Print

Print


I have been doing a lot of readintg lately. One such effort is in
Hogben's Interglossa. He makes some interesting points, which for
me, help explain why mote is a good IAL tool. Dutton's primary
concern was with "writing" first, speech second. Even when he
changed his "International Symbolic Language" because of positive
criticism from Dr. Foat, he still wrote that the written form was
of first importance. Hogben offers some insight as to why.

"The skills necessary for complete mastery [of a new language]
are: (a) auditory recognition; (b) pronunciation and intonation;
(c) self-expression in writing; (d) recognition of the written
word. Whether one of them is more or less difficult to acquire
than another depends partly on personal gifts, such as vusual
memory and mimetic aptitude. Opportunities for use by reading, by
travel or by correspondence play a part, as also intrinsic
characteristics of the language itself.
"Languages which are relatively holophrastic, such as French,
offer greater difficulties for auditory recognition than more
staccato languages like German. The syntax of German makes
reading difficult, and Hottentot clicks or Chinese tones are hard
to mimic without special phonetic training. With due allowance to
these considerations, one thing stands out clear. On the whole,
most people master reading knowledge with least difficulty, and
acquire the trick of auditory recognition last of all. With
constant use, the latter comes easily to anyone who has acquired
the knack of self-expression in writing. So auditory recognition
is of minor interest, if the end in view is to make things easy
for the beginner." p. 22

To me this is one of the strong point of RLR. One uses it daily,
every day, in one's private life whether there is another speaker
around or not. Thus, one can use RLR literally everyday through
their writing. What a nice way to learn and to reinforce the
learning of a new language. Plus, all the time while doing this,
we are writing at least at double speed.

Hogben makes several other most interesting statements that give
excellent meaning to Dutton's method.

Hogben's book was published in 1943. Dutton's book was first
published in 1943. And, several other's, for instance Heimer's
Mondial was first published in 1943. Does anyone know of other
works on IAL's published in the same year? Seems like 1943-4-7
were prime years for this kind of publishing. Loom of Language,
where Hogben calls Speedwords "ingenious" was published in 1944.
Interesting, all of the few mentions of Speedwords that we know
of, published in major works, or by famous people, always mention
Speedwords favorably. I like that.

Al l sue, & stu mote,
Bob