--- Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>
wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:35:39 -0800,
> Costentin Cornomorus <elemtilas@...>
> wrote:
>
> > --- Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > [...] All I wanted to say is that
> > > the line between
> > > auxlang design discussion and auxlang
> advocacy
> > > is easily crossed,
> >
> > Yes. Intending to create an auxlang pretty
> much
> > sets one up as an auxlang advocate. I haven't
> yet
> > met an auxlang (with the possible exception
> of
> > Europanto)
>
> ...which is rather a joke...
True. The people (UN translators/interpreters)
that created it understand it to be a joke as
well.
> As I have said before, I see nothing wrong with
> discussing auxlang or loglang *design* here
> (and most people here agree with me, I think);
Yes. I (somewhat grudgingly) agree in principal.
> the problem only arises when the topic shifts
> to auxlang *advocacy*, which, however, happens
> easily.
Quite.
[snip]
> > > Yes, there are such cases, but the
> > > "typical"
> > > auxlang is designed to better the world.
> >
> > Correct. The notions of "ease of use",
> > "simplicity to learn", "global impact and
> > outreach". That sort of thing. This is why
> > I'd
> > consider BrSc et al to be artlangs, even if
> > they
> > could in principal be implemented as
> > auxlangs.
>
> Well, in theory, any fully developed conlang
> (as well
> as any natlang) could serve as an auxlang.
Of course. We're using one of the most popular
auxlangs in history right now. I should have been
more specific and kept it to _designed auxlangs_
- conlangs that are planned for implementation as
a serious auxlang proposal.
> Whether
> the language in question is easy to learn etc.
> remains an open question.
Of course. I didn't find E-o particularly
difficult; but it wasn't as easy as I-a. It's a
moot point anyway, because we (as a group) tend
to be more facile with languages than the average
person anyway.
> And part of the joy of artlanging
> is that one need not answer it. So I can
> happily design
> a language with active case marking,
> suffixaufnahme,
> initial consonant mutations and three kinds of
> umlaut,
> which would be a monster to have in an auxlang
> ;-)
Sounds like Q! What does the "Q" stand for (if
anything) anyway?
[snip]
> Now that you mention it, I remember such a
> threat. The name
> "Kernopanto" springs to my mind.
Yes, that was it.
> I did not follow it in detail,
You didn't miss anything!
> because (1) I wasn't all too interested in
> matters concerning
> Ill Bethisad, and (2) I didn't take it
> seriously.
Fair enough; and (hopefully) no one took it too
seriously. We were just being silly.
> > I foget who won - I think it
> > was the Wenedyk contender (a just vicotry as
> Dr.
> > Zamenhof was from that region of the world).
> I am
> > entertaining the idea of creating an IB
> auxlang.
>
> It would be interesting to explore the
> possibility that the
> auxlang movement took a very different path
> *there* than *here*.
> Perhaps they are still messing about with a
> priori philosophical languages?
Now that's an idea!
>
> > But I think the idea is a nonstarter in IB,
> which
> > is a truly international and polyglot place.
> Even
> > the Americans *there* speak more than one
> > language.
>
> Yes, that fits the overall tone of Ill
> Bethisad.
>
> > > And then there are those
> > > who take an artlang and propose it as an
> > > auxlang. I have seen
> > > such proposals for Quenya and Klingon.
> >
> > I did that for Kerno once. Can't recall if I
> did
> > so on Auxlang or on Usenet somewhere.
>
> Well, most auxlangers would find fault in quite
> a number
> of features of Kerno, such as cases, initial
> mutations, irregular verbs, etc.
Naturally! It certainly wasn't a serious
proposal, after all.
> > la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu ast
> > meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.
>
> I tried to make sense of this, but my knowledge
> of Kerno is
> sadly insufficient. Could you please give a
> translation?
Sure: "the right (surgical) procedure badly done
is better than the wrong procedure perfectly
done".
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 19:18:46 +0000,
> Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, November 26, 2003, at 11:21 PM,
> Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > > This is indeed true. I occasionally look
> into the AUXLANG archive,
> > > and there are hardly ever any design issues
> discussed there.
> > > It is almost entirely about Esperanto vs.
> Ido vs. Interlingua
> > > vs. Acadon vs. ...,
> >
> > or even Novial vs. Novial! That's when I
> finally quit.
>
> Novial vs. Novial... a really sad thing.
It meboggles. There must be two versions of the
same language...
Padraic.
=====
la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.
--
Ill Bethisad --
<http://www.geocities.com/elemtilas/ill_bethisad>
Come visit The World! --
<http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>
.