activeselective | Re: Freezing the basic grammar

• Autor: activeselective
• Tema: Re: Freezing the basic grammar
• Data: 2006-04-29 08:05
• Mesaje: 2118 (a supra, presedente, seguente)

I have doubts about this suggested "declaration of stability".

EXPERIENCE
First, "stability" is not something to be declared. What can be
declared is an "apriori intended stability", but the real stability
is something we EXPERIENCE when using the language and then report.
Only by using the language it is open to such evaluation of
stability: when we need to express, the language is put to the test
and accordingly we find it to be sufficient (stable) or we change it
(unstable). I believe that I have seen too little use of the language
here, too little texts going around here, too little number of people
writing it, in order to give anyone here the authority of declaring
this language stable. What we need is texts, communication, more
expression, wiki fillings, songs, poetry, and then find out if it is
stable... and not some apriori declaration of stability.
Yes, what I found out personally in the little use I made of the
language: it was sufficient. No grammar changes or major vocabulary
adjustments were necessary to me, nor did I find any contradictions
in the grammar rules. But my personal findings of stability are
statistically way too little. It is not enough in order to represent
the language and its diverse possible uses. How many texts do we
really have? Only 30? Maybe... 40? We definitely need more proof
before declaring stability: go write! translate! and go find out!
prove that it is stable!

ROAD SIGNS
Second, I see some use the 'argument' of attracting new users in
order to have this "declaration of stability". Nonsense. "Stability"
is not a road sign which will attract new users, and therefore should
not be seen as such. Declaring stability comes from experience (with
200+ texts), not from wishing to find more users. Let's take a real
look at attracting users.
Only people already into Constructed Languages care about stability.
They are welcome but we need to see the potential users outside the
ConLangers (most conlangers have already found their favorite
language and stick to it).
A McDonalds road sign makes me hungry as I can see that juicy
hamburger persuading me to eat it; but a language stability road sign
makes me ask:
 (4) who cares!? (imagine McDonalds road sign saying "financially
stable". Does it make you go eat there?)
 (3) a sniff of sterility?
 (2) I don't see the pudding. "Stability? Yeah, oh. But do you also
have a funny text for me? Have an interesting article to show me? Is
Romeo&Juliet in LFN?" I want to see the pudding (or the hamburger)
not stability (or the recipe).
 (1) Almost ALL -if not all- users went for proof of LFNs simplicity
and understandability they found out once they were reading it.

If you want a road sign, I think we need one like: "Veni e leje nos
Isola Tesoro e Prinse Poca" and "Leje la novas en la creol de la
mundo". They suggest TO USE and TO EXPERIENCE the language.