Newsgroups: uk.politics,alt.politics.ec,sci.lang,talk.politics.european-union
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!hookup!news.moneng.mei.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!warwick!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!edcogsci!iad
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Subject: Re: Single European Language
Message-ID: <DA5wuM.27F@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK
References: <smryanDA1t7t.3wr@netcom.com> <803065760snz@storcomp.demon.co.uk> <DA5JFG.3r@ftel.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 12:15:55 GMT
Lines: 45

Folks, it's fine to bash Esperanto and the Esperantists (I enjoy
doing it myself), but let's get the facts straight.

In article <smryanDA1t7t.3wr@netcom.com> smryan@netcom.com (@#$%!?!) writes:
>While an invented language might be very regular the day it is
>created, what about ten years or hundred years later. People make
>mistakes, some of which become embedded. Verbal shortcuts are
>invented. Humans don't need extremely regular languages and
>wouldn't know what to do with one if it existed.

This is nonsense, of course.  There are very many natural languages
whose phonological, derivational and inflexional complexity comes far
closer to the clockwork regularity of Esperanto than to the lunatic
idiosyncrasy of Latin.  I'm sure the speakers of Turkish, Japanese,
Quechua, Swahili, Indonesian would be thrilled to know that they
neither need those languages nor know what to do with them.


In article <DA5JFG.3r@ftel.co.uk> I.G.Batten@ftel.co.uk (Ian G Batten) writes:
>In article <803065760snz@storcomp.demon.co.uk>, Phil Hunt  <philip@storcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> Esperanto's been around for over 100 years, and still has a regular grammar
>
>Yes, that's because dead languages neither spoken not written by more
>than a few hundred people tend to become preserved.  I suspect that
>ancient Greek hasn't changed that much lately for the same reason.

See above.  (A few hundred people, indeed!  Wasn't the Inca Empire,
whose official language Quechua was 500 years ago, larger than the EU?
Now, in the days of its waning, the language still has several million
speakers, and yes, although it has not remained the same, it still has
a regular grammar.)

>Or are you going to show me the vibrant, culturally active Esperanto
>community?  Languages change to reflect the culture in which they are
>used, and if they have no culture there is little reason to change.

`Languages change to reflect the culture in which they are used'?
Care to provide a couple of references to support this statement?
I'm sure I'm not the only linguist who would be interested to see
the research which has led to this result.
-- 
`So they widny bow doon tae me, wid they no?! [...] They deserve their paiks.'
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
