LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG Archives

AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG  December 1997, Week 4

AUXLANG December 1997, Week 4

Subject:

Re: The Final Count

From:

STAN MULAIK <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

International Auxiliary Languages <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 26 Dec 1997 18:24:05 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (913 lines)

I'm Stan Mulaik.  I subscribed to AUXLANG over a year ago and dropped
off because I had too many lists and newsgroups to follow.  However,
Don Harlow's recent posting inspires me to pass on the following
information, which will be long. At the end is a paper by Dr. Gode
that bears directly on the topic of this group in many respects. It
will be a valuable source document in any auxiliary language constructor's
files.


>>Date:         Fri, 26 Dec 1997 09:18:38 -0800
>>From: "Donald J. HARLOW" <[log in to unmask]>
>>Subject:      Re: The Final Count
>>To: Multiple recipients of list AUXLANG <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>At 08:12 AM 12/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>>Zarz,
>>>Based on what I personally feel is fairness to all, I am not
>>>recording any further votes to our count. However, if anyone
>>>wishes to keep track of any further votes they may do so.

[snip]


>>
>>>Footnote 2: Someone in NY sent out questionaires to linguists to
>>>get their feedback to words, etc. selected for Interlingua when
>>>it was being developed. Who did that, and who talleyed the
>>>results? The implication is, someone created the language and
>>>then asked others to verify their decisions. Anyone know who did
>>>that?
>>>
>>Here's the scoop as provided by Edo Bernasconi in "Esperanto au^
>>Interlingua?" (La Chaux-de-Fonds: Kultura Centro Esperantista, 1977).
>>Translation errors are my responsibility; factual errors may be laid at
>>Bernasconi's door, if you can find it.
>>
>>---
>>
>>In 1939 the linguistic center of IALA moved from Liverpool to New York.
>>Between 1939 and 1942 the American philologist and Esperantist poet Ezra
>>Clark Stillman filled the office of directory (replacing the linguist
>>Collinson). Alexander Gode was vice-director until 1948.
>>

Stan Mulaik comments:  The General Report of The International Auxiliary
Language Association in 1945 listed Dr. Gode as "Director of Linguistic
Research".  However, the Interlingua-English Dictionary of 1951 says
"During the war years, Dr. Alexander Gode kept the research program going by
assuming the duties of Acting Director in addition to his regular work
as Editor of Reference Books with the T. Y. Crowell Company.  In 1946
IALA brought Dr. Andre Martinet from the Sorbonne to New York and entrusted
him with the direction of of its interlinguistic research. Upon his joining
the faculty of Columbia Univesity in 1948, Dr. Gode assumed full direction
of the work.  In its final form the Dictionary is his conception and his
responsibility. It is the fruit of his and of his staff's exacting
scholarship and patient labor." (IED, p. xiv).


>>According to Gode, it was Stillman who was the first to take steps to work
>>out a methodology to extract the international vocabulary in the form of a
>>prototype vocabulary (1), but only Gode worked it out in full and defended
>>it against proposals of "linguistic compromise". (1)
>>

See below the paper presented by Dr. Alexander Gode to the Modern Language
Association in 1954, where he makes mention of a 500 page manuscript by
Stillman (then Director of Research) and Dr. Gode:

  *
  *The fundamental work on the theory and methodology of Interlingua
  *is unfortunately available only in typescript.  It is a 500-page tome
  *written in 1943 in collaboration with the research staff of the
  *International Auxiliary Language Association by E. Clark Stillman and
  *A. Gode-von Aesch and bears the significant title, "Interlinguistic
  *Standardization, An Objective System for the Normalization of
  *Internationally Current Word-Material Together With a Practical Plan
  *for Its Elaboration Into a Complete Auxiliary Language."

This became the the methodological basis for the work on establishing the
international vocabulary and standardizing it conducted after 1943 and
described in part in the 1945 General Report. Once these principles were
laid down, any competent linguist with training in philology and etymology
could carry out the work, given he/she had adequate reference materials to
work from. What was needed was good etymological dictionaries and an
understanding of the historical development of the respective Romance
languages.


>>Gode's starting point was an a priori position of seeking a Platonic
>>ursprache (though he limited this research to the field of the vocabulary,
>>and did not widen it to the field of morphosyntax). Because of this several
>>friends of Interlingua are of the opinion that their language was inspired
>>by no previous language project (2). This is obviously an error of vision.

The Stillman-Gode proposal for the methodology for establishing the
international vocabulary did not concern a Platonic ursprache. What was
believed to be real was the international vocabulary, atested to by the
similar variant words of similar meanings in numerous languages. You did
not have to invent words to create an auxiliary language.  You simply had
to register and standardize the international vocabulary.  The prototypes
as the basis for standardizing the variant forms of the international
vocabulary is a straightforward linguistic solution to this problem.
Linguists before Gode had been establishing these prototypes as simply
the words from which the modern variants had descended or were derived
(as in the case of borrowings from Neolatin or classical Greek and Latin).
Look up in the Oxford English Dictionary or Webster's Third International
for the prototype forms from which the modern English words are believed
to have been derived. The methods used by linguists to establish prototypes
are well-known, and much of this work had already been done in the preparation
of etymological dictionaries when IALA's research staff began its work.
But it was a brilliant solution to the standardization problem to use the
prototypes, because they are generally the same forms from which the
variants in the Romance Languages and English (or German or Russian) were
derived, simply because the Latin language (in its several forms) was the
common ancestor for most of the modern variants and represented forms
intermediate to the variants that had evolved their separate and idiosyncratic
ways. The prototypes were an objective solution to the standardization problem.

But it works also in the case where one of the base languages, like English,
is the source for words in the other base languages. The English form is
the prototype, and is so included in Interlingua.  Today we can include
"software" in the international vocabulary and Interlingua because it has
been borrowed in that form in most of the base languages.

>>
>>In 1945 there appeared a "General Report" where three experimental
>>languages could be found, constructed according to the principle of
>>greatest direct understandability. One language is perfectly neo-Latin
>>(very similar to today's Interlingua); another is more "modern
>>language"-appearing; the third is partially autonomist. In 1946 IALA
>>undertook an inquiry among the interinguists.

Here's what these variants looked like.  I use a few short sentences taken
from the Report of 1945:

The original English sentences:

"Unity for common action toward common good and against common peril is
the sole effective method by which, in time of peace, the nationas which
love peace can asure for themselves security and orderly progress, with
freedom and justice. In the face of what modern war means to the physical
and moral being of man, the maintenance of such unity is a matter of the
highest and most enlighed self-interest. In the final analysis it is, first
and foremost, a thing of the spirit.

Naturalistic Model:

"Le unitate que permitte de agere in commune pro le bene commune et contra
le periculo commune es le sole methodo effective per que, in tempore de
pace, le nationes que ama le pace, pote mantenere et guarantire securitate
et progresso bene regulate, cum libertate et justitia.  Si nos considera
ille que le guerra moderne significa pro le existentia physic et morale
de le homine, le mantenentia de un tale unitate deveni un questione de le
plus alte et illuminate egoismo.  In ultime analysis iste unitate es
primamente un cosa spirituale."

Schematic E Model (Minimum regularization):

"Le unita' kel permise action comun por le bono comun e contra le periculo
comun es le sole metodo efective per kel, in tempore de pace, le nationes
kel ama le pace pote guarantir se securita' e progreso ben regulate, con
liberita' e justitia.  Si nos considera eso kel le guera moderne
significa por le existentia fisike e moral del home, le manteno de un tal
unita' deveni un question de le plu alte et iluminate egoismo. In ultime
analise este unita' es primemente un cosa spirital."

Schematic K Model (Medium regularization):

"Le uneso kel permise komune akciono por le komune bono et kontra le
komune perikulo es le sole efektive metodo per kel, in temporo de
paco, le nacionos kel ama le paco pote guarantire se bene regulate
sekureso et progreso, kno libereso et justicio. Si nu konsidera ilo kel
le moderne guero signifika por le fisike et morale existo del homo,
le manteno de un tale uneso deveni un questiono de le plu alte et
iluminate egoismo. In ultime analiso, iste uneso es primemen un spiritale
koso."

My translation into current Interlingua of IED. (Actually, as a matter of
style, there are several ways to proceed, but I will stick closely to the
translations of the Naturalistic Model):

  "Le unitate que permitte de ager in commun pro le ben commun e contra
le periculo commun es le sol methodo effective per que, in tempore de
pace, le nationes que ama le pace, pote mantener e garantir le securitate
e le progresso ben regulate, con libertate e justitia.  Si nos considera
lo que le guerra moderne significa pro le existentia physic e moral del
homine, le mantenentia de un tal unitate deveni un question del plus alte
e illuminate egoismo.  In le analyse ultime, iste unitate es primamente
un cosa spiritual."


>>
>>But only in 1947 did IALA send out 3,000 test brochures to people
>>completely outside the interlinguistic movement. In this brochure four
>>experimental language-variants (P, M, C, K) were introduced, of which only
>>two had already been introduced in the "General Report" of 1945 (3). In
>>1948 the results of that inquiry appeared.
>>
>>This brochure contained a text in the four projects, and it was to be
>>immediately decided (at first sight) which was the more attractive.
>>Afterwords came several explanatory pages about their characteristics, and
>>at the end of that text another judgement on the four projects was requested.
>>
>>The 3,000 brochures were sent to the United States, Great Britain, France,
>>Denmark, Czechoslovakia and Chile.
>>
>>-- Variant P (a prototypistic system analogous to Interlingua), very
>>irregular, received 26.6% of the preferences.
>>
>>-- Variant M (a system more "modern-linguistic", between Interlingua and
>>Occidental, but also somewhat irregular) received 37.5% of the preferences.
>>
>>-- Variant C (a "modern-linguistic" system, very similar to Occidental)
>>received 20% of the preferences.
>>
>>-- Variant K (a nearly autonomist system, but less perfect than e.g. Ido)
>>received only 15% of the preferences.
>>
>>So the naturalistic systems in an extreme position (P and M) received 64%
>>of the preferences, while the modern-linguistic planned languages (M and C)
>>received only 57%. This is probably why Gode felt himself given the right
>>to continue his "prototypist" research.
>>
>>Concering the geographical origin of the preferences, we note the following:
>>
>>*In the first ("first-sight") reply*
>>
>>Favorable to M and C: Mainly those from France and the United States
>>Favorable to P: Mainly the British and Czechs/Slovaks
>>Favorable to P and M: mainly the Danes
>>
>>*In the second ("post-explanation") reply*
>>
>>Favorable to P and M: Mainly the British, Czechs/Slovaks and Danes
>>Favorable to C: The French
>>Favorable to K: The Americans
>>
>>Such information is interesting, but how many replies actually came back to
>>IALA?
>>
>>We know this: 11.9% of those addressed replied to the brochure tests, i.e.
>>350 replies! Of these 350 responses, 18% were technicians or engineers,
>>while only 6% belonged to rural or blue-collar media.

This is a typical return rate for mail surveys.

>>
>>(1) quote from GODE, found in: BERGER, Ric, "Historia del lingua
>>international. Unua volumo", Morges, Editiones Interlingua, undated (b), p.
>>17.
>>
>>(2) BERGER, op cit, undated, p. 19.
>>
>>(3) M. MONNEROT-DUMAINE, "Precis d' interlinguistique generale et
>>speciale", Paris, Maloine, 1960, p. 134.
>>
>>---
>>
>>It would appear from this that Interlingua was developed in NY in the late
>>forties by Gode; the advice sought from outside was not on individual
>>words, etc., but simply on the preferred _type_ of language, within a
>>certain range of acceptable types.

This seems to suggest that Dr. Gode compiled the 27,000 word Interlingua-
English Dictionary all by himself. This is ridiculous.  Let me first note
that  according  to  the  General  Report  of  IALA  in  1945
the staff of the Research Division, Chaired by Mrs. Dave H. (Vanderbilt)
Morris and William E. Collinson under the Direction of Dr. Gode comprised
the following persons:  Erich Berger, Chassia Topaze Heldt, Francis H. Heldt,
Christine Meyer, Leonie Sachs, and Hugh E. Blair.  I do not know the role
that each of these had in the work, although I am fairly certain that Blair
had a considerable role in developing the vocabulary.  Note that the
methodology required obtaining expert information on word origins in seeking
prototypic forms on which to standardize the international words and forms.
Often that was available in etymological dictionaries, but others could be
consulted. But the solutions generally do not depend on the whims of the
researchers, but on the linguistic facts--as long as there are prototypes
available common to at least three variants.  In my own efforts to discover
whether the prototype solutions were accurate, I have time and again
concluded that for the most part, given what likely were the etymological
and philological reference works available at the time, the solutions for
the prototypes were obtained in an objective manner and would be essentially
the same forms obtained by anyone else following the same methodology today.
In fact, Piet Cleij has added at least 18,000 more words to the Interlingua
vocabulary using these principles, and the work will continue as Interlingua
is applied in various specialized realms with specialized vocabularies.


The following is a note from me to INTERLNG which shows both our concerns
with studying the etymology just to double-check the IED and also come up
with new words as circumstances require and questions about the history
of Interlingua germaine to this discussion:

>
>Date:         Sun, 30 Nov 1997 14:41:31 -0500
>From: STAN MULAIK <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      dansar
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Gratias, Piet, pro le informationes super "dansar".  Mi Webster's dice:
>
>1. dance  vb  danced; dancing [ME dauncen, fr. OF dancier]
>
>Mi Larousse dice:
>
>danser v.i. (frq. *dintjan "se mouvoir de-ci, de-la"
>
>"frq" es "francique" = "Langue des anciens Francs, faisant partie du germanique
>occidental, reconstituee de fac,on conjecturale.'
>
>Nos va lassar "dansar" solo.
>(Del anglese, "to leave alone", to let it be, do nothing with it).
>
>
>Stan Mulaik
>
>Date:         Sun, 30 Nov 1997 15:15:17 -0500
>From: STAN MULAIK <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Re: Europeano facilita un nove interessato
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Jay,
>  Io non cognosceva usque vos lo diceva que Sra. Morris esseva un
>Vanderbilt. Qual fonte ha vos pro vostre informationes?
>
>Anque, esseva le ration que Martinet ha partite de IALA a causa de disaccordo
>con Dr. Gode?  Le IED solmente dice que Martinet partiva de IALA a devenir un
>professor a Universitate Columbia (in Nove York), e Dr. Gode assumeva le final
>labor como Director (qual position ille habeva como Director pro tempore
>durante le Guerra Mundial II, quando Sr. Stillman ha vadite al Departimento
>del Stato).  Io ha un memoria vage, que Dr. Gode me diceva que a ille tempore,
>quando Prof. Martinet ha partite de IALA, lassante necuno a complir le
>labor, Sra. Morris alora veniva a ille a peter le assumer le position. Ille
>habeva justo recipite un bon offerta de un position como professor a
>Vanderbilt Universitate (ah ha! le intriga deveni plus dense), e pro
>satisfacer su requesta, ille requireva multo de illa.  Si isto esseva plus
>que un bon salaria, p.e. libertate del interferentia, io non cognosce. Mais
>possibilemente le disaccordo inter Gode e Martinet esseva que Martinet non
>intendeva le philosophia del personal previe qui ha facite le labores durante
>le guerra (p.e. de Stillman e alora Gode), le philosophia del prototypo.
>Possibilemente, Martinet ha usate su connexiones con IALA a venir a Nove York,
>e alora a discoperir un bon position in Nove York al Universitate Columbia.
>Qui cognosce iste detalios historic?
>
>Stan Mulaik


>Date:         Mon, 1 Dec 1997 01:16:58 +0100
>From: "Ingvar Stenstrvm, Varberg" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Re: Europeano facilita un nove interessato
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by anvil.gatech.edu id
>TAA17
>055
>
>Car amicos,
>Recentemente Alix Potet, su soror Madeleine (secr.de UIF)
>e su sposo prof. (de informatica) Jean-Pierre Elloy ha visitate
>prof. Martinet e facite un longe interview registrate per magneto-
>phono.  In illo prof. Martinet dice clarmente que le causa de su
>partita de IALA esseva simplemente que ille (M.) esseva offerite
>tres professoratos (le sposa expectante un baby prefereva le SUA)
>e que le "controversia" esseva ni grave ni essential.
>Mi prof. de phonetica, Dr Bertil Malmberg del Univ. de Lund, qui
>cognosceva Martinet, diceva lo mesme.  Le "conflicto" es un invention
>de esperantistas e de occidentalistas, qui *desirava* que le grande
>linguistico Martinet esseva in disaccordo con Gode.
>Le stupiditates que Gode "sol faceva le lingua" es horribile!  Interlingua
>non es identic con le variante P(rototypic).  E como pote un homine
>normal assumer que le grande labor de extraction e standardisation
>per le personal de IALA haberea essite lassate sin consideration?!?!
>
>In un longe conversation con Alice M(orris). Sturges, filia de Alice
>V(anderbilt
>)
>Morris, que io va contar in le veniente historia de Interlingua, illa me
>confirmava le factos in supra e diceva (multo directemente) "Ab le puncto
>de vista de I-a le morte de Matre esseva beneficial, proque alteremente
>I-a forsan nunquam haberea essite finite.  Illa habeva un tal interesse pro
>detalios e un voluntate forte e voleva interferer usque al puncto ubi
>Dr Gode, qui esseva un homine plen de charme, perdeva su patientia
>e demandava que illa le lassa in pace pro finir le obra secundo *su*
>ideas, e non secundo le capricios de Matre".
>Si io mori ante finir iste capitulo, "Le mythos", pro le historia de I-a
>vos pote citar isto...    Sra Sturges - etiam un femina de charme - indicava
>que Sra Morris sovente habeva vistas linguistic "radical".
>Prof. Martinet etiam diceva, reguardante un numero de Panorama:
>que isto semblava esser Interlingua tal qual ille lo haberea volite.
>Con salutes amical,
>Ingvar

The following is a paper written by Dr. Alexander Gode:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Convention of the Modern Language Association of America

Conference on Interlinguistics
(December 27, 1954, 2:00 P. M.,  Hotel Statler, New York City)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
        THE PROBLEM  OF FUNCTION AND STRUCTURE IN INTERLINGUA

The preparation of this paper was rather a tantalizing business.
What seemed at first a fascinating, and clear-cut topic remained
fascinating but became more and more involved.  As the paper now
stands, it is wide open and had better be called an invitation to
further study than a study complete in itself.  It consists of an
attempt to clarify the question of function and structure in terms
applicable to Interlingua followed by illustrative excursuses and a
summary of the practical implications of the approach used.

