At the time I didn't know about any other logical languages already in existence, and wouldn't have cared if I had, so Danv t's structure sprang exclusively from the structures of the languages I had examined, which were English, German, French and Latin, together with my theories of mind. Danav n was the result of the first major revision of Danv t, and served to clear up a lot of the weak forms and ambiguous structures which kept Danv t from completely living up to its name. My goal was, basically, to make the language so thoroughly logical and unambiguous that a machine could parse it and instantly work out the structure of each sentence and of each word without knowing the meaning of a single root word, without a single exception that could throw the machine off. And, behold, I succeeded. So, cornered, I finally made a compromise between unambiguity and aesthetics, in that a sentence has to be unambiguous based on the meanings of the individual words, but the words themselves do not need to be of unambiguous composition.
Soft ambiguities are unresolvable and thus fatal for the logical meaning of the sentence.
On the whole Danov n is a significant improvement upon Danav n, though even it is not quite done changing yet. I now use for the logically thorough form, identical to Arov n in all but a few minor aspects, with entirely the same vocabulary and lacking only a handful of naturalistic patterns peculiar to Arov n alone.