On Mon, 23 Feb 1998, Bruce R. Gilson wrote:
> Paul O. Bartlett wrote:
> >On Mon, 23 Feb 1998, Bruce R. Gilson wrote (tiny excerpt):
> >> ... Because I would NEVER want to
> >> learn a language such as you propose.
> >[...] Would we refuse to learn and
> >use it simply because it does not fit our own ideas and preferences?
> >Do we want an IAL at all or do we want only our own IAL?
> Two parts in my answer:
> IF some IAL becomes formally adopted by a quasi- or para-governmental body, or
> even by an association with which I have to deal, obviously I would have to
> learn it in the same way that [etc.]
> To your last question I say, it doesn't have to be _my_ IAL. But I do have some
> minimum standards. [...]
> Does this make my position clearer?
Not entirely. On the one hand, you say you would learn an IAL in
order to deal with some body. On the other hand, you say you have
minimum standards. It seems to me you can't have it both ways.
Suppose Esperanto -- for which you have repeatedly expressed almost
vehement dislike -- got adopted. Would you learn and use it, even
though it does not seem to meet your minimum standards?
Paul <[log in to unmask]>
Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA
Finger, keyserver, or WWW for PGP 2.6.2 public key
Home Page: http://www.access.digex.net/~pobart