* * *
The ideal machine is a system of perfect correlations of functions
and structures.  Every part of the ideal machine has its simple or
complex, but in any event specific, function.  If we consider that the
full description of the individual parts of a machine should cover
both its torn and its location in the machine in working condition,
then the parts catalogue of the ideal machine must be a simple key:
look up a particular function and you will find_ the one corresponding
part;; look up a specific part and you will find the clearly
circumscribed function it nan designed and is destined to discharge
In a nay such a parts catalogue might be called a dictionary of
totally unambiguous entries for the translation of machine parts into
parts' functions and vice versa.

The ideal organism, no less than the ideal machine, may be
characterized as a system of perfect correlations of functions and
structures.  But the practical manifestations of this correlation are
complicated by additional factors which do not obtain in the case of
the machine.  I cannot attempt to define these "additional factors,"
but I venture to suggest that they can all be construed as
consequences, effects, or simply specialized aspects of the axiomatic
datum that in an organism both the function and the structure of all
the individual parts are labile and variable.  It is probably possible
to demonstrate that the truth of this assertion is operative only
within strict type limits, but that is a question we shall set aside
for the philosophers of biology to discuss.  For the present context
it is enough to observe that in an organism changed demands in
function will be reacted to by complex structural readjustments while
both slow and violent changes in structure may result in a striking
redistribution of functions.  As a result a descriptive parts
catalogue in the organic realm may serve all sorts of useful purposes
but can never assume the appearance of a simple, static, and
reversible key of structures and functions.


The polarity of function and structure constitutes a most helpful

varied disciplines.  It has a bearing on hematological research as
on aeronautical engineering, on pharmacology as on structural
linguistics.... It has a bearing on all these fields, though by no
means the same in all cases, as witness the contrast of its
significance in mechanical versus organic entities worked out above.

As we apply the polarity of function and structure to language we
cannot expect to emerge with a pattern of observations comparable in
every respect to that obtaining in other domains.  The Romantic
conception of language as an organic growth is something we can
tolerate today at best as an occasionally useful but always risky
metaphor, yet the conception of language as an entity exhaustively
describable as a tool or machine is likewise unsatisfactory and
dangerous when vie take it too literally, derive from it too naively
literal conclusions

Here as elsewhere the question of the organic or mechanical nature
of language is a little childish and possibly an atavism of the parlor
game phase of our development when everything had to be animal,
vegetable, or mineral.

Basically language is language and need not be further classified.
Though it is perhaps permissible to think of it primarily as a medium
of expression and hence physiognomonic in nature.  If that is sound -
and I think it is -- we have at least a reliable basis for rejecting
the assumption that the structure-function relationship in language
ought to be reducible to an unequivocal key.

There is a parallel here that deserves closer scrutiny. Perhaps I
am sticking my neck out if I admit that to my mind phrenology, graph-
ology, and physiognomonics in general deserve to be classed as
potentially serious sciences.  I am convinced that these branches of
study would not enjoy today too ill-flavored a reputation if it were
not for the accidental fact that the fathers of their modern tradition
-- Messrs. Lavater, Gall, et al. -- were eighteenth-century minds in
search of characterological keys.

Lavater's conception of physiognomonics is neatly, though perhaps a
little unfairly, illustrated by the passage in which he insists that
the flatness of the bed bug is a convincing manifestation of the
creature's inability to love.  Gall's catalogues of phrenology are
equally mechanical in their keylike arrangement and so were until
quite recently the atlases of the brain with their tendency to assign
unequivocal nervous functions to specific cerebral structures.  The
theory of the immutable link of every individual nervous function with
one specific structural unit in the brain has been badly shaken in our
time through experiments with localized extirpations in pigeon brains,
though we cannot over- emphasize the fact that the results of these
experiments did not call for an outright rejection of the conception
of a link between brain structure and nervous function but only for
the recognition that in this particular field the link cannot be
expressed in a simple keylike parts catalogue.
If I allude in this context also to the work of Ludwig Klages, who
did more than anyone else to replace, in all the characterological
disciplines in general and in graphology in particular, the conception
of a mechanical correspondence of trait and significance, i.e. of
structure and function, by a conception of labile correspondences
expressive of tendencies rather than of facts, I think we have
sufficient evidence to suspect that the inclination to recognize
function- structure correspondences as varied and complex is just as
characteristic of our age as the endeavor to reduce these
correspondences to a mechanical key was characteristic of Lavater's
and Gall's age, perhaps of the entire nineteenth century and certainly
of the eighteenth.

* * *

This outline has significant bearings on the history of inter-
linguistics.  In a certain, not as yet completely dispelled prejudiced
attitude, the lumping of interlinguistics with graphology, phrenology,
and the like seems quite natural.  But the really essential point to
be stressed here is that until quite recently and in some quarters
even today the task of the interlinguist was and is construed as that
of a linguistic tool designer who starts out with a clear-cut list of
requirements of function and is done when he has devised for each such
requirement an ideally efficient structural feature.

In its extreme form this approach yields nothing but ludicrously
impracticable interlinguistic schemes or even sketchy outlines of
projects of such schemes.  But we are hardly interested in these
caricatures of the idea that in designing an auxiliary language one
should provide structural representation of previously recognized
functions.  In its serious manifestations the idea can be traced, I
believe, in one uninterrupted continuity to Leibnitz and Descartes. It
is clearly apparent in Esperanto and by no means absent from de Wahl's
Occidental.

Now obviously, the complete practical failure of interlinguistic
systems built exclusively on the idea that we can establish an
exhaustive list of linguistic functions which need but be equipped
with corresponding structural devices in order to turn into a full-
fledged language and also the suspicion that the representation of
this same idea in systems like Esperanto and Occidental has hampered
their progress, is not enough to condemn the idea as theoretically
invalid.

If we could compile an exhaustive list of separate linguistic
functions, the proposal to evolve from it a smoothly operating
language by simply providing all the required structural parts would
certainly seem appealing.  The difficulty is precisely that the
initial list of separate linguistic functions is not just hard to
compile but is actually impossible.  Language shares with organism the
trait that the correspondence of function to structure is labile and
variable; language shares this trait with organism not because it is
(romantically speaking) an animate being with a life of its own but
because in addition to being an expressive tool it is a physiognomonic
manifestation of individual and social existents.

In all this there is nothing particularly puzzling except of course
that by implication it seems to impute to Leibnitz and Descartes and
their like-minded contemporaries a fairly naive conception of
language.  Anyone who has ever attempted an exhaustive description or
definition of the function of even the simplest structural element in
language -- let us say for instance of so "clear" and "plain" an item
as the common occidental Latin suffix -al- will recall the creeping
notion that possibly the difficulty lay not at all in his own
inadequate analytical powers but rather in the very character of the
thing he was trying to cover by a logical statement.  Is it
conceivable that Leibnitz for instance failed to aware of this
situation   I submit that it is inconceivable, and more than that:
it is precisely this aspect of language that Leibnitz complained about
and hoped to mend by his preoccupation with the problem of a
philosophical language.

We may look at it this way:  the motive in all interlinguistic
endeavors of the past century or so has been to provide mankind with a
common auxiliary language, a language that is, which could serve all
of mankind as Latin once served all of the nations of the occident.
In other words:  if Latin in the closing decades of the nineteenth
century had been as alive as it was four or five hundred years before,
it most probably would never have occurred to Dr. Zamenhof to devise
his Esperanto   Instead he would have advocated the universal teaching
-- possibly in a simplified form -- of the existing international
language, i.e. of Latin.  At the time of Leibnitz the Latin situation
was of course not yet half as bad as when Zamenhof did his work.  And
yet, to my knowledge Leibnitz did nothing to keep Latin alive and to
revitalize it as a better-than-nothing answer to his quest for a
universal language.  Actually he did the exact opposite. By deed and
example he promoted the use of the regional national languages to the
detriment of Latin.  For to Leibnitz' mind Latin as a universal
language was just as bad as German or French, and if he had known
Esperanto or Interlingua., he would not have liked them one whit
better.

