Re: The Great Sundering (was Re: basic morphemes of a loglang)

Hallo!

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:46:38 +0000,
Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:

> On Thursday, November 27, 2003, at 08:58 PM, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
>
> > Hallo!
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > It's what I call the "Highlander condition":
> > there can be only one.  The goal of all auxlanging is to
> > set up ONE language to be used by everyone in the world;
> > this inevitably means that ONE proposal will eventually
> > be chosen to be that one, and all others be rejected.
>
> No, no, no!
>
> Don't tar all auxlangers with the same brush.
OK, I have generalized more than I should have done.

>       When I was on that
> list there were still a few auxlangers who proposed their schemes
> or supported another's an _an_ IAL, i.e. a language which could
> as an interlanguage among interested groups - not as _the_
> interlanguage.
>
> One of the sanest people I came across was an advocate of Interlingua.
> But he most certainly didn't propose it as _the_ interlanguage - but
> as _an_ interlanguage which could serve essentially among those of
> occidental background.  And indeed Interlingua has been so used.
Yes.

> It may be that sadly such people have been squeezed out of Auxlang -
> but I hope not.  But even if they have, I'm sure they still exist.
>
> There are auxlang moderates.
Yes, there are.  Some people propose auxlangs for less absolute
purposes, such as regional auxlangs or languages for specific
domains of discourse.  The problem is, however, that such
limited-scope proposals are often understood as proposals for
the absolute general global IAL, and bashed accordingly.
Of course, there could be several regional or specialized
auxiliary languages in a state of peaceful co-existence.

But, the most economic solution (at least in terms of
how many languages are involved), and the scenario associated
with the term "international auxiliary language" by the general
public, would be to have ONE language that is used worldwide
and for ALL fields of discourse, and that is indeed subject
to the "Highlander condition".  After all, an "occidental"
language that is used in Europe only would be of little help
to a tourist in Nepal or a businessman in Shanghai.
And a formulaic language for scientific communication
would benefit neither, either.

> [snip]
>
> > On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 19:18:46 +0000,
> > Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:
> >>
> [snip]
> >> or even Novial vs. Novial!  That's when I finally quit.
> >
> > Novial vs. Novial... a really sad thing.  IMHO, Novial is the most
> > elegant of the a posteriori auxlangs I have yet studied.
>
> I agree - I've known Novial since I got "Novial Lexike" for Christmas
> in 1953.
To pick just one nice feature: the way gendered words are formed
from gender-neutral words by changing the final vowels, e.g.
_doktore_ (common), _doktoro_ (male), _doktora_ (female).
I use such a system in Q (my artlang; and with the same vowels,
except that /a/ is common gender and /o/ male).

> > That's just childish, as I have written above.  Shame on them.
>
> Absolutely - as I said, it was the last straw.  I quit.
Yeah.  Such quibbling doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

> >> > [Quenya as an IAL]
> >>
> >> No, no! Please save JRRT and Quenya from such a fate - both deserve
> >> better.
> >
> > It is bad enough how Quenya and Sindarin are treated by those scholars
> > at places like Elfling.  Many of them have turned blind for the beauty
> > of the languages and bicker about reconstructions of words and
> > grammatical forms that are not attested in what has been published
> > so far of Tolkien's writings.
>
> I had got wind of this, which has, sadly, made me wary of getting involved
> on any Elfling or similar groups.  As far as I'm concerned, Quenya and
> Sindarin are as we find them in JRRT's work.
Yes.  Everything else is speculation, which should neither be suppressed
nor taken as canon.  As long as no *original* grammars and dictionaries
are published (provided Tolkien did actually write such), our knowledge
of the languages remains fragmentary.  They are like ancient languages
known only from old written records, like Etruscan or Sumerian.

My "Q" artlang, BTW, started with such speculations.  The original idea
was to create a modern-day descendant of Sindarin, assuming that
Quenya and Sindarin had actually been spoken in some distant past
(the inspiration came from a Tolkien fan fiction story about Elves
that linger in the modern world); however, it soon took a different
direction as I developed my own style and introduced elements that
were independent from Tolkien's languages.

> > There are a number of "grailkeepers"
> > who see themselves as defenders of the true Tolkienian traditon and
> > violently reject any such "fill-in" attempts.
>
> Sadly, I feel this is bound to be the fate of any attempted fill-ins.
Yes.  It is a rather dogmatic and uncreative way of dealing with the
languages.

> > The word _vinyacárië_
> > (`new creation') has developed negative connotations on Elfling,
> > which is a sad thing as it denotes something very much in style
> > for the Elves!  Tolkien and his language haven't deserved that.
>
> No, they do not.  Let's at least preserves them from the flames of
> Auxland.  (Here in SE England, Orcsland and Auxland are synonyms  :)
That's a good one!

Greetings,

Jörg.

Replies