endangered natural languages. relationship to aux-langs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/4699960/Celtic-dialects-declared-extinct.html

"Unesco director-general Koichiro Matsuura said: "The death of a language leads to the disappearance of many forms of intangible cultural heritage, especially the invaluable heritage of traditions and oral expressions of the community that spoke it - from poems and legends to proverbs and jokes."

The Manx language was thought to have died out in the mid-19th century but there are now believed to be about 600 active speakers.

... There are thought to be just 300 fluent speakers of Cornish left in the world and Jenefer Lowe, development manager of the Cornish Language Partnership, says reports of its extinction are premature."

----------------------------------

D: I can just imagine telethon 'adopt-a-language' drives.

What is the relationship of auxlangs to natlangs?

Every new religion, every new ideology begins as marginal.

The plead for tolerance and wanting everyone to 'play nice in the sandbox together'.

Once in charge, often they'll engage in bloody pogroms against the old guard.

The Romans and Christianity come to mind.

Monotheism. The One True Way.

... A world language.... no room for others?

With languages, there are 4 tiers in this analogy.

1) learned in adulthood, second language

2) learned in childhood, second

3) learned in childhood, co-taught with first natural language

4) first language.

http://www.uea.org/info/angle/ed37-angla.html

International linguistic hegemonies draw on beliefs and attitudes to linguistic hierarchies and interlock with the allocation of more resources to the dominant language.

The imaginative project in the inter-war period to devise a restricted form of English as an "international auxiliary language", BASIC English (BASIC = British American Scientific International Commercial), was promoted in the hope that lesser languages would be eliminated:

***"What the world needs is about 1000 more dead languages — and one more alive" ***

(Ogden, 1934, cited in Bailey, 1991, 210). Here "international understanding" was seen as unidirectional, with other languages to be abandoned in favour of the dominant language, English, this having been made more accessible through simplification.

Linguistic imperialism has invariably presupposed the superiority of the dominant language, in both the colonial and postcolonial worlds (Mühlhäusler 1996; Phillipson 1992). The British and Americans created a substantial academic infrastructure to serve the promotion of English worldwide.

D: note this is the opinion about a con-nat-lang (controlled natural language).

I hear the Germans were preparing a simplified German for the masses, to facilitate the 3rd Reich.

D: aux-langs have an advantage that nat-langs lack in the same degree.

They can be sufficiently simple to learn that there is plenty of time for a second childhood language. Some nat-langs possess such qualities in varying degrees.

I refer back to my first blog entry.

Finns are literate c. 2 years before English kids, with Russians in turn years behind English.

It matters a lot what qualities a language, spoken and written, possesses! The key is simplicity (to a degree), regularity, phoneticity. Turkish affixes are not simple, but they are simple in the sense of lacking irregulars and exceptions. In short, there are not many rules to learn. Compare to English with the THOUSANDS of rules that would be needed to encompass its quirks.

Conlangs are an attempt to minimize these aspects of natlangs. Naturalistic auxlangs, I suppose, resemble reformed con-langs quite closely.

http://ogden.basic-english.org/rules.html

1. Plurals are formed with a trailing "S". The normal exceptions of standard English also apply, notably "ES" and "IES".
2. There are four derivatives for the 300 nouns: -"ER" and -"ING", and two adjectives, -"ING" and -"ED".
3. Adverbs use -"LY" from qualifiers.
4. Degree is expressed with "MORE" and "MOST". Be prepared to find -"ER" and -"EST" in common usage.
5. Negative adjectives are formed with "UN"-
6. Questions are formed by inversion and by "DO".
7. Operators and pronouns conjugate in full.
8. Compound words may be combined from two nouns (milkman) or a noun and a directive (sundown).
9. Measurement, numerals, currency, calendar, and international terms are in English form.
10. Technical expressions required and customary for the immediate task are included in the locally used form.

D: English verbs seem unnecessarily complex.

Lang X aims to be the first childhood language of the world.

Lang53

27

26

2726 AD

100%

0%

D: Finnish gives insight into how a dominant world language could play well with others.
Being easy enough to learn, picking up Swedish in childhood is common. Once Swedish is learned, its similarities to English allow that to be a third language, either in childhood or adulthood. The key is a conlang or auxlang sufficiently regular that the only complexity is for nuance of meaning, not mere quirkiness. A sufficiently reformed conlang would be be virtually indistinguishable from a naturalistic auxlang.

D: next I'll try to apply Ygyde's Long form to Decimese to allow for use of easily lip-read visemes from Deafese.

