Print

Print


Don HARLOW <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>There seem to be four basic questions involved in this ongoing, and
>mailbox-filling, discussion:
 
>(1) SHOULD NOVIAL INFINITIVES END IN -R? (and the like)
 
Not _infinitives_ but _verb_base_forms_ (as James Chandler has already posted
in response).
 
>Given that the question(s) involve(s) not just those in the Novial-l
>list, but also the Novial-c(handler) and Novial-f(ranco) variants,
>these are probably legitimate concerns here.
 
Actually, we are going to have to contend with three options here: No -r either
on the infinitive or any other verb form (James Chandler); -r on _all_ verb
forms that do not have another ending (the NRG), and -r specifically as an
infinitive marker (Marcos Franco). But the answer to this cannot be settled
by debate on Auxlang. All of us have our ideas here, and I _believe_ that none
of us is the slightest bit likely to be convinced any differently. I think
that the only settlement of this question will be for our three _complete_
systems to compete; if some fourth proposal is made later on as a synthesis of
two or all of the three _subsequent_to_ actual publication and _use_ of these
systems, it will at _that_ time have whatever verb system has proved best as a
result of _actual_use_.
 
Right now we each have _theoretical_ reasons for our preferences, none of which
are convincing to our opponents.
 
>(2) IS NOVIAL-L DEMOCRATIC, OR IS BRUCE GILSON A VILE DICTATOR?
 
>If the former, nobody -- especially those who are not on or who have
>left the list -- should have any complaints. If the latter, those on
>the list who are being used as window dressing always have the option
>to desubscribe, if they so choose, leaving Bruce in complete command
>of the field with the Novial-g(ilson) variant; and, again, the matter
>does not impinge on those outside the list. So this particular
>question, which impinges on personality and has been taking up a lot
>of bandwidth lately, does not seem to be an appropriate one to
>discuss here.
 
Thank you, Don. Obviously the people who might have felt the list is being
run undemocratically have left or never have joined. And the people who are
happy with the way it's run are still with us. I can't see what concern it
is to Auxlangers, but when I see personal attacks, I want the chance to respond.
But I'd be more than happy to see this topic laid to rest.
 
>(3) WHO NOW WEARS THE GENUINE MANTLE OF OTTO JESPERSEN?
 
>Auxlang is hardly the place to get the answer to this. There is an
>Esperantist group in Brazil that has done yeoman's work in answering
>such questions -- they have already published a couple of volumes of
>Zamenhof's posthumous poetry (and shown, in doing so, that poetic
>talent tends to deteriorate markedly after death). I recommend that
>those really interested turn to this group and get Jespersen's own
>current opinions on the matter. A final report here on Auxlang might
>be of some interest, far more so than ongoing speculation. But, given
>that Jespersen, in the space of twenty years, changed from thinking
>that Ido was the cat's pajamas to abandoning it completely, I suspect
>that everybody will be very surprised by what the man is thinking
>today, more than half a century after his death. Who knows, given his
>current circumstances (whatever they may be), he might not even
>consider the question of great interest anymore.
 
Actually, this seems, more than anything else, to have been the principal
topic of contention. But as Ray Brown stated and I've already responded in
agreement, NOBODY can really tell what Jespersen might approve. You obviously
agree with this.
 
What _I_ would like to see would be an agreement to treat this question as
follows:
 
Those who feel that they are following J's ideas be permitted to follow whatev-
er direction their concept of J's ideas leads them, even if this allows for
competing concepts of "J's ideas" since nobody can appeal to the ultimate
authority;
 
BUT, those of us who feel J would have approved of one thing and disapproved of
another NOT attack as un-Jespersenian those others of us whose conclusions are
opposite.
 
AND, one thing that I think we all have agreed upon, we admit that what we are
doing is _based_ on J's creation, but that we have no proof as to _what_ J
would feel about our current developments, if he could be resuscitated today.
 
>(4) WHO GETS TO USE THE NAME NOVIAL?
 
>Anybody who wants to.
 
It looks as the real answer to this is "nobody." We were going to, but in the
face of opposition, a unanimous vote agreed not to after an equally unanimous
consensus had made the decision to do it. James doesn't want to. I don't think
Marcos wants to either, though I'm not certain. Philip not only does not want
to; he's already picked the name he _is_ using.
 
                                Bruce R. Gilson
                                email: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask]
                                IRC: EZ-as-pi
                                WWW: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3141
                                (for language stuff: add /langpage.html)