Re: Conlangs in History

Yoon Ha Lee wrote:

> The seeming lack of language change in the Foundation trilogy really
> bothered me when I first read it a month ago <ducking>, but there were so
> many other things I loved about it that I forgave Asimov.
What was even more ridiculous was that in one of the related
novels set in the same universe, _The Stars, like Dust_, in the end
the main protagonist reads aloud an astonishing discovery, the
preamble to the US Constitution, and understands it!  In thousands
of years time, even assuming that a copy of the US Constitution exists
(which is a *big* if), there is no reason to believe that his language
would at all resemble that of English today, much less 212 years ago.

By the way, there's no reason to be ashamed of not having read him.
Asimov's writing is simple and unpretensious, but the depth of meaning
that goes into much of his work is equally shallow at times.  He goes
often more for narrative flow than symbolism or philosophy. He will
probably be remembered, however, as fairly representative of the
archaic period of English scifi literature, when people were still
developing the new genre and getting the kinks out of it. And he's a
good, light read, and there's nothing wrong with that.

======================================
Tom Wier   |     "Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."
======================================