Print

Print


MacLeod Dave wrote:
> 2010/1/2 <deinx nxtxr> <[log in to unmask]>:
>> MacLeod Dave wrote:
>>
>>> I think the lesson of Na'vi may end up being that in the beginning,
>>> communication is secondary to simply having a powerful reason for
>>> existence, some sort of mythology that people are interested in
>>> besides just the language. Appealing to groups simply on the basis of
>>> communication usually just leads to a Nutterist conclusion that
>>> English is the best way to go since so many speak it anyway. Actually
>>> the interest in Na'vi is probably a good sign for languages like
>>> modern Indo-European and Sambahsa, since people that are interested in
>>> a language clearly don't mind if it's more complex than your average
>>> auxlang.
>> Their interest isn't in the language or languages in general.
> 
> Wrong. Look at the number of people on the Na'vi group that are
> professional linguists. Also check out the people that have written up
> the Na'vi page on Wikipedia.

Yes, linguists.  It had a thread on conlang too which is probably where 
a lot of the activity was spawned though discussions have moved onward 
to other things. The general public though couldn't care less and even 
for the linguists the it's just a current fad.  Remember the Demos group 
  like so many others had a lot of activity early on.  After a couple of 
months everyone strayed into other projects or interests and that was 
the end of it.