It seems to me problematic from a cat-rat distribution standpoint. If people who aren't fluent in English are too busy or uneducated to learn English "properly," then why would they be that much more capable of learning Esata? Granted, Esata is simpler, but it's also not the lingua franca that English is, so there's far less impetus to learn it (which means that it will remain not the lingua franca). Also, English remains the lingua franca largely from USian resistance to learn or use any language other than English, and I don't see a lot of USians either bending to "Well, all right, I'll learn *one* other language" or to the notion that this particular corruption of English, among all those out there, is acceptable. So that leaves an English-based creole as being used primarily among people who aren't fully fluent in English themselves, which defeats the putative purpose of using it as a global language as opposed to a localized creole (i.e., for
 communication between those fluent in English and those not).

As for topline comments about Esata as an auxlang meant to be learned by English speakers:

-- The vowels have basic pre-GVS values (e.g., <i>=/i/). That's currently a struggle for English speakers studying other IE languages, so it would be a struggle for them learning Esata as well.
-- I don't think auxlangs should have "optional" features right off the bat, and that applies here to the odd writing system.
-- /$rp/? That's not going to work for English speakers. Syllabic /n/ and /r/ in general seem problematic to me in many of the example words (e.g., /srumn/ "instrument," which also has /$sr/ in violation of English phonotactics.
-- Section 12 of the PDF suggests that any language could use the principles of Esata to create their own version, which would then be inaccessible to speakers of English (even more so than the source language would be). I don't see how that's either tenable or consistent with the stated purpose of the language (i.e., to make a simplified English).

Instead of creating a new and untested system, I should think the stated goal (an English-based auxlang) would be more successful by looking at a global sample of English creoles and pidgins and integrating the commonalities. This would most likely result in some of the same changes -- simpler spelling (including pre-GVS vowel values) and regularized grammar -- but would capture changes that people naturally make.

-- Paul

----- Original Message ----
> From: Vincent Pistelli <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 11:01:32 AM
> Subject: esata
> I was just wondering if any of you saw a google ad for this new language
> Esata. It looks kind of neat, and I was just wondering what everyone else
> thought of it. I couldn't find a grammar or anything for it though, and it's
> web page isn't put together too well. 
> What do you guys think about it?