Re: Which auxlangs? (was Re: I won't start a flame war)

At 6:52 pm -0800 8/11/99, Charles wrote:
>Don Blaheta wrote:
>
>> > The point is that it is too political an issue to decide that way.
>>
>> Is there any better way to decide it?
>
>Yes, avoid it entirely, or include about 6 of them including Occidental.
>Please do *NOT* choose 3, that is the worst thing you could do.
Tosh.
I saw _nothing_ political about Don first letter.  Like it or not, Volapuk
& Esperanto were two of the first _conlang_ auxlangs to get any sizable
following. Actually, Solresol was there even earlier  :)

As far as I can see, Don was being objective & non-political.
Why do we have to bring the petty & pointless politics of auxlang onto this
list?

>
>> Having seen Jay's post of it, I'd be perfectly happy with that as our
>> romance auxlang on the T-shirt---it's perfect, because it's fairly
>> representative of its genre, *and* it's designed by a list member to
>> boot. :)
>
>Why have any other auxlang? You just keep asking for trouble.
Only from those looking for trouble IMHO.

>Auxlangs will save the world, but only after they kill each other!?!
Auxlangs will do neither.

[...]
>>
>> I understand not liking Esperanto, but the fact remains that it would
>> be probably the #1 most recognisable thing on the t-shirt, absent any
>> natlangs (and as I said, I think it's a good idea for the natlangs to
>> be absent).  What's your beef with having Eo on the shirt, anyway?
>
>My beef is that you ought not to be judging auxlangs. Nor should anyone.
But Don is not & was not - unless my understanding of English is at fault -
making any judgment as to the fitness or otherwise of any conlang as an
auxlang.  He was merely pointing to historical fact.

I know those who are politically in any matter get uptight when history
comes up with anoying things like factual evidence - tough.

It is no secret that I'm no admirer of Esperanto & certainly would not
advocate it as an auxlang.  But I do recognize that it did get a following
and still has a following.  And if you mention "constructed languages" to
the 'person in the street', the one conlang s/he may have heard of is
Esperanto.

To omit it from a list of conlangs is IMHO simply ignoring history and
being petty minded.

>It is a sensitive issue, leading to arguments here, as we have just proven.
I can see that deciding between Occidental & Interlingua as the
representative of the 'euroclone' (no one's mentioned 'Eurolang'!) could be
a source of argument.  That's why Jay's Ekspreso is probably preferable as
it's a euroclone conIAL of one the current list members.

To ignore conIALs entirely seems to me a cop out.  They do form an
interesting variety of conlangs.  To have Solresol as the representative of
a_priori type, Volapuk as a 'mixed type', Esperanto as early a_posteriori &
Ekspesso of more recent a_posteriori seems entirely reasonable to me.

Heck - if we can't discuss these reasonably and objectively on this list,
without getting into the petty-minded politics of auxlang, then I think I
might keep to a list where this can be done.

Ray.



=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                   [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================