הודעות: 86
שפה: English
sudanglo (הצגת פרופיל) 6 בפברואר 2014, 11:21:39
You keep saying "Esperanto is unique" but I don't see any evidence for that. Of course Esperanto is a conlang but even that isn't unique.Please distinguish between a language project and an actual language.
Do not the linguistic forces that you think will inevitably apply to Esperanto, require a body of speakers and a history of usage before they can come into play?
Of course there have been many ideas for a conlang. In all probability people are still inventing conlangs. But where are the dictionaries and grammars based on actual usage for these conlangs, and how many speakers are there?
Where are you going to find reliable corpuses for such conlangs for your linguistic investigations?
captainzhang (הצגת פרופיל) 6 בפברואר 2014, 22:44:59
sudanglo (הצגת פרופיל) 7 בפברואר 2014, 11:34:18
Por ke io estu lingvo, ne sufiĉas nomi ĝin tia.
And what's the point of a conlang being 'complex', if it is going to provide a practicable solution to the lingva problemo.
We already have a well-established interlanguage that's difficult for non-native speakers to learn - that's English.
By the way, I don't think that an Esperantist would seriously suggest that you can do everything in Esperanto that you can do in a natural language.
Swearing like a trooper, using really uncouth offensive language, sounding illiterate and uneducated, using olde worlde language, mocking by imitation the language of a foreigner, are all things that are difficult to do in Esperanto.
But then Esperanto is not really intended for such purposes.
lagtendisto (הצגת פרופיל) 7 בפברואר 2014, 14:21:48
captainzhang:If Esperanto continues to evolve and its number of speakers grow as well, then it will become more and more irregular and idiomatic like natural languages.
captainzhang:I know many Esperanto speakers cling to this delusion that Esperanto is somehow immuned to evolution because they want it to stay relatively regular and easy to learn but that just isn't how living languages work, contructed or otherwise.
captainzhang:It's okay for things to change, you can still enjoy Esperanto even if it becomes less regular and more idiomatic. The only languages that don't change are dead ones, and that's okay.Through daily use of Internet facilities language changes can spread and keep in sync more faster and easier than it was possible at pre-Internet ages. Even already telephone were tool to spread language changes more faster than it was possible at pre-telephone ages.
Now central Internet tools - the browser facilities - are featured by default with video chat facilities (WebRTC) which before were exclusive to Skype and other Internet service protocols. Nearly every household at modern societies hosts some 'central communication box' (Router; Integrated access device) inside.
Globalization more and more force people to leave their childhood location to move to where the jobs are. So that way globalization destroys traditional family concepts where several generations of one family share one location their whole job and private life. But to hold families together there excists technical solutions which help to stay together virtualy through telephone and video chat facilies. There's big market for facilities which enable to 'virtually stay tied together'.
Language changes spreading through that communication channels often also spread outside 'they left the communication channels'. That way language changes more and more faster spread and can keep in sync world-wide.
captainzhang:A couple other conlangs that are active and sufficiently complex to express whatever you could in a natural language are Interlingua and Lojban.Well, compared to Esperanto, community of Interlingua is very small but nethertheless active. About Lojban I can not say something. But for sure, user of Esperanto language test their language more broader than other conlang communities (can) do. Users of Esperanto language test their language broader in combination of written and spoken use. In my opinion influences of spoken language use often are underrated but they excists.
sudanglo (הצגת פרופיל) 8 בפברואר 2014, 10:48:21
users of Esperanto language test (and have tested) their language more broadly than other conlang communities (can) doA good point.
Meaning in language depends on consensus among the community of users.
However much the inventor of a conlang may wish a certain meaning to be attached to a word or piece of syntax, this is of no avail, if the community doesn't accept it.
You can't properly attach the label language to a conlang, until the conlang is tested by actual use. And that Rome can certainly not be built in a day even in the Internet age.
If in no other way, the 125 years of publishing and conferencing make Esperanto unique.
lagtendisto (הצגת פרופיל) 8 בפברואר 2014, 11:54:45
sudanglo:Meaning in language depends on consensus among the community of users.I'm very interested in how native speakers of regarding source languages are perceiving naturalistic conlangs. If it would sound to much babyish to them then probably they will refuse to accept that naturalistic conlang like some cognate dialect to their native language.
sudanglo:However much the inventor of a conlang may wish a certain meaning to be attached to a word or piece of syntax, this is of no avail, if the community doesn't accept it.Yes, that is 'normal' language evolution. I.e. inside Interlingua 'sed' disappears more and more in favour of 'ma'.
sudanglo:You can't properly attach the label language to a conlang, until the conlang is tested by actual use. And that Rome can certainly not be built in a day even in the Internet age.I agree. Some conlang has to tested spoken at 'face-to-face' events.
sudanglo:If in no other way, the 125 years of publishing and conferencing make Esperanto unique.I agree. Thats the current state of the art which tells nothing about the future. Every conlang inventor should keep in mind that 'every day one person less learns its conlang'. With state of the art computer software its not that huge impossibility to create dictionaries and learn courses. But without (as many as possible) 'face-to-face' events no conlang will spread much. Internet silicium world (computer) is just extension of the real hardware and carbonate world (every organism).
erinja (הצגת פרופיל) 9 בפברואר 2014, 02:44:27
sudanglo:Swearing like a trooper, using really uncouth offensive language, sounding illiterate and uneducated, using olde worlde language, mocking by imitation the language of a foreigner, are all things that are difficult to do in Esperanto.I'd say that all these things are done easily in Esperanto, other than the older worlde language.
But then Esperanto is not really intended for such purposes.
sudanglo (הצגת פרופיל) 9 בפברואר 2014, 10:44:16
We ain't gonna do it, bruv, innit!
I 'ave monet, said the Frenchman, who was feeling flush. Velly good, replied the Chinaman.
I hesitate to use the 'c' word or other really taboo words, there may be minors reading the forum - so just mild examples of uncouth language - Shut your trap, bitch!, Fan-bloody-tastic!
lagtendisto (הצגת פרופיל) 9 בפברואר 2014, 11:00:29
sudanglo (הצגת פרופיל) 9 בפברואר 2014, 11:09:10
Thats the current state of the art which tells us nothing about the futureI am not entirely sure I can agree with this, Spree.
The size of the catch-up for any conlang inventor is so great that the exercise seems pointless (except from a fun or academic point of view).
What's the point of reinventing the wheel, people will say.
I understand that the best demographic projections estimate that of the 11 billion people in the world that there will be in 2100, 9 billion will be in Africa or Asia, so not in the America's or Europe.
But even if this were to prompt a desire to develop an interlanguage easier for the peoples of those regions, such a language would have to have many of the features of Esperanto; features whose presence in Esperanto is dictated by logical considerations.
Features like phonemic spelling, word-building to keep the vocab load down, the absence of unproductive grammar like gender and irregular verbs and plurals, and so on.