Re: artlangs/auxlangs/engelangs (was Re: LCC2: Meeting our Community)

> [mailto:CONLANG@listserv.brown.edu] On Behalf Of Jorg Rhiemeier
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:49:30 -0400, i_sasxsek@NUTTER.NET wrote:
>
> > > [mailto:CONLANG@listserv.brown.edu] On Behalf Of Jorg Rhiemeier
> > >
> > > [auxlang advocacy and the CONLANG/AUXLANG split]
> > >
> > > Yes.  This is indeed the case.  People who design new auxlangs
are
> > > always aware that many, many other auxlangs have been proposed
> > before,
> > > and sooner or later are confronted with the question, "What's so
> > great
> > > about your proposal that we should adopt it rather than English
or
> > > Esperanto?"  This question gives an auxlanger only two options:
> > >
> > > 1. Abandon the proposal and shut up.
> > >
> > > 2. Tell the world that all other auxlang proposals (especially
the
> > >    major ones) are crap, and that a new proposal is necessary.
> > >
> > > Most auxlangers are too proud to choose option #1 and instead
> > > go for option #2.
> >
> > The problem with this is that it's not that black or white.
>  Designing
> > an auxlang is a form of problem solving, and there are often many
> > diffent approaches and solutions to achieve the same goal.
>
> True.  Not all auxlang designers are like that.  However, there
> is some sort of "slippery slope" involved here - once you come out
> with a new auxlang, soon others will ask you, "Why a new proposal,
> can't we agree on Esperanto?" and the debate begins.
Well yes, there is much debate about which language to use.  I could
go on for a long time about the shortcomings of Esperanto and
Euroclones as I do on Auxlang, but won't bother here.  Beyond that I
can say that there are some others that I do like even though they
aren't my creations.

> > It's true that there are some auxlangers behave like religious
> > fanatics, but not all.  I prefer to design auxlangs because of the
> > problem-solving aspects involved, and because it puts me in
> touch with
> > a variety of natangs while I conduct research for them.
>
> Yes, and that is OK.  Actually, I also have spent some thoughts
> on auxlang design for the intellectual challenge of the problem
> (see http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/auxlang-design.html ),
> and one day, I will perhaps distill these thoughts into an actual
> auxlang - not to tell the rest of the world that all previous
> auxlangs suck, but to play with the challenge of designing a
> language which *could* serve as a means of international
> communication.  I guess, however, that my scheme will improve
> over Esperanto, Novial & co. only in details, if at all.
I actually have several I'm toying with.  Like I said, I see many
different ways to tackle a problem, not just one.  I have Sasxsek, of
course, but also have and English based creolistic type language
called Ingli, and a couple of Esperantic-style languages that I really
never would expect anyone to take seriously but made them up just for
the exercise.  I also have a couple of regional auxlangs that I've
started.  I have Pasifika, which is designed as an interlanguage for
the Pacific Rim where the demographics are very different (mainly
inflenced by Indonesian and Japanese) than those included in a WAL
design, then I also have Panamerikan which is as the name implies, a
language for the Americas using mainly English, Spanish and Portuguese
as its sources.

> >        I have no
> > great expectations that any of my creations will ever
> become anything,
> > and would even be surprised if one of them got a small cult
> following.
> > Regardless, the design criteria used will still be based
> upon auxlang
> > usage.  I also have a couple of engelangs.  The closest I have to
an
> > artlang would probably be the personal language I'm working
> on.  It's
> > goal is simply to be anything I want it to be.
>
> Sure.  You can design an auxlang just for the enjoyment of the
> intellectual challenge and without any attempts to proselytize;
> however, it is somewhat more typical of auxlang designers to
> peddle their scheme to whomever they could, and many people
> *will* ask the question, "Why do you think we need yet another
> auxlang?  Don't we have enough proposals already?"
I have some arguments for that as well, mainly having to do with
changes in the socio-political makeup of the world since the creation
of many of them, and how they may have seemed okay then, but fall
short of today's situation.  One example would be E-o's machinability
issues.


> Note also that only a small minority of the people on AUXLANG
> are actually auxlang *designers*.  Most are merely disciples
> of this or that auxlang scheme designed by someone else, and
> many of them are sectarian about their favourite auxlang.
> So we have Esperantists vs. Idists vs. Novialists vs.
> whatever-ists.  All that used to go on in CONLANG, and it
> bored and annoyed the language designers.
Oh, yes! This is very true.  Most are not designers, and some are very
overzealous about their choices, and seem to all think they have found
the holy grail of languages.

> > > *There can be only one.*  The point of an auxlang, after all, is
> > that
> > > the whole world adopts *one single language* for international
> > > communication.  *One* language will be chosen (if at
> all), and *all
> > > others* go to the junkyard.
> >
> > Yes, that's the idea.  But that doesn't mean *we* (as a collective
> > group) have to choose one.  We could (though that's not the
reality
> > right now) conduct it like a friendly rivalry and see which one,
if
> > any, ultimately prevails, but you are right that there is a
warlike
> > approach to the situation where many choose a language and view
the
> > others as "the enemy."
>
> I agree whole-heartedly.  We are not the ones to decide which
> auxlang to be adopted.  And even though the auxlang milieu is
> competitive by its nature, that doesn't mean that this
> competition has to be conducted as a war.  Make it a peaceful,
> friendly contest in which the contenders respect each other.
I'd like to see more of that myself, and the funny thing is that the
few of us who are actually designers seem to have no problems.  It's
those non-designers that take on more of a religious attitude toward
their auxlang-du-jour.