Print

Print


>From: "Rex F. May" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: International Auxiliary Languages <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: AUXLANG Digest - 28 Aug 2001 to 29 Aug 2001 (#2001-190)
>Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:11:05 -0600
>
>Samuel Rivier wrote:
>
> > Umm I didn't mention Ido because it is a clone of
> > Esperanto, and I think is so similar to the latter
> > that it doesn't deserve recognition. I suppose, like
> > taiwan to the people's republic, they're all chinese
> > to me.
> >
> > Also I did mention Ceqli and in fact praised you on it
> > in the last message and in one I sent a few months
> > earlier.
>
>Yes you did.  There's something weirdly anonymous
>about the net.  All you have to go by is names to begin
>with.  Sorry.
>
> > When I say naturalistic I mean it in the etymological
> > sense. An IAL must mimic as closely as possible normal
> > linguistic patterns. That is another of my beefs with
> > the lojban place-value system.
>
>Agreed.  I don't think anybody ever seriously thought of
>Loglan as an IAL, though.  Certainly not me.

Well, they have. See 'http://www.loglan.org/Loglan1/chap1.html#sec1.8'.

> > To quote Richard K. Harrison (Author of "Proposed
> > Guidelines for the Deveolpment of an Optimal IAL"),
> > "Europe has never really been the center of
> > civilization, and is even less so now."
> > I have a serious problem with Euroclones because I
> > think there is a serious misconception about the
> > population of European language speakers (not
> > necessarily native, mind you).
> >
> > Mandarin Chinese numbers at about 1 billion, English
> > at about 1.3 billion. I think we can agree that a
> > Hindi speaker will have about as limited a capability
> > of learning a Western European language as any
> > non-European, so that adds 800 million. Add Arabic and
> > maybe Malay to that and you number about 2.5 to 3
> > billion speakers of non IE languages, over HALF THE
> > EARTH!
> > All West European speakers combined can't come near
> > this number. This goes to show how "universal"
> > Euroclones really can be.
>
>I mildly disagree about Hindi.  I think a Hindi speaker
>wd have an easier time with Euro languages than a speaker
>of a non IE language would.  But not an enormously
>easier time.  And mostly because of the cognates.

No, I must disagree with you there. Hindi has cognates with European
languages, but they're hard to recognise. I agree that learening a Euroclone
would be easier for a Hindi speaker, but more because Hindi has the concepts
of 'parts of speech', just like most European languages, it has conjugation
of verbs, etc. etc. things that are characteristics of the IE family.

>I'll say this about Euroclones.  In general, they're more
>universal than any other IAL, for the reason of numbers
>and distribution.  But no project I've ever seen can claim
>to really be universal.  I'm making a feeble attempt to
>have Ceqli be _neutral_, in its use of Mandarinesque
>grammar and its offbeat system of deriving vocabulary.
>
>--
>Rex F. May
>To order my book, click on:
>http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/gdummy.htm
>See my cartoons daily at:
>http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp

co'o mi'e ragyv.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp