Si Interlingua veramente debe esser un lingua romance, pro quo non haber
conjugation del verbos, genere grammatical, etc.? Isto seria le passo
sequente. Si le lingua es create pro communicar con parlatores romance, io
non vole sempre dicer "io es, illes es", etc., tro innatural. Interlingua
pote esser un lingua pan-romance o un lingua pan-(west)europee, ma non
ambes.




2013/6/27 Paul Bartlett <[log in to unmask]>

> Un error. :( Io intendeva expedir ad INTERLNG integre, e non solmente a
> Stan ipse.
>
> On Tuesday, 27 Jun 2013 17:27:09 -0400, Paul Bartlett <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>  Martedi, le 27 junio 2013 15:02:34 -0400, Mulaik, Stanley A <
>> [log in to unmask]**edu <[log in to unmask]>>
>> scribeva:
>>
>>
>>  Interlingua jam es morte, Paul, in le forma del parve gruppo de
>>> personas qui lo usa. Cata anno plus mori. Facer emphase super un
>>> variante del lingua que usa formas contrari al rationamento e theoria
>>> de su elaboration, solmente proque su usatores non esseva
>>> sophisticate linguisticamente como su creatores non va
>>> impressionar le autoritates politic e linguistic del meritos
>>> del lingua. Interlingua non es un esperanto, ni un occidental.
>>> Illo es un extraction e standardization objective del elementos commun
>>> in le major linguas de Europa e le Hemisphero Occidental. A causa de
>>> isto illo es un
>>> lingua ric in vocabulario. E mesmo si nos mori, le mesme lingua
>>> pote esser extracte de iste linguas parlate per centos de milliones.
>>>
>>
>> Per favor, vider mi essayo (in anglese) "Thoughts on IAL Success"
>> http://www.panix.com/~**bartlett/thoughts.html<http://www.panix.com/~bartlett/thoughts.html>. Il ha duo factores critic: "Good Enough" (bastante bon) e "Stable Base"
>> (fundamento stabile). Io scribeva (e continua asserer):
>>
>> "My point with this factor is that theoretical optimality is all well and
>> good, but it is not at all sufficient by itself to ensure acceptance and
>> use of an IAL, whereas another suboptimal but "good enough" language, taken
>> together with other factors, may have relatively more success."
>>
>> e
>>
>> "Some conIAL designers fall into tinkering, ever striving for
>> "perfection" as they see it. But as Andrew Large pointed out in his _The
>> Artificial Language Movement_ ([Oxford]: Basil Blackwell, 1985; ISBN
>> 0-631-14497-8; p. 154),
>>
>> 'Like the alchemists of old, artificial language projectors are not
>> easily deterred by others' failures. They doggedly cling to the belief that
>> success can be achieved if only the right mixture of ingredients can be
>> blended in the correct proportions.'
>>
>> Sooner or later, people have to quit tinkering and _use_ something
>> instead of dissipating the energy of the conIAL movement. Many people learn
>> Esperanto in order to use it without getting deeply involved in
>> metaconsiderations. Some people seem to get involved with conIALs for the
>> sake of discussing them endlessly and never get around to trying to build a
>> significant user community which will not spend its time talking about the
>> language almost as if it were an end in itself rather than as a means to an
>> end: improved human communication and understanding."
>>
>> Io renega tu assertion que "Interlingua jam es morte," sed io assere que
>> essayos de facer que illo se conforma ad un puritate linguistic theoric lo
>> occidera vermente. Io specula que "le autoritates politic e linguistic" non
>> se interesa in re le characteristicas theoric del lingua. Lor question es,
>> "Esque illo functiona ben como un lingua auxiliar?"
>>
>> Si, Stan, io es un "esperantisto" in re interlingua. Io lo dice fermente.
>> Io cerca un ver lingua auxiliar. Interlingua pote esser (es) un tal, sed
>> solmente si nos cessa persequer le sonio inutile de perfection theoric. A
>> mi aviso, simplemente "un extraction e standardization objective del
>> elementos commun in le major linguas de Europa e le Hemisphero Occidental"
>> es un perdita del tempore e del effortio. Si, io es un "esperantisto." (E
>> de novo, io non desira que interlingua deveni Ancora Un Altere Lingua
>> Romanic.)
>>
>> Io non accepta tu propositiones theoric, e tu non accepta mi
>> propositiones practic. Simplemente nos disaccorda, e probabilemente necun
>> convincera le altere.
>>
>
> --
> Paul Bartlett
>
>
> --
> Pro leger le archivos e pro modificar o cancellar le subscription:
> http://listserv.icors.org/**archives/interlng.html<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/interlng.html>
>



--
http://www.pagef30.com


--
Pro leger le archivos e pro modificar o cancellar le subscription:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/interlng.html