This is a complicated question that linguists have broken down into smaller, more specific questions. I'm not a linguist though, so I can't tell you the ins and the outs of the various aspects of those discussions. But, I can give a good example (I think). Since we're all familiar with English, have you ever noticed how specific the language is in regard to time? When speaking or writing English, it is generally clear when things are occurring. For example, I am now using the present progressive and simple present to express my thoughts. We also regularly construct sentences like, "I would have brought her lunch but I remembered her telling me that she would be going out for lunch with her boss". Yes, this is entirely possible in other languages, but kind of difficult (no matter what the language) and perhaps might phrased more along the lines of, "I did not bring her lunch. Earlier, she told me she would go out to eat with her boss" which serves the same general purpose, but does not convey the idea of intent, the conditional nature of that intent, nor the idea of the future from a past perspective. Language is inherently limited and imperfect. Perfect communication might be something like telepathy, where the exact meaning and feelings attached to meaning are flawlessly received and broadcast, but as things stand, that's not what we're working with. Notice how in English, it's entirely normal to ask someone to clarify what they mean, either in conversations in person, or in exchanges of text as in e-mail.
If you haven't already, I really urge you to listen to this Radiolab episode about a man who tried to make a language that would make perfect, symbolic language (5 minutes in, but the opening story is amazing as well). Amazing episode which sold me on Radiolab.
The following is a small selection of links relevant to Blissymbolics: http://www.blissym.com/ http://www.blissymbolics.org/ http://www.blissymbolics.us/
That was fantastic and sad. And beautiful in a way. I wonder if Bliss ever tried to convey his ideas to Shirley McNaughton using the Bliss symbols. I've done some work grading state standardized tests for children with disabilities and never seen Bliss symbols, though I'm American and as that episode of Radiolab mentions, Bliss symbols are mostly used in Canada and Sweden these days. Instead, children who have difficulty communicating use either American Sign Language captured on video or indicate their responses using Mayer-Johnson symbols like these: I think in some sense, Bliss was right to be angry. Sign languages tend not to be mutually intelligible, so not only are native ASL (which is not an analog of English, but a distinct language with its own grammar and vocabulary) speakers isolated from other Americans, but from other native sign language speakers from other countries or other sign languages within the country like the Martha's Vineyard Sign Language which went extinct in 1952. A universal language would be hard to maintain though, as languages adapt to what the speakers do in their everyday lives. For example, in many Asian languages, there are words for the many different types of rice and even words related to rice planting, production and culinary preparation while in English, those words do not exist, though they can be described. The fact that Bliss' interest was not in a spoken language, but rather a written language is fascinating, though even languages that are only written and not spoken as everyday means of communication, have their quirks too (as in the grammar and construction of phrases, etc.)
This looks cool, thanks for the recommendation! Do you have any recommendations for anything that has to do with neologisms? They're something I've been interested in and playing with for a while and I'd be really interested to get a more scholarly perspective on the topic.