Print

Print


Ray Brown skripted:
 
> >In the short term, clearly
> >we may include the west-Euro-L2s in our calculations,
>
> Why?  I thought you said you think Paul is right.
 
OK, he is right except for short term considerations.
 
> >but in the longer
> >term, surely we are projecting our planned ILs to replace the R/G langs
> >as these people's L2.
>
> So, as Paul says, why should they have to learn a R/G natlang _first_ in
> order to make learning a conIAL easier.  So I say to my Xhosa speaker I've
> got an ideal conIAL here; but I've based it on the languages of western
> Europe so you'll going to find it a whole lot easier if you learn English
> (or Afrikaans, or French, or Spanish or whatever) _first_.
>
> Having learnt English (or whatever) she will then find that she can now
> communicate with millions of people in many different countries and when I
> say "Well, what about learning my conIAL now?", she'll probably see no need
> and tell me just what I can do with it!
 
As I recall, Xhosa is a South African lang (correct me if i'm wrong).
So that person will be bound to learn English or Afrikaans anyway to
get along in the rest of their own country.
I suppose this is the whole point: do we intend our IL to go so far
as to eliminate the need for Africans with African L1 to learn the
European national language of their own country?  That is probably quite
an ambitious goal, but it's not an unreasonable one.
 
James Chandler
[log in to unmask]