Re: Uusisuom's influences

Some excellent points have been made on here about the problems with
creating international auxiliary languages (IALs). I would like to answer
the several points raised by list members:

1. One of Uusisuom's main inspirations can be traced via Finnish right back
to Saami. The word for language in Uusisuom is very similar to this word:
'suom'.

2. Barry is spot on when he says 'complete' neutrality is impossible. It's
like when people say newspapers or writers are completely 'objective'.
Everything and everyone has some kind of bias, however marginal. I think for
Uusisuom, the thing is to have as large and wide an appeal as possible and
not to have been actively developed from one or more of the natural
languages.

3. The phonology of Uusisuom is in some ways advantageous to many regions of
the world. The 'a' is very common I believe throughout most of the world (I
read somewhere that it is the most common sound in the world), as I also
believe are the other vowels, with the exception of 'y'. The main consonants
t, l, m, n, are found over large sections of the linguistic world. Note as
well that there are no accents or diacritical marks in Uusisuom (this is not
the case in Esperanto) and that every word's stress is the same (on the
first syllable).

4. Someone might point out the 'r'. But the English 'r' is very difficult
for many non-English speakers to pronounce properly. When I was teaching
English in Eastern Europe, my students really could not understand when I
said words like 'red' or 'read' until I rolled the 'r' a little for them!

5. I think Uusisuom might appeal to ethnic groups where esperanto has
failed. To those who would argue that Uusisuom is too 'finnish', I received
an e-mail a few days ago from a young Finnish girl who was studying
Uusisuom. She complained that she saw no similarity between finnish
vocabulary and Uusisuom vocabulary. A lot of Uusisuom's words are created ex
nihilo, adding to its claim of neutrality and uniqueness. Its grammar,
though different for English speakers, has a lot of similarity with some
aspects of Indian and African languages. The words themselves, emphasising
vowels and strong consonants and free of 'ugly' letters like 'x' or 'z'
would also be more appealing to Pacific, African and perhaps also Indian
language speakers.

6. I don't believe English or Russian or Spanish for that matter should ever
be adopted as a universal second language. Many of these bigger languages
are responsible for the extinction or near extinction of a lot of smaller,
more obscure but nonetheless important languages. I'm not blaming the big
languages directly, but rather indirectly, an unforeseen consequence of
globalisation. I think an independent second universal language, like
esperanto or Uusisuom ought to be eventually considered. But I think the
people will decide in the end. If people will want to speak and use Uusisuom
they will do so. And if those numbers grow large enough, something might
just start to happen.

7. I think Uusisuom works just fine as an IAL for all the reasons I've given
already. I've always wanted to create something I could share, something
that would make a difference in the world and help others. It might sound
kinda corny, but it's true. I don't know how successful it will or will not
be, all I could ever ask is for people to give it a try. If they like it,
stick with it. If they don't, don't. What more can I ask?

Best wishes,

Daniel
daniel44@btinternet.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "D Tse" <exponent@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: Uusisuom's influences


> > >The last thing anyone can call Uusisuom is a 'Euroclone'. In terms of
> > >being
> > >an international auxiliary language, it has a hell of a lot going for
it:
> > >beautiful design, inherent simplicity, uniqueness and distinctiveness
and
> > >complete neutrality.
>
> You can't really satisfy everyone: arguably the phonology of the language
is
> advantageous to Fennophones which are not exactly a world majority. This
> reflects the author's approval of the Finnish aesthetic. But Esperanto, on
> the other hand, which has phonemes common to a reasonable amount of
*common*
> world languages prove difficult to certain ethnic groups. Personally, I
feel
> that IALs are not really getting anywhere and perhaps a language that is
> already spoken by much of the world (hint, hint) should, as is the case
> today be used for much global transaction. I bet there are a myriad of
IALs
> that are not going to ever get off the ground, some of which are very
> beautiful languages in themselves. If I were this language's creator I
would
> have designed it as an artlang/conlang as opposed to an auxlang, because
> aesthetically, I think it is quite beautiful, but then again, "de gustibus
> non est disputandum". But then I'm not the creator and I can't influence
> others very well...
>
> To sum it up, *nothing* can be completely neutral ... except for those
> philosophical a priori languages perhaps...but hey, where's the aesthetic
> appeal? One part of a language can be easier to understand for a certain
> group of people while proving disadvantageous to another.
> That's why I design conlangs instead...to appeal to my *own* personal
> tastes.
>
> Thus the dilemma of an international auxiliary language. Total
> unrecognisability but universal neutrality or ease of learning for certain
> groups and the opposite for others?
>
> That's my two cents.
>
> Imperative
>
> "Siamo la coppia piu' bella del mondo
> E ci dispiace per gli altri
> Che sono tristi e sono tristi
> Perche' non sanno piu' cos'e' l'amor!"
>

Reply