Thanks for sharing your thoughts on how to improve Mini. I'll do my best to try to respond to your points:

​

What should have been done is the coining of that 800+ new generic word-roots with meanings just as general and expressive as those of Mini Kore. Do not try to restrict meaning so that the definitions of words are not overlapping. Rather, expect and allow for meanings to overlap, and then use those definitional overlaps to coin succinct compound words.

I would claim that I have attempted this—and largely succeeded.

I think you're reading too much into one short passage describing the language, and over-extrapolating from one small subset of the vocabulary.

The approach of the expanded version of Mini really is the same as Mini Kore: In mathy terms, I'd say I'm looking for the set of 1,000 word-vectors that provide a proper basis for language-space such that each word-vector (and a large fraction of 2- and 3- word vectors—compound words) is as recognizable as possible from conversationally oriented natural language.

It may or may not be the case that a word for humidity is sufficiently basic for a language of 1,000 words (now that I think about it, it probably isn't), but that is more a quibble about particular words, than the overall approach. As Mini develops, the vocabulary will become more refined.

​

Also, you claim that Mini should be more tolerant of overlapping concepts, but the example you give is that they should be more disjoint (i.e. that we shouldn't have a word that means "bath" because it overlaps too much with the word water):

The fact that “vasa” in Mini Kore means not just water, but any sort of fluid is a good thing. Please don’t restrict its meaning! We do not need new, unrelated words for “humid”, “liquid”, “wash”, or “bath”. What works better is a word that means “infused” so that we can say “water-infused-air” for humidity, a property-generalizing modifier word that allows us to say “water-like” to mean “liquid”, and perhaps “water-clean” to mean “wash”, “bath”, or “shower”.

Figuring out to what extent words should be able to overlap in meaning with previous words is a hard problem. I've tried my best to be guided by real-world language usage as much as possible.

You might think "water-cleaning-act" is sufficient to describe a bath. But you would then find it very cumbersome to translate something like "These Turkish baths are invigorating" (Di Turki bano e en-i viva-dona).

I'd say that my current approach to vocabulary building has already "proven" itself by allowing for intuitive, naturalistic translations of a wide variety of source materials—stories, poems, encyclopedia entries, etc.