Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.ultranet.com!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!uknet!festival!edcogsci!iad
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Subject: Re: One point against Esperanto
Message-ID: <D6K4A1.7Fp@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK
References: <D5tBnM.8Gv@cix.compulink.co.uk> <D5uq0q.GJ2@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <elnaD63D6J.9x9@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 10:10:47 GMT
Lines: 39

In article <elnaD63D6J.9x9@netcom.com> elna@netcom.com (Esperanto League N America) writes:
>Among the definitions of "logic" in my dictionary [American Heritage--
>the one with the IE appendix!] I found this:
>"The formal, guiding principles of a discipline, school, or science."  [...]
>So if the system of rules of word-formation and syntax is followed more 
>rigourously in one language than in another, it is completely correct, and
>not even a stretch of normal usage, to call that language more logical. 

Saying that Esperanto is *more logical* than SAE (Standard Average
European) is not nearly the same thing as saying that it follows logic
*rather than* SAE.  I say to you that if Zamenhof had chosen, say, the
North-West Caucasian languages as his starting point instead of the
Germanic, Romance and Slavic ones, he would've ended up with a language
which would be very different from Esperanto, although it would be just
as regular and as consistent in its following of its guiding principles
(and thus, by your dictionary's definition, just as logical).

>Perhaps it can be argued that Lojban or other planned languages are
>yet *more* logical than Esperanto,

Hrmph.  That sounds like `Perhaps it can be argued that elephants or
other mammals are yet heavier than dogs'.

>but it is clear that Esperanto uses a small number of rules and
>follows them rigourously, and is therefore "designed to follow logic".

Sure.  And so would the pan=North-West_Caucasian (ugh! running out
of hyphens here) conlang I brought up above.  Yet in all matters
regarding linear precedence of morphemes, words or clauses, in the
structure of their possessive, relative and Perun knows what other
constructions, the two would hardly share a thing.  And the reason
for that would be that one of them would be following SANWC, while
the other, yes, the other follows SAE.

-- 
`"Haud oan there a meenit," says the king tae Joseph, "I've been thinkin."'
Ivan A Derzhanski (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk)    (J Stuart, _Auld Testament Tales_)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,   Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House E113, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Pk Rd, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
