Conlangs' info website
Thread poster: Natalya Zelikova
Could those of you who interested in the subject share your views on which languages (not mentioning Esperanto) can be called perspective and what perspective do they actually have?
Well.. not mentioning Esperanto make the question hardI am interested in all the IALs - not only Esperanto and I do not think that any of the others can really be called perspective. When I decided finally to learn one of the languages(after a few years of just interest - not learning but reading a lot about all of the IALs), I did a really long research if there is an alternatiove of Esperanto... I did not find such. However - this does not mean I am less interested in the others or that I do not want to learn at least a few more but...
Just my thoughts...
| Belated comment on the interesting issue :) || Jan 15, 2006 |
Indeed an interesting link and great reference for everybody who is interested in this.
I am afraid the language construction is an area of many many personal ambitions... There are too many people who desire to control their invented languages, to find themselves masters teaching worldwide dummies...
In my personal opinion, Esperanto is unquestionable leader. For me it does not sound beautifully but the reality is that neither any new conlang nor any reformation, whatever advancing it seems, can compete it.
What I personally like the most is the idea (not creation, not invention but idea!) of Giuseppe Peano - Latino sine flexione. Everything seems just perfect with it. The grammar is simplified without going into any kind of invented artificiality. Source of its vocabulary is clearly defined, the dictionaries are available for the speakers of the majority of the living languages - any good Latin dictionary works. Thus the language can live without its author - this is the most important thing for any conlang. Compare to all those who provide English-Conlang glossaries consisting of 1, 5 or 10 thousand words and expect the world will accept their invention for international communication. What they, in my opinion, subconsciously expect is the world applying to them for any new needed word (but, unfortunately, the world is blind and does not realize its benefits )... Well, Latino sine flexione went along with G. Peano to be later "reformed" into something that fully depends on inventors as many others do.
Another good idea was that of Lancelot Hogben (Interglossa) - combination of the (latinized) Greek vocabulary with simplicity of the Chinese syntax. The language does not sound as beautifully as Latino sine flexione but its ideology was the closest to a truly international conlang: Greek is the basis of European civilization, notable by its great influence into African and Middle East cultures (one must also remember the early Islamic world's interest on Greek authors), while Chinese is the most influential language of Asia. The fate of Interglossa was the same as that of Latino sine flexione - "reformation/modernization"...
This was just my opinion, and I am sure many will disagree with it.
[Edited at 2006-01-16 07:10]
| || || |
To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:
You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »