Newsgroups: alt.uu.lang.misc,sci.lang,alt.language.artificial,soc.culture.europe
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!newstand.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!208.195.160.130!garlic.com!news.scruz.net!cruzio.com!cruzio!dfb
From: dfb@bbs.cruzio.com
Subject: Re: Naturalismo e schematicismo, un problema in linguas auxiliar
Reply-To: dfb@bbs.cruzio.com
Sender: news@cruzio.com (System Administrator)
Organization: Cruzio Community Networking System, Santa Cruz, CA
Message-ID: <E4t0EE.Er1@cruzio.com>
References: <32d22fb6.4656355@news.mindspring.com> <5ashvn$phk@acmey.gatech.edu> <32ed9ce4.7077997@news.mindspring.com>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: bbs.cruzio.com
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 04:27:50 GMT
Lines: 98


Someone has just pointed out that, whether we like it or not,
English is by far the nearest thing to a world language right
now. That's why I suggest that IALs should get their vocabulary
from English, if they want a chance at becoming a universal
2nd language.

There's much agreement among IAL advocates that the search for
the best IAL proposal isn't over. Even the most successful IAL
project hasn't come close to universality. When one approach
doesn't work, you try another. When the customer doesn't buy
one project, you offer her/him another.

Most people who study a 2nd language don't want neutrality. They
don't want fairness. They want English. You can say that's only
because of Englilsh's ecoonomic importance, not because of
its linguistic merit; so what? Whatever the reason is, it's
still true.

It's often pointed out that the lack of success of IALs is due
to a vicious cycle: Because so few people speak them, they don't
give you access to many people, and so people don't study
them, with the result that they continue to have few speakers.

But English-derived vocabulary would break that vicious
cycle. Someone could study an English-based IAL, with 
extremely simple grammar, and all they'd really have to
be studying would be the English words. They could do that
while studying English. Or they could use the IAL's simple
grammer easily, with the English vocabulary, before mastering
the highly arbitrary English grammer & spelling. (I forgot
to add that the English-derivations should be phonetically-
spelled.

Earlier, I proposed an Esperanto with an English-derived vocabulary--
an Angla-Esperanto. Another possibility would be a combination
of Chinese gramamar (but without the classifiers) with English-
derived vocabulary. As you probably know, English & Chinese
are remarkably similar in word-order. English & Chinese are
also, of course, the biggest languages. English, with its
lack of endings, especially lends itself to that isolating
grammar. I suggest that such a combination would please
lots of people.

Someone pointed out that Volupuk (sp?) was based on English,
and didn't succeed, and so my suggestion has already ben
tried. But did that language have as simple a grammar, and
as phonetic a transcription of English as what I'm proposing?
Also, English is much bigger than it was then.

Someone pointed out that Basic English failed, but Basic
English was based on a trade of lots of illogical idioms
for lots of words.

By the way, a 3rd possibility, in addition to those I mentioned,
would be to start as a simplification of English, phonetic
& grammatical & orthographic. But Pei pointed out that English
grammar is much more arbitrary than most of its speakers realize.
Maybe, in order to get rid of that arbitrariness, one would
have to go all the way to a Chinese-like total generality.
I find that appealing & elegant. Also, it makes for great
flexibility for adding more grammatical distinctions
in the form of optional particles. Someone suggested such
a language with provision for the optional expression of
the distinctions familiar to each people using the language,
but maybe that's over-ambitious.

Anyway, whether it's Angla-Esperanto or Chinese grammar with
English-derived vocabulary, it seems to me that English
is the kind of vocabulary that people want to study, based
on available statistics on 2nd language study.

Someone named Edmundo, on s.c.e., got quite angry when I suggested
on that newsgroup that a version of E-o with a different vocabulary
would have better success. 

And even when I carefully explained the motivation for that
proposal, I was accused of just wanting to to make it easier
for myself, by using English words. No, I'd prefer something
fairer, but winnability is much more important to me than
fairness. The main thing is to actually have a genuine
universal 2nd language, whether or not it's neutral.

And if enough IAL advocates really disliked the use of
English words, then at least Interlingua's vocabulary could
be a next best possibility, due to the number of words it
has that are close to English. But I feel English would
be the most winnable, with a world public that wants to
study English. 


Mike Ossipoff






