LeoMoser([log in to unmask]) skribis:
> My essay, which I believe may have been sent out earlier
> on Auxlang, was not directed at "Esperanto Reform"
> of course.
Nor was it understood as such, nor did I intend to so characterize it.
I have always tended to consider Esperanto especially significant in
regard to planned languages, and thus Esperanto reform as the most
promising path to increased IAL success. I could well be wrong on that,
but then you too could be wrong if you think your completely distinct
and separate language has a greater chance of success. I don't know,
but I continue to be occupied with Esperanto reform nonetheless, and
welcome you to the discussions at http://www.egroups.com/group/esp-novo
if you'd ever like to drop in.
> Some people have misunderstood the intention of this and others
> of my essays, fearing that there was something there that implied
> that some languages were "better" or inherently more beautiful than
> others. An essay in which I mentioned "prestige among languages"
> brought out this response the most. So I plan to revise the texts
> a bit to prevent such misinterpretation.
I don't know whether I'd revise the texts or not, but you may be sure
that in any event people are continually going to be accusing you of
being a misguided perfectionist, that no language is better than any
other, that the language itself doesn't matter, that only sociopolitical
factors count, etc. You can do what you want, but I myself would prefer
that you fulfill your promise of publishing an attractive language. Just as
Paul Bartlett would like to see more of Acadon, I would too. The only thing
you said about it I didn't like was something about a certain irregularity
you were admitting into it for some reason. I don't know that you said what
it was exactly, but I'm an old Esperantic crank and dead set against any
irregularity on principle (if it can be avoided, of course).
> The objective in both activities is the same -- seeking the
> norms that would seem the most familiar, "appropriate,"
> and easy, globally. This is in part subjective.
Yes, but don't forget that an "objectivity of subjectivity" exists,
when you add up everyone's individual subjectivities. The fact that
x percent of a public would strongly prefer y rather than z, e.g.,
is *not* subjective.