------------------------

QOTD:

The Future

What makes a nation is a common language and experience. What will make men international will be a common language. The earth is getting smaller through the discoveries of Science, and Media is now putting Babel into the houses of all. One great step forward would be news every hour in a common language. Five minutes would be enough to give everyone the feeling that this little earth was pulling itself together. That language would quickly become a part of everyday experience. It would be possible for media to be produced in any country for every country.

(Ogden)

Ygyde: how NOT to promote a language

http://www.lojban.org/no/lists/lojban-list/msg01564.html

http://www.lojban.org/tiki//tiki-pagehistory.php?page=Ygyde&preview=1

D: he seems to have posted these challenges at various sites, including for Toki Pona. Oddly, he did so with languages that are NOT primarily intended as international aux-langs.
This seems to be a case of apples and oranges.
Yes, your orange certainly rates higher on the citrus scale compared to an apple... so?

Here is the gauntlet being thrown down:

>Ygyde conlang is easy to pronounce, easy to
>understand, extremely easy to learn, and has
>unique ability to define all meanings in short
>(7 letters or less) compound words. Last, but
>not least, Ygyde is fun to work with. Some
>compound words are unintentionally funny. If
>you do not believe me, think of an English
>word, define it in Ygyde, and compare it with my
>definition. Is your definition better than mine?

This does not make it "better" than Lojban.

D: he provoked a response from Lojban central.
It pretty much dissects his language.
He pretty much antagonized any groups that would  have
otherwise been interested in his language.
Plus those languages all have a group that can speak it!

Ygyde is intended as an Auxiliary Language. Lojban is not.

D: same thing on the Esperanto site.

In one passage on a chat site, they pose a sample tract to
translate.
But Ygyde lacked the vocabulary for many common
nuances.

I do think his choice of phonemes is more thoughtful than
the Lojban critique lets on. Lojban is no prize in that
respect.

I DO think a language must be designed as an IAL to be
a good one. The odds of a language fitting the
requirements for a good aux-lang by accident are not good.

I don't imagine Lojban or Ygyde are particularly brief,
given their rules for word formation.

D: Lojban has 6 vowels and 21 consonants. This is to use
a standard QWERTY keyboard and the Roman alphabet.
It also has rules for buffering consonant clusters.
It has penultimate stress, which seems artificial if
the language is not heavily prefixing.
The basic root of the language is always 2 syllables
of form either CVCCV or CCVCV.
This is highly compatible with existing speakers'
abilities.
Only 1350 of these "gismu" exist. That is a bit more
than the original Esperanto, though much less now.

Ygyde: most nouns are 5-7 letters long. The CVCVCV...
form is very easy to say (there are optional consonant
clusters for brevity).
It has 6 vowels and 15 consonants, as befits a language
designed as an IAL.
In this respect, it IS superior to Lojban as an IAL.
Also compared to Esperanto.

D: on Esperanto - this was the first great IAL. Having
said that, it should be viewed as the Mark I prototype.
To expect it to hold up after 100 years is ridiculous.
And it doesn't.
We don't expect a Model T Ford car to keep up with a
modern sedan. And it doesn't.
However, there is a difference between an old car
enthusiast and one that is so deluded as to think it
can keep up with any modern sedan, let alone sports car!
Lo and behold Ygyde, a modern sedan, can indeed run
circles around Esperanto.
For that matter, in time and with improvement, it could
likely claim to be a muscle car.

I'd like to say that is IS unfair for me to criticize
ANY existing language since I have yet to release mine.
I'm sure those chickens will all come home to roost in
time.

Problems with Ygyde, from my own unique and biased point
of view:
1) the colour system is bewildering and not optimized
(see the Lojban site critique)
2) the letters are not optimized for a computer display
(any diagonal other than 45 degrees)
3) wasting short syllables on universal constants is
pointless (talk about them much?)
4) the memory aids AREN'T much help (ebi is recalled
with abi for optical)
5) it puts a lot of demand on memory for vocabulary.
Let me explain. Big is aso. alo is small. Long is afo,
anu is short.
So we have 2 opposing pairs of qualities.
Aso-alo.
Afo-... anu. NOT something thematically related to the
above pair.

I do not plan to create much vocabulary. I plan to harness
the power of the online open source community.
If I lack enough basic concepts, I wish to invoke the
power of massively parallel computing (thinking).
So long as I set the design parameters, and focus on key
core concepts, I let others generate more words as they
wish.

Lojban threw down the gauntlet to translate one passage,
and Ygyde was not up to the task.
Don't get me wrong- it is an impressive start by one
fellow (with one assistant). I AM impressed.

