The morphology and syntax of human languages seem to be rather arbitrary, and it is conventional linguistics dogma that they are indeed arbitrary. Is this correct? What about other language-like things -- what about music, for example. Is music a language? If so, is it arbritrary in some way? Arnold Schoenberg obviously thought so, but Leonard Bernstein argued that it isn't arbitrary, and much earlier so did Pythagoras. What about mathematics? Much of it (far too much of it) seems very arbitrary, but people who do research into the foundations of mathematics, and especially category theorists, sometime argue that it is not. But what about mathematical notation? That must surely be arbitrary, don't you think. Most of it, anyway. Except for the actual keywords the languages use, both Scheme and Prolog don't seem very arbitrary, and apparently the theorem-prover-oriented language ML has nice mathematical properties that are provably correct. Some library classification schemes like the Dewey Decimal System were quite non-arbitrary in initial conception, except for the fundamental choice of 10 basic topics. The Dewey Decimal System, as originally planned by Melvil Dewey was intended to be what we now call FRACTAL, since it is (or was) based on self-similarity. A new candidate for a non-arbitrary language, currently have under-construction,is a language composed ENTIRELY of acronyms. This new NonArbitraryLanguages mailing list will discuss all of this, share and compare research, and distribute free and open-source software tools for doing this research.