Print

Print


In-Reply-To: <v01520d01b0f79e012d9e@[195.54.224.5]>
> > How can we europeans be so egoist of chosing an IAL that it's only
> > going to be easy for us?
>
> Good for Marcus!  Exactly what I've been asking for the past two or
> three years.
 
Well, I think the reasoning goes that languages such as English, Arabic
and Chinese are so diverse that there is not really that much scope for
creating even a semi-naturalistic con-lang.  Loglan and Lojban select
their vocabularies from various "major languages" using a (quasi-)
objective method.  The degree of recognizability is not high.  On the
other hand, I do find knowing the original words blended to form the
Lo{gl,jb}an word very useful from a mnemonic point of view.
 
Zamenhof argued that greater internationality would result in a language
equally _difficult_ for all.  Such a language would be fairer but it
might not be the best solution.
 
Is is also a fact, if a regrettable one, that knowledge of European
languages is widespread.  I have also heard anecdotal evidence that
Esperanto is significantly easier for Koreans than English.
 
What's more it is not unreasonable for Westerners to work with the
languages they know or to work on an interlanguage for Western
countries.  We could certainly do with one and half a cake is better
than none.
 
Nevertheless, it would certainly be interesting if someone with relevant
knowledge did attempt a widely-bases interlanguage.  I remember hearing
about an Asia-based interlanguage on ConLang[?] several years ago.
 
> If you cannot manage Arabic, wouldn't it be better to communicate in
> some neutral medium which respected both European & Arabic culture
> alike?   Why should it be the Egyptian who has to go more than half
> way to meet us Europeans?
 
The answer is out there: Lojban!
 
> Don't be intimidated by the Euroclonists.
 
Certainly not.  But don't say their work has no value either.
 
> Humor not necessarily marked
 
Good!  Emoticons are becoming overused and losing their force.
 
-- jP --