INTERLNG Archives

Discussiones in Interlingua

INTERLNG@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paul O Bartlett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
INTERLNG: Discussiones in Interlingua
Date:
Sun, 27 Jul 1997 10:58:09 -0400
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (46 lines)
{followup deliberately crossposted to AUXLANG and
{INTERLNG although not in Interlingua for the latter}

On 27 Jul 1997, STAN MULAIK wrote on
alt.language.artificial (two snippets):

> In the present case I am emphasizing the etymological connections as a
> benefit one gets from studying Interlingua.

> This sort of presupposes that English speakers will not be curious about
> the etymology of their own language. I doubt it.

    In the latter case, I certainly do doubt it.  I suspect that many
native speakers do not know and do not give a damn about the etymology
of their own language.  In the former case, I do not see "etymological
connections" as worth a whole lot to a non-Romance-non-English speaker
trying to learn Interlingua as an international auxiliary language.

    I think the Interlingua community needs to ask itself a very
serious question: Just what is Interlingua for?  Is it susposed to be
a real, global IAL?  Is it supposed to be a (non-geographic) regional
auxiliary language for Anglo-Romance speakers?  Or is it supposed to be
merely a quaint tool for academic study?  If Interlingua *is* to have
some use as a global IAL, to what extent, if any, does it have autonomy
outside the Anglo-Romance orbit?

    For non-Anglo-Romance users, will there ever be growth as an
independent language, as with Esperanto, or will it forever be
enslaved to its original source languages?  (Recall the
"american(o)/statounitese" disagreement on INTERLING some time back.)
Are Alexander Gode's original ideas about Interlingua a new "Fundamento
de Interlingvo"?  Even though keeping within its 1905 "Fundamento,"
Esperanto has managed to grow beyond Ludwig Zamenhof.  Will Interlingua
ever grow beyond Alexander Gode and his philosophically questionable
and the-common-man-in-the-street-doesn't-give-a-damn notions of
philological prototypes?  In fact, is Interlingua even *for* the
non-scholarly man in the street, or is it only an intellectual
plaything?

Regards,
Paul                             <[log in to unmask]>
----------------------------------------------------------
Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA
Finger, keyserver, or WWW for PGP 2.6.2 public key
Home Page:  http://www.access.digex.net/~pobart

ATOM RSS1 RSS2