The argument for Leibnitz was not that the barriers of inter-
national communication must be overcome through the universal
acceptance by all mankind of one common medium of communication whose
identity does not matter very much as long as it is everywhere the
same. The argument was that no existing language reflects absolute
laws of thought flawlessly, that every language tends to falsify our
thinking, that this deplorable state of affairs can only be rectified
by the construction of a new language which does -- by definition and
by construction -- reflect the universal laws of thought.  Thus the
term universal language comes to mean not a language which is
universally serviceable as a medium of communication but a language
which is universally valid as an instrument of thought.

The distinction of "medium of communication" and "instrument of
thought" cannot be overstressed.  The latter -- and only the latter --
seems to have been Leibnitz' interest.  While I must consider myself
totally unqualified to analyze this point further, it does seem quite
clear that from this point of view there is no problematic relation of
function and structure.  Once the functions -- i.e. the universally
valid elements and processes of logical thought have been clarified,
their representation by this or that system of symbols is nothing but
a question of technical convenience.

The tradition of Leibnitz' and his contemporaries' preoccupation
with a universal philosophical language is continued in the recent
past and the present not in interlinguistics but in symbolic logic and
related endeavors.

This assertion will not go unchallenged.  And actually it is not
quite correct.  For to the detriment of interlinguistics the Leibnitz
type of quest for an absolute instrument of thought was allowed to
influence and sometimes to determine the interlinguist's conception of
his task.  It should not have been allowed to do so.

* * *

The spell of the idea that interlinguistics is concerned with the
definition of linguistic functions and the subsequent provision of
efficient structural devices for their operation was totally discarded
in the theory of Interlingua.  It will be the task of the historian of
interlinguistics to show that this event was the climax of an arduous
development and cannot be accounted for as an act of creative
inspiration on the part of the Interlingua theoretician. The only
"creativity" for which these theoreticians claim credit is that they
have not been creative at all.

In methodological terms this signifies that the linguistic system
now in use under the name of Interlingua was codified on the basis of
observed forms and never by a process of supplying forms for functions
previously analyzed and judged to be desirable.  In support of this
observation I should' like to review briefly some aspects of the
procedures used in the elaboration of Interlingua

The fundamental work on the theory and methodology of Interlingua
is unfortunately available only in typescript.  It is a 500-page tome
written in 1943 in collaboration with the research staff of the
International Auxiliary Language Association by E. Clark Stillman and
A. Gode-von Aesch and bears the significant title, "Interlinguistic
Standardization, An Objective System for the Normalization of
Internationally Current Word-Material Together With a Practical Plan
for Its Elaboration Into a Complete Auxiliary Language."

I think the work keeps the promise of the title.  It justifies the
limitation of its field of research to Italian, Spanish-Portuguese,
French, and English -- with Latin as a binding power in the background
and German and Russian as occasional supplementary sources.  It does
so by elaborating the idea that these occidental languages may well be
considered dialects of a common norm which five hundred years ago
might have been identified with medieval Latin and which today must be
precipitated from its half-existence in into international
terminologies of often world-wide validity especially in science and
technology.

In this the salient point is the contention that a common standard
is latently present and variously modified in the major languages of
the Western World.

The task of the interlinguist on this basis turns out to be the
search for an objective methodology whereby a visualized pan-
Occidental Interlingua can be put down on paper.  I may note here in
passing that to my mind it is not possible to doubt the reality of the
idea of Interlingua -- if this somewhat paradoxical formulation is
permissible. It is only possible to attack the methodology employed in
the codification of Interlingua and condemn it as inadequate.  In
other words, it is not possible to improve the visualized reality
Interlingua by extrinsic additions; it is only possible to ask and
search for more refined devices which would permit the putting down on
paper of a more perfect concrete likeness of the visualized idea.

As we look briefly at the methodology employed in the extraction of
Interlingua we shall find--quite in keeping with the expectations
aroused by the foregoing argumentation--that there is nowhere an
instance of willful or arbitrary juggling of the relation of function
and structure.  This is quite apparent in the procedures used to
compile a standardized vocabulary.  Instead of following the
interlinguistic tradition of assuming that it is possible to compile a
list of concepts for which an international auxiliary language must
provide forms, the theoreticians of Interlingua insisted that the
first step had to be the parallelization -- on as complete a scale as
possible -- of the vocabularies of the four source-language units.
This was done by an exhaustive study of several thousand etymological
families.

In culling from the resulting enormous files the words justly to be
called international, the purpose of arriving ultimately at a
realistic effigy of the visualized Interlingua was naturally the
guiding principle.  This required generally speaking the slighting of
whatever could be called an accidental idiosyncrasy in one individual
language.  Hence a word was accepted as international if it occurred
in all four language units but also if it was accidentally absent from
one of then.  The requirement of a word's occurring in three language
units was so construed that either German or Russian could serve as
substitutes.

In all this work the explicitly used definition of the term 'word'
was a unit of form and meaning.'  In determining the form under which
a particular word. was to be entered in the international vocabulary
it was deemed necessary -- again in view of the ultimate purpose of
this work -- to treat each item in the light of its derivatives.

To illustrate this very important point; from a strictly French
point of view the word vital is not really a derivative from vie
although both belong to the same etymological family. But in the
international vocabulary the word corresponding to vital will have to
appear as a derivative from the word corresponding to vie, and so one
might say that the resulting Interlingua pair vita-vital reestablishes
a continuity of form which has been disturbed in French, just as it
has been disturbed in Spanish and Portuguese and is missing in English
or German.

The Interlingua forms -- in the present case vita and vital --
follow the simple rule that all their correspondences in the
contributing languages as well as all the direct derivatives must be
evolvable from them by a repetition of the processes to which those
correspondences owe their identity.  That is, whatever process brought
about the forms vie in French, vida in Spanish, etc., must be
sufficient to explain their relation to the Interlingua form.  In
other words, the Interlingua form is the nearest common historical or
theoretical ancestor of its variants in the contributing languages
with the proviso that it must also suffice to explain the derivatives
in the contributing languages.

The result of this method of "extracting" the Interlingua forms
from the consensus of the contributing languages is in very many
instances a most interesting revitalization of a function-structure
relationship which in the contributing languages appears to be blurred
or completely disrupted.  In its semantic value, or if we prefer, in
its expressive functions the English term vital is a derivative from
life.  Furthermore, even without any sort of reference to other
languages the term vital is formally a derivative built with the
suffix -al.  In English terms vital comes clearly from something
else, but that something else is not there.  The same can be said for
German vital.  In French and Spanish vital ought to come from vie and
vida, but French has no suffix -tal and Spanish no suffix -al which
changes a preceding -d- to -t-  In all these languages the form vital
is a derivative from something potentially present just as the
corresponding meaning is a derivative from something that does occur
in Interlingua this potential pattern turns out to be an actual one.

One might of course insist that in these matters Interlingua simply
follows the model of Latin.  In practice such a statement is entirely
satisfactory, but in theory it is necessary to emphasize that
Interlingua forms result from those found in any of the modern
languages of the West under the influence of their derivatives in the
same language and of their correspondences in the neighbor languages.

        The next step in the Interlingua methodology had to be an
attempt to round off the assembled international vocabulary in terms
of practical requirements.  This obviously could not simply consist in
ascertaining that either the English or the French or the German
vocabulary was adequately covered by the available Interlingua forms.
The international vocabulary must be adequate to cover the
internationally current body of concepts, and a major implication of
the basic Interlingua tenets is after all precisely that the
internationally current body of concepts constitutes a complete
language.

Hence every concept -- regardless of whether it was conceived in
English or in one of the other source languages had to qualify as
international before its claim to  representation in the international
vocabulary could be acknowledged.  This led to the striking
observation that the international vocabulary already assembled on the
basis of internationality of form was adequate on the whole in regard
to abstract, scientific. and generally learned terms.  The gaps
appeared rather in the realm of everyday concepts of a totally
concrete nature.

The problem here was not envisaged as amounting to the requirement
of clarifying a given concept and of then providing for it a
satisfactory term.  It was rather construed as requiring the search
for a new view point which would. permit the established methodology
to yield the forms wanted.  For numerous concepts whose
internationality could not be doubted this was achieved by simply
taking into consideration older levels of the source languages
sometimes going straight back to Latin. More frequently it was done by
examining and in a way by choosing among the various forms
representing a given international concept in the source languages.
For instance the concept represented in English by 'safety match' is
clearly international, but its forms in the several source languages
are totally divergent.  Since we are here concerned with the problem
of the elaboration of an.internationally valid vocabulary, we might
test the various source-language forms in their inter- national
potentialities.  The Spanish cerillas might be imitated in English as
something like waxlet or in French as cirette, but neither of these
could carry the required meaning even in context.  Testing the other
possibilities in a similar way one is bound to emerge with the
conclusion that the italian fiammifero has a fair degree of
international expressive potency.  In English it would appear as
flame-bearer or simply as lucifer, which is quite excellent.  But the
more' important point is that this term can be built into the already,
established international vocabulary by means of available elements.
The Interlingua word for 'match' is flammifero.