But going on to language-specific sites to talk about how
great YOUR language is, Andrew, sounds like insecurity.
"Mine is better? " Or should I say bigger, Mr. No*icki?
C'mon - did your overcompensating win
you any friends, make any converts?
Why do it?
If I can contribute just a few insights into some 
hypothetical eventual world language then I will be
satisfied.
Yes, I'd really like if mine was selected (pending
posting).
I don't plan to alienate all my would-be supporters
though.

Just so I am not too elusive a target, I will suggest
what I wish to do to express the opposing qualities
of big-small and long-short.
BTW, I could not find a wide/narrow opposing pair.
Azi is narrow but I could not find wide at all!

1) embed math and space/time in the core concepts
2) express big as dimensions (all or 3/inclusive) with
plus or more concept attached.
3) express small as per but with minus or less concept.
4) core syllable rules are C (maybe W or Y) V (diphthongs?)
(maybe L or R) (nasal consonant).
5) reserve some special word construction rules for common
concepts, essentially shorthand.
6) detailed concepts are expressed with CVCV...CV(nasal
consonant) construction.
7) Use the basic syllable for the concept of SIZE. Wideness,
length, et al.
8) Using size, a pair of optional consonant cluster
letters. SO Y/W or R/L.
9) For now, we'll borrow form my pilot project Decimese.
Google for it.
Syllable: CVC construction as a noun. Noun indicated
by 1 of 3 nasal consonant endings.
If we, say, have CVC as size, then the pair of adjectives
would be
i) CWVC and CYVC.
ii) Alternatively CVLC and CVRC.
iii) as an adjective, ending consonant nasal N1.
iv) as the property of size, or smallness or largeness,
nasal N2.
v) as a verb, N3.
The basic word, using the core vocabulary rules, for
three dimensions, would be
i) concept of three
ii) modifier of dimension
iii) indicator for inclusively so, to indicate all XYZ
Cartesian co-ordinates.
iv) length only would be indicated with exclusively the
third dimension
v) width only would be indicated via the 2nd dimension.
Voila. Size- big/small. Largeness. To enlarge. Sizable.
Et al.
All derived via Esperanto-esque rules (but within my
CcVvcN syllable construction rules).
If you know size, you know length and width. Short/long,
narrow/wide.
Other physical properties, such as weight/mass, density,
hardness, coldness et al can all
also be mapped in similar fashion.
So too sensory concepts. Bright/dim, loud/faint et al.
By nearly endlessly recycling core concepts, very few
root words must be learned.

Wilkins and Ro - taxonomic types

D: I will now touch upon few aborted language attempts. Nobody really learned these, so they are mere historical curiosities. Ro is inspired by Wilkins.

http://www.alamut.com/subj/artiface/language/johnWilkins.html

"He divided the universe in forty categories or classes, these being further subdivided into differences, which was then subdivided into species. He assigned to each class a monosyllable of two letters; to each difference, a consonant; to each species, a vowel. For example: de, which means an element; deb, the first of the elements, fire; deba, a part of the element fire, a flame. In a similar language invented by Letellier (1850) a means animal; ab, mammal; abo, carnivore; aboj, feline; aboje, cat; abi, herbivore; abiv, horse; etc. In the language of Bonifacio Sotos Ochando (1845) imaba means building; imaca, harem; imafe, hospital...

The words of the analytical language created by John Wilkins are not mere arbitrary symbols; each letter in them has a meaning, like those from the Holy Writ had for the Cabbalists. Mauthner points out that children would be able to learn this language without knowing it be artificial; afterwards, at school, they would discover it being an universal code and a secret encyclopaedia."

D: the language had problems, though. Some words don't fit well into the categories.

"Let us consider the eighth category, the category of stones. Wilkins divides them into common (silica, gravel, schist), modics (marble, amber, coral), precious (pearl, opal), transparent (amethyst, sapphire) and insolubles (chalk, arsenic). Almost as surprising as the eighth, is the ninth category. This one reveals to us that metals can be imperfect (cinnabar, mercury), artificial (bronze, brass), recremental (filings, rust) and natural (gold, tin, copper). Beauty belongs to the sixteenth category; it is a living brood fish, an oblong one."

D: I was inspired enough by this last observation about children that I started playing with words that children could say at various ages that would later also form the basis for such a language. See my Childese effort.

