the time, if a project accomplishes, or practically accomplishes, its stated goals, then I can respect its creator and fans, without worrying too much about whether I appreciate the actual language. If, however, like Esperanto, it fails to achieve its aspirations (and here I mean to be apolitical/acultural) then I feel almost invited to poke fun at the work.

Having recently bought and read both of the official Toki Pona books, I think that the language readily meets its stated goals. This passage might help, from page 11 (the section titled "Limitations"):

Toki Pona has a rather narrow range of functions. Although it is very easy to meditate and communicate honest thoughts and everyday activities in Toki Pona, it is impossible to translate a chemical tectbook or legal document in the language without significant losses. Such texts are products of the complex, modern civilization we live in and are not suited for a cute, little language like Toki Pona. ... [it] does not strive to convey every single facet and nuance of human communication.

Someone I spoke with in the community some time ago said something along the lines of "it is often that learning to understand someone in Toki Pona is an effort in understanding who the person speaking to you is, as much as it is parsing the individual words" -- which to me, sums up the draw I have to the language, at least.