The interest of this example is again that the Interlingua
methodology -- without assuming that it can "creatively" define a
concept and then proceed to devise a word form for it - results in a
clear correspondence of function and form which the contributing
languages harbor only potentially or historically.  The German
Feuerzeug (which corresponds fairly closely to flammifero) would not
be a bad representation of 'match'  and English 'lucifer' which is
almost completely the same as flammifero) got accidentally pushed into
the background because its etymology is not kept alive by related
popular terms.
* * *
I have attempted to show that the question of function and
structure in Interlingua cannot be posed autonomously.  It will always
present itself in terms of the same question posed in regard to the
source languages   And yet the function-structure relationship in
Interlingua is not the same as in French or in Spanish and Portuguese
or in Italian or in English

I have not solved, and have not attempted to solve, a problem. I
have posed one.  It is, reduced to the simplest statement I can
devise: How does the complex of function-structure relations in
Interlingua reflect the corresponding complexes obtaining in the
several occidental languages and in what precise fashion is it a
standardization of them?

The detailed analysis of this problem in all phases of Interlingua
morphology and syntax and possibly also phonology and orthography is
not a matter of purely theoretical interest.  If the avowed purpose of
this paper is to arouse someone better qualified than myself to
undertake this study in great detail, I will admit that the ultimate
goals I have in mind are highly realistic.

Interlingua claims to be a common denominator among the occidental
languages.  As a practical tool in the international dissemination of
scientific and especially medical information it has justified that
claim to a rather impressive extent. Yet this is only the first --
though probably the most immediate -- practical application of a
common-denominator language.

A second phase would be its exploitation for the purposes of
general-language instruction as also in the teaching of any one of the
source languages involved in its extraction.  In a teaching situation
with let us say English as the start and French as the target
language, Interlingua may function excellently as a third of
comparison facilitating the recognition of familiar patterns in the
foreign ones since both would appear as modifications of the
Interlingua standard.  But a planned exploitation of this potential of
Interlingua would of course be greatly enhanced by the availability of
exact data on the comparative function-stricture relationship in
Interlingua end the ethnic languages involved.

This same prerequisite is considerably more urgent in another
possible application of Interlingua which so far has received very
little attention.  Let me hark back for a moment to the very beginning
of this paper:  If languages were ideal mechanical tools with
function- structure relations completely coverable by exhaustive keys,
the theoretical preliminaries to translation by electronic computers
would be a cut-and-dried affair.  As I see it, the theoretical
prerequisite of electronic translation is as easily stated as it is
hard to fulfill. To be able to rig up the translation machine for
perfect results, all that is needed is a perfect calibration of the
function-stricture patterns of the departure language against the
function-structure patterns of the target language   The reason for
the practical difficulties in this assignment has been variously
alluded to in this paper. The patterns to be calibrated are not
stable.  They are as unstable and variable in Interlingua as they are
in French or English or in any other language.  But if we want to
connect for instance French and English in an electronic-translation
set-up, it seems sensible to suggest that the possibility of
introducing a neutral intermediary of common-denominator
qualifications should be investigated.

It is quite conceivable that research of the kind proposed in this
paper will eventually bear fruit in the use of Interlingua as a half-
way station in MT (as the experts have come to call the new field of
mechanical translation by means of electronic computers). Instead of
translating from German to English, one would translate from German to
Interlingua and from Interlingua to English.  Instead of having to
calibrate German function-structure relations against those in French,
those in French against those in English, and so forth in a criss-
cross maze of connections of all sorts of language pairs, there would
have to be only back-and-forth calibrations between each individual
language and Interlingua.

To be sure, even if it can be demonstrated that Interlingua can
function as efficiently in this assignment as it does in its present
jobs, it may well be that this can no longer hold true when a language
pair not comprising a Western language is to be connected by
mechanical translation.  But rendering Khirgiz texts in Korean or vice
versa is probably not a very urgent matter.

And anyway  if and when the time comes when the languages of the
Western world are no longor of prime importance in most international
affairs, Interlingua will no longer be around either.  As a product
and physiognomonic expression of Western civilization it seems fitting
that it should perish with it -- or of course, survive with it and
flourish.


        Alexander Gode
        Interlingua Division of
        Science Service
        80 East 11th Street
        New York 3, N.Y.
___________________________________________

