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!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!noc.netcom.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!uknet!ftel.co.uk!I.G.Batten
From: I.G.Batten@ftel.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Subject: Re: Single European Language
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: jupiter.fulcrum.co.uk
Message-ID: <DA5JFG.3r@ftel.co.uk>
Sender: news@ftel.co.uk (0000-news(0000))
Organization: Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Ltd
References: <690061730wnr@afin.demon.co.uk> <3rgkru$7cn@cosmos.imag.fr> <smryanDA1t7t.3wr@netcom.com> <803065760snz@storcomp.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 07:28:28 GMT
Lines: 25

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.

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.

> If a constructed lang was chosen to be the EU's common 2nd language,
> it would keep its regular grammar to a large extent, because people
> would be using it to communicate. If they used non-standard words
> or grammar, they would be less likely to be understood. This is 
> especially true when you consider that the person they are talking
> to might not know the lang very well.

So how would new words be introduced to cover new concepts?  Will
manufacturers of novel devices have to seek a new word before they can
sell their product?

ian
