Re: Language superiority, improvement, etc.

Matt Pearson wrote:

> [kut]In what sense are human languages "different in every respect"
> from each other?  Personally, the more I study different languages,
> the more similar to each other they seem.  One question that I
> ask myself constantly in my research is: "Why are languages not
> MORE different from each other than they appear to be?"  In other
> words, why do languages NOT seem to display the full range of
> logically possible structural variation?  It's an interesting
> question...
An interesting point. One thing that has intrigued me over the last few
weeks is how the construction of some {or all???] languages seem to be
just for the sake of looking different from another by a "subtle but
'worthless' difference. Here are some examples.
The word "the" starts the pattern.
RLR: l
Occidental: li
Interlingua: la
Others: le, lo, and etc.

And, if one carries on through the list of vocabulary one sees:
lin, lingue, lingua, etc.

In fact, it appears that one could in some cases, write a sentence using
only "k" for "c", and then rewrite the whole thing all over again using
"ch" for "k" and "c", etc. and you would be told you have just read
three different languages, when in fact, you have just read three
different ways of "spelling" the _same_ thing. So, are we really
"creating" new languages, or just "respelling and rehashing" the same
old language over and over again to make it look like we have finally
"created" something different. I'm speaking here more of the languages
called "naturalistic", but this even comes across to me with some of the
"artificial" languages we've all heard of.

Just wondering out loud.

Al l sue, Amico,
Bob, x+

P.S. See, Amico, amigo, amika, amike, car, kar, zar, &e.