Print

Print


Dear Thomas,

I don't really think this is a case of hypocrisy (note
spelling).

A similar situation prevails with other languages. For
example, the number of people using English as a
second language has recently overtaken the number of
native speakers. 

There are also different variants of English, e.g.
British English, American English, Indian English,
Singapore English (Singlish), Malaysian English
(Manglish), etc. 

Some versions of "Manglish" could be unintelligible to
speakers of other variants.

One can conceptualise different variations within a
language:

 the basilect - which is along way way from the
standard variety;

 the mesolect - where perhaps 50% is understandable by
speakers of other variants of the language;

 the acrolect - which is close to the standard 

The fact that if you speak some kind of English you
will be more or less understood "a prime vista" by
millions of people for whom it is a second language
does not mean that one has to abandon any notion of
standards. (Though the change in the balance of power
between native and non-native speakers arguably opens
up the possibility that it will no longer be the
British or Americans who have the last say in deciding
what that standard is.)

Of course, the situation is slightly different with
any constructed (or extracted) IL, as for most of its
speakers it is not the native language. 

It is actually an advantage that the IL is not the
property of any particular national group of users.
All speakers are on an equal footing psychologically.


Don la Fulmo  


--- Thomas Alexander <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


And here is another hypocracy.  When I use words
like "saepe" or even "presque" (which is not in the
IED at all), I am certain that I am writing in a way
which can be understood "a prime vista" to any speaker
of Interlingua (or, at the very most, he may need to
look one word up in his dictionary), yet the reaction
is not "hey, I understand this" but rather "this
Salivanto has a strange way of writing."  At the same
time, however, they expect to be able to use their
language with non-Interlinguans without them coming
back and saying that they're talking wrong.

Put another way, the claim that the primary value of
Interlingua is that you can use it "a prime vista"
with the uninitiated is at odds with the claim that
one should strive to learn to speak Interlingua like
the Interlinguans do, yet both these claims are put
forward by Interlinguans -- often by the same person
in the same message.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com