On Mon, 18 May 2009 12:38:21 -0700, Gary Shannon wrote:

> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote: 
> >
> >   Purism does not preserve languages, it *kills*
> > them.  Change is part of languages' nature; a language which no
> > longer changes is a dead language.
> The very process by which French is being nudged toward extinction.

Well, French is not going to die anytime in the foreseeable future.
But French is not an unchanging language; the attempts of the
Académie Française to preserve the language as it is are not all
that successful.  And even the AF has no "no change" policy - they
mainly try to replace anglicisms by native coinage.

What I meant is this: any language that is actually *used* *will*
change, especially in vocabulary.  If you try to nail the vocabulary
shut, you will get at something too clumsy for practical use.

> And probably a significant reason why auxlangs will never catch on
> with the general population. English language Grammar Nazis can be bad
> enough, but Auxlang Nazis are the worst.

Concurred, though your use of the word "Nazi" raises a bullshit flag
in me.  Such usage is disrespectful towards the victims of the *real*

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf