At 11:17 am +0000 24/4/02, Kala Tunu wrote:
>The trouble with keeping only phonems that most earthlings can tell and
>execute is that you end up with the 7 usual gk, lr, m, n, bp, s, dt
>archphonems or whatever equivalent allophones. if all auxlangs adopt this
>minimal phonology, they will soon all sound the same.

But they don't - and Esperanto will be sticking around for some time to
come, I expect, and that can't be accused of sticking with the archphones.

Besides, it looks as though I'm going to be stuck with [1]  ;)

>I understand "hoaxlang" as "hoax auxiliary language". Right - tho I'm still
>not quite certain exactly what you mean. Maybe you've
>detected that the IAL aim of BrSc is not being pushed.
>The IAL aim of BrSc and Interlect seem be pushed technically but not
>"politically". i guess you're making an auxlang with well-thought "minimal"
>or "logical" or "universal" syntax or phonology or vocabulary for the fun of
>it--not to save the world--and keeping in mind that what is easy for some is
>hell to others:

You are absolutely right on all points!

The "save the world & bring apple pie to all" auxlang mentality seems to me
naive in the extreme.  As events in the Lebanon several years back, the 30
years 'Troubles' in northern Ireland, and more recently the genocide (aka
"ethnic cleansing") in Croatia & Bosnia show that speaking one language
doesn't stop people being nasty to one another.  On the other hand, the
Swiss seem to have managed to live in harmony with one another for a long
time now, despite their four different languages.

I have not even the tinyest interest in pushing any conlang IAL politically
- quite the reverse, in fact - which is why I'm not on the Auxlang list.

My own personal view is that when peoples have felt the need for an IAL
they've found it in a (modified) natlang, e.g. Akkadian, Aramaic, Hellenic
Greek, Medieval Latin, Arabic, Malay-Indonesian (or is it
Indonesian-Malay?), Swahili, etc. etc.; and currently the most wide-spread
IAL is English (or AngloAmerican).  I have little doubt this will continue
to be the main type of IAL.

>etc. Btw i like the Toki Pona pidgin auxlang-for-fun:

I agree.

The reason that an IAL is one of the goals of "BrSc" is inherited from
'Speedwords'.  I liked the *interlectual challenge* of trying to produce a
language that could act as both an IAL and an alphabetic shorthand.