Yes, I agree with the general viewpoint of Mr. Dehee's
comments, reflecting JayBowks. I would not propose a IAL based on [equally]Chinese, Japanese, Hindi, Russian, Spanish, english,
and Swahili. Or any such formula. Lojban trys a bit of this in
vocab, but NOT in grammar. Dunia tried this too, I think. Any
IAL would have much if not most of words from languages based
in Europe. But selection would be based on world distribution.
Not automaticaly based on ancient Latin or modern generalized

>Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:19:36 -0400
From: Jacques Deh=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E9e?= <[log in to unmask]>
[ Add to Address Book | Block Address | Report as Spam ]
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Auxlang > Eurolang > Romaling

>Dear Wei Chang,
>Jay Bowks wrote in 1997:
> I rather would see another term used for Euroclones
>or Occidentally based Conlangs, because as has been pointed out many times
>in this list--that I have seen in the short time I have been subscribed to
> it--the original languages on which many of the Auxlangs that have sprung
> up from fertile linguistic minds find suitable ground to base their roots
> is definitely from Europe.

Fact, of course. But not all is Roma-centric.

>But isn't it the case that though North and
>South America are continents in themselves, the predominant
>language is of European background?

This is the fact.

> Africa with all its diverse and exotic linguistic
> diversity, was it not colonized and taught a few Euro-based languages of
>colonization? French, Spanish, German, English, Dutch, Portuguese.

Also Arabic. Some Italian too. But majority in Africa do not
speak a European language.

>And of
>course all these also show themselves throughout Asia and Oceania.
> Australians definitely speak something akin to English, I think. :^)

Oh, yes. Even most aborigines.

>So could someone come up with a rather not so "culpative" (is that a term?)
>form of the word for a Euroclone?

Culpative? What guilt has a language term? Euro- is
only a localizer. Not an insult.

> After all I hope we all have more than
> the unification of Europe in mind when we Conlang in earnest.

I see now less evidence of this[in reality, if not theory].

> As is the
> case with the majority of postings, much gets talked about other than the

>European'icity of Auxlangs. I sincerely hope projects like Bahasan develop

Also Dunia and many others in the past. Seem none on Auxlang
recently. Maybe this is only an impression, since i have not
lurked for months.

>more and more, I find it intreguing enough. But I also hope the
> of originally European languages

not "universality", but "widespreadness". Yes

> is acknowledged in any
> Auxlang for use throughout the world. :^) Since, Jay B.

I do not disagree [with that big change]. Don't forget
there are many widespread words that are NOT in Europe. And
there are MANY meanings with no one related word among all
or most of the languages inside Europe.

> Dear Wei Chang, this text sounds for me like a 6 years old
> answer to you, a very well written one, in my opinion.
> Best regards, Jacques

Yes, it applies. But it is 6 years old. Who on Auxlang now is
working on such--or even mentioning the matter to all
the Romanic enthusiasts?

 "." CHANG Wei

Join Excite! -
The most personalized portal on the Web!