Stan Mulaik

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2020, Week 1
March 2020, Week 5
March 2020, Week 4
March 2020, Week 2
March 2020, Week 1
February 2020, Week 5
February 2020, Week 4
February 2020, Week 1
January 2020, Week 4
January 2020, Week 3
January 2020, Week 2
January 2020, Week 1
December 2019, Week 2
December 2019, Week 1
November 2019, Week 5
November 2019, Week 4
November 2019, Week 3
November 2019, Week 2
November 2019, Week 1
October 2019, Week 4
October 2019, Week 3
October 2019, Week 2
October 2019, Week 1
September 2019, Week 4
September 2019, Week 3
September 2019, Week 2
September 2019, Week 1
August 2019, Week 5
August 2019, Week 4
August 2019, Week 3
August 2019, Week 2
July 2019, Week 3
July 2019, Week 2
July 2019, Week 1
June 2019, Week 4
June 2019, Week 3
June 2019, Week 1
May 2019, Week 1
April 2019, Week 4
April 2019, Week 3
March 2019, Week 5
March 2019, Week 4
February 2019, Week 3
February 2019, Week 1
January 2019, Week 5
January 2019, Week 2
October 2018, Week 2
October 2018, Week 1
September 2018, Week 3
September 2018, Week 2
August 2018, Week 5
August 2018, Week 4
August 2018, Week 3
August 2018, Week 2
July 2018, Week 4
July 2018, Week 1
June 2018, Week 4
June 2018, Week 3
June 2018, Week 2
June 2018, Week 1
May 2018, Week 3
April 2018, Week 4
April 2018, Week 3
April 2018, Week 2
March 2018, Week 4
February 2018, Week 3
February 2018, Week 1
January 2018, Week 4
January 2018, Week 3
January 2018, Week 1
December 2017, Week 5
December 2017, Week 4
December 2017, Week 2
November 2017, Week 3
November 2017, Week 2
November 2017, Week 1
October 2017, Week 5
October 2017, Week 4
October 2017, Week 3
October 2017, Week 1
September 2017, Week 5
August 2017, Week 5
August 2017, Week 4
August 2017, Week 3
August 2017, Week 2
August 2017, Week 1
July 2017, Week 4
July 2017, Week 2
July 2017, Week 1
June 2017, Week 3
June 2017, Week 1
May 2017, Week 5
May 2017, Week 4
May 2017, Week 3
May 2017, Week 2
May 2017, Week 1
April 2017, Week 4
April 2017, Week 3
April 2017, Week 2
April 2017, Week 1
March 2017, Week 4
March 2017, Week 3
March 2017, Week 2
March 2017, Week 1
February 2017, Week 4
February 2017, Week 3
February 2017, Week 2
February 2017, Week 1
January 2017, Week 5
January 2017, Week 4
January 2017, Week 3
January 2017, Week 2
January 2017, Week 1
December 2016, Week 5
December 2016, Week 4
December 2016, Week 3
December 2016, Week 2
December 2016, Week 1
November 2016, Week 5
November 2016, Week 4
November 2016, Week 3
November 2016, Week 2
November 2016, Week 1
October 2016, Week 5
October 2016, Week 3
October 2016, Week 2
October 2016, Week 1
September 2016, Week 3
September 2016, Week 2
September 2016, Week 1
August 2016, Week 3
August 2016, Week 2
August 2016, Week 1
July 2016, Week 5
July 2016, Week 4
July 2016, Week 3
July 2016, Week 2
July 2016, Week 1
June 2016, Week 5
June 2016, Week 4
June 2016, Week 3
June 2016, Week 2
June 2016, Week 1
May 2016, Week 5
May 2016, Week 4
May 2016, Week 3
May 2016, Week 2
May 2016, Week 1
April 2016, Week 5
April 2016, Week 4
April 2016, Week 3
April 2016, Week 2
April 2016, Week 1
March 2016, Week 5
March 2016, Week 3
March 2016, Week 2
March 2016, Week 1
February 2016, Week 5
February 2016, Week 4
February 2016, Week 3
February 2016, Week 2
February 2016, Week 1
January 2016, Week 5
January 2016, Week 4
January 2016, Week 3
January 2016, Week 2
January 2016, Week 1
December 2015, Week 5
December 2015, Week 4
December 2015, Week 3
December 2015, Week 2
December 2015, Week 1
November 2015, Week 4
November 2015, Week 3
November 2015, Week 2
November 2015, Week 1
October 2015, Week 5
October 2015, Week 4
October 2015, Week 3
October 2015, Week 2
September 2015, Week 4
September 2015, Week 2
September 2015, Week 1
August 2015, Week 5
August 2015, Week 4
August 2015, Week 3
August 2015, Week 2
August 2015, Week 1
July 2015, Week 4
July 2015, Week 3
July 2015, Week 2
July 2015, Week 1
June 2015, Week 5
June 2015, Week 4
June 2015, Week 3
June 2015, Week 2
June 2015, Week 1
May 2015, Week 5
May 2015, Week 3
May 2015, Week 2
May 2015, Week 1
April 2015, Week 5
April 2015, Week 4
April 2015, Week 3
April 2015, Week 2
April 2015, Week 1
March 2015, Week 5
March 2015, Week 4
March 2015, Week 3
March 2015, Week 2
March 2015, Week 1
February 2015, Week 3
February 2015, Week 2
February 2015, Week 1
January 2015, Week 5
January 2015, Week 4
January 2015, Week 3
January 2015, Week 2
January 2015, Week 1
December 2014, Week 5
December 2014, Week 4
December 2014, Week 3
December 2014, Week 2
December 2014, Week 1
November 2014, Week 5
November 2014, Week 4
November 2014, Week 3
November 2014, Week 2
November 2014, Week 1
October 2014, Week 5
October 2014, Week 4
October 2014, Week 3
October 2014, Week 2
October 2014, Week 1
September 2014, Week 5
September 2014, Week 4
September 2014, Week 3
September 2014, Week 2
August 2014, Week 5
August 2014, Week 4
August 2014, Week 3
August 2014, Week 2
August 2014, Week 1
July 2014, Week 5
July 2014, Week 4
July 2014, Week 3
July 2014, Week 2
July 2014, Week 1
June 2014, Week 5
June 2014, Week 4
June 2014, Week 3
June 2014, Week 2
June 2014, Week 1
May 2014, Week 5
May 2014, Week 4
May 2014, Week 2
May 2014, Week 1
April 2014, Week 4
April 2014, Week 3
April 2014, Week 2
April 2014, Week 1
March 2014, Week 4
March 2014, Week 3
March 2014, Week 2
March 2014, Week 1
February 2014, Week 4
February 2014, Week 3
February 2014, Week 2
February 2014, Week 1
January 2014, Week 5
January 2014, Week 4
January 2014, Week 3
January 2014, Week 1
December 2013, Week 5
December 2013, Week 4
December 2013, Week 3
December 2013, Week 2
December 2013, Week 1
November 2013, Week 5
November 2013, Week 4
November 2013, Week 3
November 2013, Week 2
November 2013, Week 1
October 2013, Week 5
October 2013, Week 4
October 2013, Week 3
October 2013, Week 2
October 2013, Week 1
September 2013, Week 3
August 2013, Week 4
August 2013, Week 3
August 2013, Week 2
July 2013, Week 2
July 2013, Week 1
June 2013, Week 5
June 2013, Week 4
June 2013, Week 3
June 2013, Week 2
May 2013, Week 5
May 2013, Week 3
May 2013, Week 2
May 2013, Week 1
April 2013, Week 5
April 2013, Week 4
April 2013, Week 3
April 2013, Week 2
April 2013, Week 1
March 2013, Week 5
March 2013, Week 4
March 2013, Week 3
March 2013, Week 2
March 2013, Week 1
February 2013, Week 4
February 2013, Week 3
February 2013, Week 2
February 2013, Week 1
January 2013, Week 4
January 2013, Week 3
January 2013, Week 2
January 2013, Week 1
December 2012, Week 5
December 2012, Week 4
December 2012, Week 3
December 2012, Week 2
December 2012, Week 1
November 2012, Week 4
November 2012, Week 3
November 2012, Week 2
November 2012, Week 1
October 2012, Week 5
October 2012, Week 4
October 2012, Week 3
October 2012, Week 2
October 2012, Week 1
September 2012, Week 5
September 2012, Week 4
September 2012, Week 3
September 2012, Week 2
September 2012, Week 1
August 2012, Week 4
August 2012, Week 2
August 2012, Week 1
July 2012, Week 5
July 2012, Week 4
July 2012, Week 3
July 2012, Week 2
July 2012, Week 1
June 2012, Week 5
June 2012, Week 4
June 2012, Week 3
June 2012, Week 1
May 2012, Week 5
May 2012, Week 4
May 2012, Week 3
May 2012, Week 2
May 2012, Week 1
April 2012, Week 4
April 2012, Week 3
April 2012, Week 2
April 2012, Week 1
March 2012, Week 5
March 2012, Week 4
March 2012, Week 3
March 2012, Week 2
March 2012, Week 1
February 2012, Week 5
February 2012, Week 4
February 2012, Week 3
February 2012, Week 2
February 2012, Week 1
January 2012, Week 4
December 2011, Week 5
December 2011, Week 4
December 2011, Week 3
December 2011, Week 2
December 2011, Week 1
November 2011, Week 4
November 2011, Week 3
November 2011, Week 2
November 2011, Week 1
October 2011, Week 5
October 2011, Week 4
October 2011, Week 3
October 2011, Week 2
October 2011, Week 1
September 2011, Week 5
September 2011, Week 4
September 2011, Week 3
September 2011, Week 2
September 2011, Week 1
August 2011, Week 5
August 2011, Week 4
August 2011, Week 3
August 2011, Week 2
August 2011, Week 1
July 2011, Week 4
July 2011, Week 3
July 2011, Week 2
July 2011, Week 1
June 2011, Week 4
June 2011, Week 3
June 2011, Week 2
June 2011, Week 1
May 2011, Week 5
May 2011, Week 4
May 2011, Week 3
May 2011, Week 2
May 2011, Week 1
April 2011, Week 4
April 2011, Week 3
April 2011, Week 2
April 2011, Week 1
March 2011, Week 5
March 2011, Week 4
March 2011, Week 3
March 2011, Week 2
March 2011, Week 1
February 2011, Week 4
February 2011, Week 3
February 2011, Week 2
February 2011, Week 1
January 2011, Week 5
January 2011, Week 4
January 2011, Week 3
January 2011, Week 2
January 2011, Week 1
December 2010, Week 5
December 2010, Week 4
December 2010, Week 3
December 2010, Week 2
December 2010, Week 1
November 2010, Week 4
November 2010, Week 3
November 2010, Week 2
November 2010, Week 1
October 2010, Week 5
October 2010, Week 4
October 2010, Week 3
October 2010, Week 2
October 2010, Week 1
September 2010, Week 5
September 2010, Week 4
September 2010, Week 3
September 2010, Week 2
September 2010, Week 1
August 2010, Week 5
August 2010, Week 4
August 2010, Week 3
August 2010, Week 2
August 2010, Week 1
July 2010, Week 5
July 2010, Week 4
July 2010, Week 3
July 2010, Week 2
July 2010, Week 1
June 2010, Week 5
June 2010, Week 4
June 2010, Week 3
June 2010, Week 2
June 2010, Week 1
May 2010, Week 5
May 2010, Week 4
May 2010, Week 3
May 2010, Week 2
May 2010, Week 1
April 2010, Week 5
April 2010, Week 4
April 2010, Week 3
April 2010, Week 2
April 2010, Week 1
March 2010, Week 5
March 2010, Week 4
March 2010, Week 3
March 2010, Week 2
March 2010, Week 1
February 2010, Week 4
February 2010, Week 3
February 2010, Week 2
February 2010, Week 1
January 2010, Week 5
January 2010, Week 4
January 2010, Week 3
January 2010, Week 2
January 2010, Week 1
December 2009, Week 5
December 2009, Week 4
December 2009, Week 3
December 2009, Week 2
December 2009, Week 1
November 2009, Week 5
November 2009, Week 4
November 2009, Week 3
November 2009, Week 2
November 2009, Week 1
October 2009, Week 5
October 2009, Week 4
October 2009, Week 3
October 2009, Week 2
October 2009, Week 1
September 2009, Week 5
September 2009, Week 4
September 2009, Week 3
September 2009, Week 2
September 2009, Week 1
August 2009, Week 5
August 2009, Week 4
August 2009, Week 3
August 2009, Week 2
August 2009, Week 1
July 2009, Week 5
July 2009, Week 4
July 2009, Week 3
July 2009, Week 2
July 2009, Week 1
June 2009, Week 5
June 2009, Week 4
June 2009, Week 3
June 2009, Week 2
June 2009, Week 1
May 2009, Week 5
May 2009, Week 4
May 2009, Week 3
May 2009, Week 2
May 2009, Week 1
April 2009, Week 5
April 2009, Week 4
April 2009, Week 3
April 2009, Week 2
April 2009, Week 1
March 2009, Week 5
March 2009, Week 4
March 2009, Week 3
March 2009, Week 2
March 2009, Week 1
February 2009, Week 4
February 2009, Week 3
February 2009, Week 2
February 2009, Week 1
January 2009, Week 5
January 2009, Week 4
January 2009, Week 3
January 2009, Week 2
January 2009, Week 1
December 2008, Week 5
December 2008, Week 4
December 2008, Week 3
December 2008, Week 2
December 2008, Week 1
November 2008, Week 5
November 2008, Week 4
November 2008, Week 3
November 2008, Week 2
November 2008, Week 1
October 2008, Week 5
October 2008, Week 4
October 2008, Week 3
October 2008, Week 2
October 2008, Week 1
September 2008, Week 5
September 2008, Week 4
September 2008, Week 3
September 2008, Week 2
September 2008, Week 1
August 2008, Week 5
August 2008, Week 4
August 2008, Week 3
August 2008, Week 2
August 2008, Week 1
July 2008, Week 5
July 2008, Week 4
July 2008, Week 3
July 2008, Week 2
July 2008, Week 1
June 2008, Week 5
June 2008, Week 4
June 2008, Week 3
June 2008, Week 2
June 2008, Week 1
May 2008, Week 5
May 2008, Week 4
May 2008, Week 3
May 2008, Week 2
May 2008, Week 1
April 2008, Week 5
April 2008, Week 4
April 2008, Week 3
April 2008, Week 2
April 2008, Week 1
March 2008, Week 5
March 2008, Week 4
March 2008, Week 3
March 2008, Week 2
March 2008, Week 1
February 2008, Week 5
February 2008, Week 4
February 2008, Week 3
February 2008, Week 2
February 2008, Week 1
January 2008, Week 5
January 2008, Week 4
January 2008, Week 3
January 2008, Week 2
January 2008, Week 1
December 2007, Week 5
December 2007, Week 4
December 2007, Week 3
December 2007, Week 2
December 2007, Week 1
November 2007, Week 5
November 2007, Week 4
November 2007, Week 3
November 2007, Week 2
November 2007, Week 1
October 2007, Week 5
October 2007, Week 4
October 2007, Week 3
October 2007, Week 2
October 2007, Week 1
September 2007, Week 5
September 2007, Week 4
September 2007, Week 3
September 2007, Week 2
September 2007, Week 1
August 2007, Week 5
August 2007, Week 4
August 2007, Week 3
August 2007, Week 2
August 2007, Week 1
July 2007, Week 5
July 2007, Week 4
July 2007, Week 3
July 2007, Week 2
July 2007, Week 1
June 2007, Week 5
June 2007, Week 4
June 2007, Week 3
June 2007, Week 2
June 2007, Week 1
May 2007, Week 5
May 2007, Week 4
May 2007, Week 3
May 2007, Week 2
May 2007, Week 1
April 2007, Week 5
April 2007, Week 4
April 2007, Week 3
April 2007, Week 2
April 2007, Week 1
March 2007, Week 5
March 2007, Week 4
March 2007, Week 3
March 2007, Week 2
March 2007, Week 1
February 2007, Week 4
February 2007, Week 3
February 2007, Week 2
February 2007, Week 1
January 2007, Week 5
January 2007, Week 4
January 2007, Week 3
January 2007, Week 2
January 2007, Week 1
December 2006, Week 5
December 2006, Week 4
December 2006, Week 3
December 2006, Week 2
December 2006, Week 1
November 2006, Week 5
November 2006, Week 4
November 2006, Week 3
November 2006, Week 2
November 2006, Week 1
October 2006, Week 5
October 2006, Week 4
October 2006, Week 3
October 2006, Week 2
October 2006, Week 1
September 2006, Week 5
September 2006, Week 4
September 2006, Week 3
September 2006, Week 2
September 2006, Week 1
August 2006, Week 5
August 2006, Week 4
August 2006, Week 3
August 2006, Week 2
August 2006, Week 1
July 2006, Week 5
July 2006, Week 4
July 2006, Week 3
July 2006, Week 2
July 2006, Week 1
June 2006, Week 5
June 2006, Week 4
June 2006, Week 3
June 2006, Week 2
June 2006, Week 1
May 2006, Week 5
May 2006, Week 4
May 2006, Week 3
May 2006, Week 2
May 2006, Week 1
April 2006, Week 5
April 2006, Week 4
April 2006, Week 3
April 2006, Week 2
April 2006, Week 1
March 2006, Week 5
March 2006, Week 4
March 2006, Week 3
March 2006, Week 2
March 2006, Week 1
February 2006, Week 4
February 2006, Week 3
February 2006, Week 2
February 2006, Week 1
January 2006, Week 5
January 2006, Week 4
January 2006, Week 3
January 2006, Week 2
January 2006, Week 1
December 2005, Week 5
December 2005, Week 4
December 2005, Week 3
December 2005, Week 2
December 2005, Week 1
November 2005, Week 5
November 2005, Week 4
November 2005, Week 3
November 2005, Week 2
November 2005, Week 1
October 2005, Week 5
October 2005, Week 4
October 2005, Week 3
October 2005, Week 2
October 2005, Week 1
September 2005, Week 5
September 2005, Week 4
September 2005, Week 3
September 2005, Week 2
September 2005, Week 1
August 2005, Week 5
August 2005, Week 4
August 2005, Week 3
August 2005, Week 2
August 2005, Week 1
July 2005, Week 5
July 2005, Week 4
July 2005, Week 3
July 2005, Week 2
July 2005, Week 1
June 2005, Week 5
June 2005, Week 4
June 2005, Week 3
June 2005, Week 2
June 2005, Week 1
May 2005, Week 5
May 2005, Week 4
May 2005, Week 3
May 2005, Week 2
May 2005, Week 1
April 2005, Week 5
April 2005, Week 4
April 2005, Week 3
April 2005, Week 2
April 2005, Week 1
March 2005, Week 5
March 2005, Week 4
March 2005, Week 3
March 2005, Week 2
March 2005, Week 1
February 2005, Week 4
February 2005, Week 3
February 2005, Week 2
February 2005, Week 1
January 2005, Week 5
January 2005, Week 4
January 2005, Week 3
January 2005, Week 2
January 2005, Week 1
December 2004, Week 5
December 2004, Week 4
December 2004, Week 3
December 2004, Week 2
December 2004, Week 1
November 2004, Week 5
November 2004, Week 4
November 2004, Week 3
November 2004, Week 2
November 2004, Week 1
October 2004, Week 5
October 2004, Week 4
October 2004, Week 3
October 2004, Week 2
October 2004, Week 1
September 2004, Week 5
September 2004, Week 4
September 2004, Week 3
September 2004, Week 2
September 2004, Week 1
August 2004, Week 5
August 2004, Week 4
August 2004, Week 3
August 2004, Week 2
August 2004, Week 1
July 2004, Week 5
July 2004, Week 4
July 2004, Week 3
July 2004, Week 2
July 2004, Week 1
June 2004, Week 5
June 2004, Week 4
June 2004, Week 3
June 2004, Week 2
June 2004, Week 1
May 2004, Week 5
May 2004, Week 4
May 2004, Week 3
May 2004, Week 2
May 2004, Week 1
April 2004, Week 5
April 2004, Week 4
April 2004, Week 3
April 2004, Week 2
April 2004, Week 1
March 2004, Week 5
March 2004, Week 4
March 2004, Week 3
March 2004, Week 2
March 2004, Week 1
February 2004, Week 5
February 2004, Week 4
February 2004, Week 3
