With Jabber, the representational meaning is obvious; this is an engine that signifies the malleability of the English language by using physics to form random letters into strings of nonsense (and less often, real) words that could potentially (read: phonically) see regular use as a member of the language. This word engine speaks to the random and often quizzical nature of our language, as well as exhibiting a type of chemistry, where certain fragments can connect to form a plausible string, while others will disintegrate after a few moments.
What Jabber says evocatively, however, is less concrete. It seems to raise questions about how our language is added to or amended, as when literary characters become adjectives or ideas based on their written personae. Jabber also seems to play on the evolution of language itself, as with slang or colloquialisms we begin to hear and read more and more words that don’t exactly make any sense within their context; how can 30 inch rims be “ballin'” or new sneakers be “fresh” or “dope”. While Jabber affirms this sort of nonsensical usage by providing an engine through which strange words can be formed and documented, it also hinders its own evolution by the creator imposed algorithms that make certain strings of letters impossible to form.
While some form of regulations is necessary, so that all of the letters don’t simply clash together and form some ultimate nonsensical language pangaea, to truly push the evolution of language you need to relax some of the phonetic and pronunciational guidelines. While this might be analogous to expecting a bear to grow wings, i’m of the opinion that the English language has always been about nonsense rules and complexity, so why not throw in a few more.
“X” before “D” and “Z” after “K”, let the Jabber engine lead the way.