Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs
|From:||Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, June 29, 2005, 21:49|
Keine Sorgen, Carsten, ich war gar nicht beleidigt!
Don't worry, Carsten, I didn't feel offended at all.
But of course I'm happy so many people seem to feel the need to defend me.
I did have a short period though, about a year ago, I was a real
promotor of Interlingua. That was because I really loved that artlang at
as a language, and I found it so much more beautiful and fit than e.g.
I even wrote a brochure once: Interlingua, un lingua pro tote le mundo.
The first time I read an Interlingua text I understood everything, that was
real Aha-Erlebnis to me.
Actually, that hasn't changed much, but I don't like the whole circus around
especially the "language evangelism", the civil wars, the fanatism, exactly
kind of things, I suppose, many of you here seem to be afraid of.
The idea to create Middelsprake was inspired by Interlingua: I wanted
to make a Germanic equivalent of it, not so much for idealistic, but for
artolinguistic reasons. I'm happy I don't have to promote Middelsprake,
or any other artlang, since I don't want to be a Don Quijote, but of course
I'm happy when people like it, and understand much of it even without
previous knowledge. As a Gemanic common language, MS has one unique
feature compared to most other "auxlangs" and that is it closeness to
That's why it "feels" different, closer, more natural, easier, I hear from
people. That goes for Germans, Dutch and Scandinavians as well, but English
(first or second language) speakers always form the majority of course.
Well, now I really have to cut it out, otherwise it will look like promotion
or advocating anyway, and that we don't want here, do we ;-?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carsten Becker" <naranoieati@...>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs
> From: "tomhchappell" <tomhchappell@...>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 12:27 AM
> Subject: Re: introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs
> vs. auxlangs
> > Ingmar's Middelsprake, as well as some others of his
> > ConLangs, are
> > also ArtLangs, in spite of not all being FictLangs; and in
> > spite of
> > the fact that MiddelSprake was constructed by a technique
> > similar to
> > one by which some InterLinguas are constructed. The
> > differences are
> > (1) Ingmar's purpose, (2) what he has done with the
> > language, and (3)
> > what he asks us to do with the language.
> > Ingmar does seem to be involved with an AuxLang project;
> > but MiddelSprake is not it.
> > I think that those things about MiddelSprake that Ingmar
> > has chosen to post here, I would welcome here.
> Since I started this issue, I think I need to clarify that I
> didn't mean any offense. I just wanted to notice Ingmar
> because I didn't know his intention. It has actually
> happened in the past that people asked about or promoted
> their auxlangs here instead of on AUXLANG as they should.
> Edatamanon le matahanarà benenoea eibenem ena Bahis Venena,
> 15-A8-58-5-4-3-2B ena Curan Tertanyan.