February 2004, Week 2
February 2004, Week 1
January 2004, Week 5
January 2004, Week 4
January 2004, Week 3
January 2004, Week 2
January 2004, Week 1
December 2003, Week 5
December 2003, Week 4
December 2003, Week 3
December 2003, Week 2
December 2003, Week 1
November 2003, Week 5
November 2003, Week 4
November 2003, Week 3
November 2003, Week 2
November 2003, Week 1
October 2003, Week 5
October 2003, Week 4
October 2003, Week 3
October 2003, Week 2
October 2003, Week 1
September 2003, Week 5
September 2003, Week 4
September 2003, Week 3
September 2003, Week 2
September 2003, Week 1
August 2003, Week 5
August 2003, Week 4
August 2003, Week 3
August 2003, Week 2
August 2003, Week 1
July 2003, Week 5
July 2003, Week 4
July 2003, Week 3
July 2003, Week 2
July 2003, Week 1
June 2003, Week 5
June 2003, Week 4
June 2003, Week 3
June 2003, Week 2
June 2003, Week 1
May 2003, Week 5
May 2003, Week 4
May 2003, Week 3
May 2003, Week 2
May 2003, Week 1
April 2003, Week 5
April 2003, Week 4
April 2003, Week 3
April 2003, Week 2
March 2003, Week 5
March 2003, Week 4
March 2003, Week 3
March 2003, Week 2
March 2003, Week 1
February 2003, Week 4
February 2003, Week 3
February 2003, Week 2
February 2003, Week 1
January 2003, Week 5
January 2003, Week 4
January 2003, Week 3
January 2003, Week 2
January 2003, Week 1
December 2002, Week 5
December 2002, Week 4
December 2002, Week 3
December 2002, Week 2
December 2002, Week 1
November 2002, Week 4
November 2002, Week 3
November 2002, Week 2
November 2002, Week 1
October 2002, Week 5
October 2002, Week 4
October 2002, Week 3
October 2002, Week 2
October 2002, Week 1
September 2002, Week 5
September 2002, Week 4
September 2002, Week 3
September 2002, Week 2
September 2002, Week 1
August 2002, Week 5
August 2002, Week 4
August 2002, Week 3
August 2002, Week 2
August 2002, Week 1
July 2002, Week 5
July 2002, Week 4
July 2002, Week 3
July 2002, Week 2
July 2002, Week 1
June 2002, Week 5
June 2002, Week 4
June 2002, Week 3
June 2002, Week 2
June 2002, Week 1
May 2002, Week 5
May 2002, Week 4
May 2002, Week 3
May 2002, Week 2
May 2002, Week 1
April 2002, Week 5
April 2002, Week 4
April 2002, Week 3
April 2002, Week 2
April 2002, Week 1
March 2002, Week 5
March 2002, Week 4
March 2002, Week 3
March 2002, Week 1
February 2002, Week 4
February 2002, Week 3
February 2002, Week 2
February 2002, Week 1
January 2002, Week 5
January 2002, Week 4
January 2002, Week 3
January 2002, Week 2
January 2002, Week 1
December 2001, Week 5
December 2001, Week 4
December 2001, Week 3
December 2001, Week 2
December 2001, Week 1
November 2001, Week 5
November 2001, Week 4
November 2001, Week 3
November 2001, Week 2
November 2001, Week 1
October 2001, Week 5
October 2001, Week 4
October 2001, Week 3
October 2001, Week 2
October 2001, Week 1
September 2001, Week 5
September 2001, Week 4
September 2001, Week 3
September 2001, Week 2
September 2001, Week 1
August 2001, Week 5
August 2001, Week 4
August 2001, Week 3
August 2001, Week 2
August 2001, Week 1
July 2001, Week 5
July 2001, Week 4
July 2001, Week 3
July 2001, Week 2
July 2001, Week 1
June 2001, Week 5
June 2001, Week 4
June 2001, Week 3
June 2001, Week 2
June 2001, Week 1
May 2001, Week 5
May 2001, Week 4
May 2001, Week 3
May 2001, Week 2
May 2001, Week 1
April 2001, Week 5
April 2001, Week 4
April 2001, Week 3
April 2001, Week 2
April 2001, Week 1
March 2001, Week 5
March 2001, Week 4
March 2001, Week 3
March 2001, Week 2
March 2001, Week 1
February 2001, Week 4
February 2001, Week 3
February 2001, Week 2
February 2001, Week 1
January 2001, Week 5
January 2001, Week 4
January 2001, Week 3
January 2001, Week 2
January 2001, Week 1
December 2000, Week 5
December 2000, Week 4
December 2000, Week 3
December 2000, Week 2
December 2000, Week 1
November 2000, Week 5
November 2000, Week 4
November 2000, Week 3
November 2000, Week 2
November 2000, Week 1
October 2000, Week 5
October 2000, Week 4
October 2000, Week 3
October 2000, Week 2
October 2000, Week 1
September 2000, Week 5
September 2000, Week 4
September 2000, Week 3
September 2000, Week 2
September 2000, Week 1
August 2000, Week 5
August 2000, Week 4
August 2000, Week 3
August 2000, Week 2
August 2000, Week 1
July 2000, Week 5
July 2000, Week 4
July 2000, Week 3
July 2000, Week 2
July 2000, Week 1
June 2000, Week 5
June 2000, Week 4
June 2000, Week 3
June 2000, Week 2
June 2000, Week 1
May 2000, Week 5
May 2000, Week 4
May 2000, Week 3
May 2000, Week 2
May 2000, Week 1
April 2000, Week 5
April 2000, Week 4
April 2000, Week 3
April 2000, Week 2
April 2000, Week 1
March 2000, Week 5
March 2000, Week 4
March 2000, Week 3
March 2000, Week 2
March 2000, Week 1
February 2000, Week 5
February 2000, Week 4
February 2000, Week 3
February 2000, Week 2
February 2000, Week 1
January 2000, Week 5
January 2000, Week 4
January 2000, Week 3
January 2000, Week 2
January 2000, Week 1
December 1999, Week 5
December 1999, Week 4
December 1999, Week 3
December 1999, Week 2
December 1999, Week 1
November 1999, Week 5
November 1999, Week 4
November 1999, Week 3
November 1999, Week 2
November 1999, Week 1
October 1999, Week 5
October 1999, Week 4
October 1999, Week 3
October 1999, Week 2
October 1999, Week 1
September 1999, Week 5
September 1999, Week 4
September 1999, Week 3
September 1999, Week 2
September 1999, Week 1
August 1999, Week 5
August 1999, Week 4
August 1999, Week 3
August 1999, Week 2
August 1999, Week 1
July 1999, Week 5
July 1999, Week 4
July 1999, Week 3
July 1999, Week 2
July 1999, Week 1
June 1999, Week 5
June 1999, Week 4
June 1999, Week 3
June 1999, Week 2
June 1999, Week 1
May 1999, Week 5
May 1999, Week 4
May 1999, Week 3
May 1999, Week 2
May 1999, Week 1
April 1999, Week 5
April 1999, Week 4
April 1999, Week 3
April 1999, Week 2
April 1999, Week 1
March 1999, Week 5
March 1999, Week 4
March 1999, Week 3
March 1999, Week 2
March 1999, Week 1
February 1999, Week 5
February 1999, Week 4
February 1999, Week 3
February 1999, Week 2
February 1999, Week 1
January 1999, Week 5
January 1999, Week 4
January 1999, Week 3
January 1999, Week 2
January 1999, Week 1
December 1998, Week 5
December 1998, Week 4
December 1998, Week 3
December 1998, Week 2
December 1998, Week 1
November 1998, Week 5
November 1998, Week 4
November 1998, Week 3
November 1998, Week 2
November 1998, Week 1
October 1998, Week 5
October 1998, Week 4
October 1998, Week 3
October 1998, Week 2
October 1998, Week 1
September 1998, Week 5
September 1998, Week 4
September 1998, Week 3
September 1998, Week 2
September 1998, Week 1
August 1998, Week 4
August 1998, Week 3
August 1998, Week 2
August 1998, Week 1
July 1998, Week 5
July 1998, Week 4
July 1998, Week 3
July 1998, Week 2
July 1998, Week 1
June 1998, Week 5
June 1998, Week 4
June 1998, Week 3
June 1998, Week 2
June 1998, Week 1
May 1998, Week 5
May 1998, Week 4
May 1998, Week 3
May 1998, Week 2
May 1998, Week 1
April 1998, Week 5
April 1998, Week 4
April 1998, Week 3
April 1998, Week 2
April 1998, Week 1
March 1998, Week 5
March 1998, Week 4
March 1998, Week 3
March 1998, Week 2
March 1998, Week 1
February 1998, Week 5
February 1998, Week 4
February 1998, Week 3
February 1998, Week 2
February 1998, Week 1
January 1998, Week 5
January 1998, Week 4
January 1998, Week 3
January 1998, Week 2
January 1998, Week 1
December 1997, Week 5
December 1997, Week 4
December 1997, Week 3
December 1997, Week 2
December 1997, Week 1
November 1997, Week 5
November 1997, Week 4
November 1997, Week 3
November 1997, Week 2
November 1997, Week 1
October 1997, Week 5
October 1997, Week 4
October 1997, Week 3
October 1997, Week 2
October 1997, Week 1
September 1997, Week 5
September 1997, Week 4
September 1997, Week 3
September 1997, Week 2
September 1997, Week 1
August 1997, Week 5
August 1997, Week 4
August 1997, Week 3
August 1997, Week 2
August 1997, Week 1
July 1997, Week 5
July 1997, Week 4
July 1997, Week 3
July 1997, Week 2
July 1997, Week 1
June 1997, Week 5
June 1997, Week 4
June 1997, Week 3
June 1997, Week 2
June 1997, Week 1
May 1997, Week 5
May 1997, Week 4
May 1997, Week 3
May 1997, Week 2
May 1997, Week 1
April 1997, Week 5
April 1997, Week 4
April 1997, Week 3
April 1997, Week 2
April 1997, Week 1
March 1997, Week 5
March 1997, Week 4
March 1997, Week 3
March 1997, Week 2
March 1997, Week 1
February 1997, Week 5
February 1997, Week 4
February 1997, Week 3
February 1997, Week 2
February 1997, Week 1

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager