Print

Print


Robert J. Petry wrote:
 
> Accents in Occidental:
> I've read the few comments about Occ and accents on this list,
> and have come to this conclusion. Why are people who aren't going
> to use Occidental in their lifetimes, probably, even worried
> about it?
 
Well, speaking personally, my comments were motivated by concerns about
fitting into already existing technology and a lack of concern about
100% unanimity in pronunciation. There is, of course, no objective
criteria for establishing the value of either.
 
 
> After having that thought hit me, and after reading a few
> of the explanations given for accents in Occ. I personally am not
> going to do away with them. There aren't that many, and they
> serve a purpose.
 
As you see fit. The main thing I think this list can do (I am an
idealist) is offer different viewpoints to those of us who want input.
What we individually do with them is up to each one of us.
 
 
> Occidental explanations and examples:
> Because I thought it would be of interest to present Occ to this
> "language" list since it had not been seen or read by most of us,
> I've come to the conclusion it is no longer necessary to do so.
 
Why?
 
 
> Sending a card with Esp:
> There's nothing wrong with doing this. Even RLR has a booklet to
> send along with a letter to a friend to help them read the RLR
> message. However, I could translate the RLR booklet into
> Occidental and send with the letter, and then the receiver would
> have two languages they could use. And, no need for a dozen
> different language translations to explain RLR for different
> people receiving the RLR letter.
 
This sounds like you're using Occi mainly as a tool in propogating RLR.
Is that what you mean when you refer to them as a package? Partly?
 
> Hype vs "detailed explanations".
> First, Occidental can beat out almost any, if not all, detailed
> grammar arguments presented by other IAL's against Occ, and for
> their position. Why? Because all the arguments presented against
> Occidental are basically the personal preferences of the critic,
> and have virtually nothing to do with the _real world usage_ of
> the language.
 
Are you implying that criticisms against other IAL's are *not* basically
the personal preferences of the critic? In other words, you don't have
personal preferences. Personal preferences are vital, we need to be
honest that that's what they are though.
 
 
> Frankly, Occidental _is_ the _best_ IAL on the
> planet today.
 
 Well you're implying that a) there's a market for IAL's and b) there's
some set of criteria that we can agree on to evaluate them.
I take a different approach.
a) Although I perceive a *need* for an IAL, I can perceive no great
market for IAL's. The choices I then make are dictated by this
constraint.
b) There's no criteria about "better" or "worse" for IAL's than there is
for natural languages. The only criteria is "works" or "doesn't work".
Natural languages by definition work. The very few IAL's that have
speaking populations either a) "work" in which case, will have
development/change patterns similar to those of natural languages b)
"don't work" in which case speakers will rapidly modify them in the
differection of something that does work. No problem. Or rather, any
fundamentally unworkable structure as thought of by an IAL's creator(s)
will automatically be corrected (by "corrected", I mean "brought in line
with the parameters of natural languages").
 
 
> Does that mean everyone will go for it because it
> is the best? Hardly, some folks prefer to remain in their present
> ruts. Ruts are bad habits that are worse than the nicotine or
> heroin habit.
 
I think your enthusiasm for Occidental is wonderful, I wish I could
share it (maybe someday...) but please don't compare other IAL's to
ruts. Imagine a French speaker were comparing English to a rut, you
probably wouldn't like it.
 
 
 
> Also, the public does NOT buy detail, they buy a
> product, concept, or ideal on it's emotional appeal.
 
Very true.
 
> I prefer to
> give the public what it wants to know: Does it work, and is it
> the best on the market? To which the answers are Yes and Yes.
 
 Does it work? Yes. No further comment is necessary.
 
> Then, those who want the best will "buy" the best. Others will
> always prefer to stick with second best. Or, even third or
> fourth. Some [most] even prefer to remain in poverty and never
> learn any other language but the one they received at birth.
 
Again, true enough. But referring to peoples IAL's of chose as "poverty"
or "heroin addiction" doesn't make you any friends. No, you don't do
that directly, the connection is pretty easy to make though.
 
Mi amika fughi,
Mike Farris