D: Ro is a modern variation of Wilkins' effort.
http://www.langmaker.com/db/Ro
Like Solresol, Ro is an a priori philosophical language, with a vocabulary derived not from natural languages but from a classification structure. The sense of a word is indicated by its initial letters; for instance, in Ro, bo- is the category of "sense-affecting matter", and color words (falling under this category) begin with bofo-: bofoc means "red", bofod means "orange" and bofof means "yellow".

D: a problem is the very similarity that makes such words easy to learn. For example, a cucumber and pumpkin are both vegetables. If they vary by only one phoneme, context is not of much help to tell them apart. I guess this is a case of choosing your poison. Easier to learn or easier to understand spoken, once learned. This is a constant theme in language design. Often you get something but you lose something. For example, removing agreement between grammatical elements makes speaking a language easier. No more "I am" but "you are". However, this very aspect of English serves to give a listener not one but two chances to catch the intended pronoun-verb "to be" combo. I introduce optional tonal agreement in VERSE.

Ro Design principles

All of the language is stretched across the alphabet. Pronouns begin with A and mathematical words begin with Z, living things with L and M: mu are animals, mul are birds, mulca are swimming birds, mulcam is a duck.

D: My Decimese effort is taxonomic. I use syllables v.s. single phonemes, something that has not been tried to date. I suffer great problems with brevity due to this. I needed to introduce various tricks for "spoken shorthand" to address this. I make the CV syllable the basis for each lexeme, rather than C or V. Typically, taxonomic languages use alternating CVCVC or VCVC... to do so.

D: Ygyde is another example of this. I will touch upon that language in its own entry later.
Suffice to say, it shares uncanny similarities to Decimese. We vary in details, though, and the devil is in the details. Anybody reading the lang53 article and the UPSID phoneme data will inevitably show similarities, when attempting a taxonomic basis.

http://www.langmaker.com/db/Ygyde
http://www.medianet.pl/~andrew/ygyde/ygyde.htm
"Names of letters and scientific constants are 2 letters long. Names of variables are 4 letters long compound words. Proper nouns are 6 letters long compound words except for names of people and some geographic names, which are 8 letters long. Names of complex chemicals and proteins are proper nouns made of two words. Precise biological names of species are made of three words."
"All other words are either 5 or 7 letters long. They are compound words coined by combining a vowel prefix with two or three morphemes. Examples of the Ygyde compound words:
aniga (corrupt) = a (adjective) + ni (secret) + ga (money)"

D: taxonomic languages typically suffer from a lack of brevity. They also rely on each phoneme/letter so much that minor errors in hearing and typing will completely skew the meaning.
Typically, this lack of redundant phonemes for clarity is offset by fewer phonemes for clarity. This in turn reduces brevity. Alternatively, if they contain brevity there may not be enough base categories to ensure enough nuance in the basic vocabulary.
This has certainly vexed me greatly.

Perhaps the most interesting variant of this is AUI:
http://www.langmaker.com/db/AUI
http://www.anomalist.com/reports/language.html
" Probably the most bizarre artificial "universal" language of recent times is aUI (pronounced "a-OO-ee"), the "Language of Space." aUI, meaning "space-spirit-sound" or "space-language," and advertised as the "Pentecostal Logos of Love and Peace," was launched on Planet Earth in the 1960's by John W. Weilgart, an Austrian-born Iowa psychiatrist who claimed to have learned the language as a young boy from a little green elf-like humanoid from outer space. The little green spaceman told Weilgart that aUI was the literally universal language used by intelligent beings on all planets throughout the Cosmos. aUI, according to Weilgart, is a perfectly logical and rational language, and learning aUI can actually cure a person of irrational thinking patterns. "
D: quite the character!

Cheers.
Tomorrow, I will look at Solresol, a musical pitch-only language, then segue into various strategies to use tone in more conventional languages.

English quirk of the day:
http://alt-usage-english.org/I_before_E.html
"I before E except after C" ... not!
Exceptions:
beige, cleidoic, codeine, conscience, deify, deity, deign,
dreidel, eider, eight, either, feign, feint, feisty,
foreign, forfeit, freight, gleization, gneiss, greige,
greisen, heifer, heigh-ho, height, heinous, heir, heist,
leitmotiv, neigh, neighbor, neither, peignoir, prescient,
rein, science, seiche, seidel, seine, seismic, seize, sheik,
society, sovereign, surfeit, teiid, veil, vein, weight,
weir, weird

QOTD: "Both French and Latin are involved with nationalistic and religious implications which could not be entirely shaken off, and so, while they seemed for a long time to have solved the international language problem up to a certain point, they did not really do so in spirit. "
Edward Sapir