Paul Bartlett | Re: [LFN] Is the lingua-franca-nova.net Site Moribund?
- Autor: Paul Bartlett (“bartlett22183”)
- Tema: Re: [LFN] Is the lingua-franca-nova.net Site Moribund?
- Data: 2010-05-11 22:32
- Mesaje: 3142 (a supra, presedente, seguente)
On Tue, 11 May 2010, George Boeree wrote: > On May 10, 2010, at 9:50 PM, Paul Bartlett wrote: > >> Despite the fact that I have had some differences in the past, >> I do genuinely think well of LFN, even if I have not mastered it. (But >> I can read it with almost no difficulty.) [trim] >> Outside the circle of aficionados, are LFNers talking to >> anyone but themselves and a few other auxlangers? > > Sadly, I agree with you. And not just in regards to LFN's chances at > success, but Esperanto's and Interlingua's as well. Despite nay- > sayers, English seems destined to remain the go-to IAL for many more > decades, not because everyone loves Anglo-American culture, but > simply because it has become entrenched internationally. Outside of > the ridiculously irrational spelling, English is not too difficult > and a rather amusing (yes, I mean that) language, with its odd idioms > and constantly evolving slang. Interesting observation. My conclusion, after having worked with people (especially refugees) struggling to be able to use the language, is that English is actually a rather difficult language for adult learners (just to speak; forget about reading/writing). English has an at least moderately difficult phonology (more so than average across the world's languages in terms of number of phonemes, with some actually rare ones, such as /T/ and /D/), including an abundance of closed syllables and Germanic/Slavic consonant clusters which are notoriously difficult to so many people. Add the chaos of our irregular verbs (the most commonly used), phrasal verbs, and on and on, and it seems to me that English is actually not at all an easy tongue to master. > [trim] > Nevertheless, should, say, the European Union seek an IAL, I actually > think LFN has a real chance. I tend to agree that the only realistic chance *any* (con)IAL has to go beyond the "hobia lingvo" (as the esperantists phrase it) stage is for some sort of international body decide to go for one. The EU would seem to be the most likely candidate, as there are only about three and a half languages in major use in the Americas. (Unfortunately for the francophones, I consider French to be the "half" in this hemisphere.) However, the real issue is how to "get the word out" about LFN. What visibility does it really have beyond the world of English-speaking auxlang aficionados? For good or for ill, Esperanto is so far ahead of the pack that when a lot of people think of "international language," E-o is about the only thing they have ever heard of. Would LFN be ready for the EU to choose? (For that matter, would Ido or Interlingua, the only two other plausible candidates, in my estimation?) > It is the first well-developed language > since the 1950s to gain some real interest and has the advantage of > relating to more modern sensibilities. Esperanto really does seem > Victorian, if you think about it. Even Interlingua, with its latinate > vocabulary, feels old and out-of-tune with the modern spirit. Of course, this is highly subjective. My own assessment is that Interlingua does not feel "old and out-of-tune," but that may be just me. It has never occurred to me that someone might consider E-o "Victorian," but I can see how someone might think that. Nevertheless, it is the only conIAL with an actual thriving community of users (small though that commmunity be in absolute terms), Victorian or not. > I would like to see a single language - artificial or natural - > selected as the world's IAL. There is no down-side that I can see. I agree. > But it seems that translation technology may still advance to a > degree that there will no longer be a motivating force for choosing > an IAL. C'est la vie. In the meantime, I continue to enjoy LFN and > the friends I have made along the way. Fair enough. -- Paul Bartlett