<p>Humans in such kind of situation devolop a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pidgin" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Pidgin</a> specifically for trade. It is arguably easy not only for humans but also for robots: no complicated ingredients in syntax nor morphology, and also usually a simple phonology.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-25T21:56:44.850Z
Interesting point. Robots which are able to produce any sound would probably not have to worry much about phonology and could just produce sequences of beeps, but they would stick to the sounds pronounceable by the people they trade with.
Domino
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-23T19:59:21.213Z
2019-03-23T19:59:21.213Z
Sir Cornflakes
<p>How about Polynesian languages? The people travelled far distances, their culture was very spread out, and they don't really have a country that 'owns' the language.</p>

<p>A further positive aspect is that you can pick up basic Hawai'ian on Duolingo; this quickly gives you a feel for the language. It's VSO, so sounds unusual enough to Western cultures who are more used to SVO. It would also be very plausible for machines who might process knowledge in predicate calculus (as in <code>eats(cow, grass)</code>).</p>

<p>The vocabulary has a strong English influence, due to the colonialisation by the Americans, who made teaching the language illegal, but you will probably adapt that anyway to choose your own words.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-23T19:54:04.547Z
Thanks, I’m going to look at their culture as well as their history and add Yiddish vocabulary as well
The Jaunty Fool
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-18T09:25:46.410Z
2019-03-18T09:25:46.410Z
Oliver Mason
<p>I've created a race of nomadic robots, but am having trouble finding a culture to base their language off of. They're peripatetic nomads, meaning they travel around offering goods and services to any friendly people they come across, but most nomadic peoples of this style either use the languages of their country, or the language is too fluid and natural to be suited for machines. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-18T16:00:41.653Z
Are you seeking a natural language basis? Otherwise, languages like ROILA or Lojban might be better suited, as they are already intended to be machine-recognizable languages.
Cecilia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-18T23:28:30.880Z
Hello and welcome to the site. Unfortunately this question in its current form isn't a good fit for the site. We like questions to be specific and, if possible, objectively answerable. In principle you could base a robotic language off any human language and culture.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-18T23:28:34.860Z
Could you [edit] this question to give a lot more detail, to explain what you mean by basing a language off their culture (are you thinking in terms of the vocabulary needed for a nomadic culture?), and to explain more why the nomads you've considered are not good options for you? What does it mean for a language to be "too fluid and natural" for machines?
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-19T09:14:14.940Z
I think this is a perfectly valid question, asking for inspiration to  kick-start developing a conlang. Not all questions are directly about the shape of a language, see eg this one: https://conlang.stackexchange.com/questions/119/how-does-the-wedei-language-reflect-their-cultural-focus-on-government?rq=1
Oliver Mason
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-20T04:06:05.437Z
@OliverMason That question is much more specific and doesn't really have much in common with this question IMO. As I wrote above, there's lots of scope for improvement with this question, so I hope it will be edited soon.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-03-25T21:59:19.370Z
You'd have to be more precise about how human-like your robots are at the very least. Technically, a robot's language could be similar to the TCP protocol for all we know, and transmitted as a sequence of beeps.
Domino
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-06-20T10:20:22.540Z
@curiousdannii Since this question was already closed and reopened (see [revision history](https://conlang.stackexchange.com/posts/908/revisions)), I think it's better not to close it twice unilaterally
b a
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-06-20T11:24:42.230Z
@ba The question has not been edited and gives no criteria for answers to be judged by. Any culture is in principle good to base a robotic language off. No argument was made by the reopen voters that it meets the general standards of the Stack Exchange network. I think I was justified in closing it again, but of course any decision like this can be challenged in [Meta].
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-06-20T11:58:35.443Z
@curiousdannii Oliver Mason did make an argument in the comments above (even if you didn't agree). I think that all languages about conlang creation are going to have to be somewhat subjective (though you closed it as "too broad" which doesn't seem to be your reason). And I think that the fact that there are already two answers shows that the question is answerable
b a
<cultural-influence><machine-communication>
Good cultures to base a robotic language off of
# Good cultures to base a robotic language off of

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-03-18)

I've created a race of nomadic robots, but am having trouble finding a culture to base their language off of. They're peripatetic nomads, meaning they travel around offering goods and services to any friendly people they come across, but most nomadic peoples of this style either use the languages of their country, or the language is too fluid and natural to be suited for machines.

**Tags:** cultural-influence, machine-communication

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Are you seeking a natural language basis? Otherwise, languages like ROILA or Lojban might be better suited, as they are already intended to be machine-recognizable languages.  
> **username_2**: Hello and welcome to the site. Unfortunately this question in its current form isn't a good fit for the site. We like questions to be specific and, if possible, objectively answerable. In principle you could base a robotic language off any human language and culture.  
> **username_2**: Could you [edit] this question to give a lot more detail, to explain what you mean by basing a language off their culture (are you thinking in terms of the vocabulary needed for a nomadic culture?), and to explain more why the nomads you've considered are not good options for you? What does it mean for a language to be "too fluid and natural" for machines?  
> **username_3**: I think this is a perfectly valid question, asking for inspiration to  kick-start developing a conlang. Not all questions are directly about the shape of a language, see eg this one: https://conlang.stackexchange.com/questions/119/how-does-the-wedei-language-reflect-their-cultural-focus-on-government?rq=1  
> **username_2**: @OliverMason That question is much more specific and doesn't really have much in common with this question IMO. As I wrote above, there's lots of scope for improvement with this question, so I hope it will be edited soon.  
> **username_4**: You'd have to be more precise about how human-like your robots are at the very least. Technically, a robot's language could be similar to the TCP protocol for all we know, and transmitted as a sequence of beeps.  
> **username_5**: @username_2 Since this question was already closed and reopened (see [revision history](https://conlang.stackexchange.com/posts/908/revisions)), I think it's better not to close it twice unilaterally  
> **username_2**: @ba The question has not been edited and gives no criteria for answers to be judged by. Any culture is in principle good to base a robotic language off. No argument was made by the reopen voters that it meets the general standards of the Stack Exchange network. I think I was justified in closing it again, but of course any decision like this can be challenged in [Meta].  
> **username_5**: @username_2 username_3 did make an argument in the comments above (even if you didn't agree). I think that all languages about conlang creation are going to have to be somewhat subjective (though you closed it as "too broad" which doesn't seem to be your reason). And I think that the fact that there are already two answers shows that the question is answerable  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2019-03-23. Score: 3

Humans in such kind of situation devolop a [Pidgin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pidgin) specifically for trade. It is arguably easy not only for humans but also for robots: no complicated ingredients in syntax nor morphology, and also usually a simple phonology.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: Interesting point. Robots which are able to produce any sound would probably not have to worry much about phonology and could just produce sequences of beeps, but they would stick to the sounds pronounceable by the people they trade with.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-03-18. Score: 2

How about Polynesian languages? The people travelled far distances, their culture was very spread out, and they don't really have a country that 'owns' the language.

A further positive aspect is that you can pick up basic Hawai'ian on Duolingo; this quickly gives you a feel for the language. It's VSO, so sounds unusual enough to Western cultures who are more used to SVO. It would also be very plausible for machines who might process knowledge in predicate calculus (as in `eats(cow, grass)`).

The vocabulary has a strong English influence, due to the colonialisation by the Americans, who made teaching the language illegal, but you will probably adapt that anyway to choose your own words.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks, I’m going to look at their culture as well as their history and add Yiddish vocabulary as well  

---

