There are three different types of decisions, if you are designing an auxiliary language. (1) Collecting words from as many languages as possible, (2) forming words minimally dependent on any existing languages, (3) choosing only the most common words from existing languages.

(1) makes your language harder than any other existing language, because you need to memorize more words, and you need to learn even more complex grammar from every existing language. It can be neutral, but it just becomes harder, satisfying nobody on Earth except the creator. By the way, do you know how many languages there are on Earth?

(2) There are many minimalistic languages, independent from existing languages, and some of them are good ones. How many words do you think we need to create a minimal language? Certainly not 10,000 nor 1,000. That's too much for minimalistic languages. How about 100? We have already such a language with 125 words -- Toki Pona. But the utmost minimal language has just 2 words. Scientists know that it's very efficient to have a binary language. These are simpler than others. Please take time to see some of these simpler, completely independent from natural languages. You may find these types of languages are just for computers or some other robotic races, not for us.

(3) So we have to choose words in some balanced sense. How to choose the most common, optimal part of all possible scenarios? I don't think you would choose words from Arabic languages, if you have a balanced sense about the whole globe. You wouldn't choose any language groups from Africa, Oceania or native America. Obviously because more people become unhappy.

If you consider the whole world, you have only two viable options in fact -- choosing common words from (a) Indo-european language group or words from (b) Chinese language group (Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese in consideration). As a Korean who studied all these neighboring languages, I can certainly say, that (a) is a better choice, because (b) is dependent on Chinese letters (Ideograms) which share the meaning but not the sound. The sound among these languages is quite different and it completely prevents mutual understanding. You don't want to bring pencil with you to draw letters to 'speak', do you? My ancestors did that, hundred years ago, when they travel Asian world.

Trust me. Esperanto is a very balanced choice, resulting from a really really serious study, and that's why Esperanto is equally loved by Asian, Arabian, and African people.

Posted by nomota multilingual

댓글을 달아 주세요