🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 14 Feb 1996, Kjell Rehnstroem wrote:

> The Interlingua text is the original of this reply. The English one is
> thus a translation of it. Those who would like to read the Esperanto
> version of the reply may turn to:
>  soc.culture.esperanto,

I think I'll suggest to post the same article in different languages
seperately (not necessarily in different ng's) when they are so long
as this one (or at least do it in two columns).

[...]

> >As I understand it the utility of learning Esperanto before other
> >languages that has been observed in some studies is not due to any
> >special advantage in vocabulary or grammar. It is mostly due to the
> >encouraging experience of having successfully learned a foreign
> >language.

> Esperanto is good when you have to learn to parse sentences.

Esp'o is good not only to teach the fundamentals of syntax, but also
the fundamentals of semantics. All Interlingua is good for in this
context is Romance etymology; the grammar is an ill-defined mixture
of French and English, and there has been no attempt to remedy the
semantic incompatibilities among the source languages.

> >   Interlingua. Every minute you have dedicated to the study of
> >   Interlingua will pay off when you start learning other languages.
>=20
> >Other Romance languages.
>=20
> and English, that is to say the "culture" words in it.

In short: the _vocabulary_ may be called "proto-anglo-romance" as
Stan Mulaik puts it, but it's hardly so different from that of
Esperanto (or that of a zillion conlangs for that matter) that it
makes a remarkable difference in _reading_ Romance languages and
English.  Interlingua may be a viable choice if you can't decide
whether to learn Spanish or Italian, but _speaking_ Interlingua
won't bring you much further than broken Spanish or rudimentary
Italian. People's true motivation for learning Interlingua is the
same as for all other languages, including Esperanto: interest in
the community that is defined by that language.

You may call me a raumisto.

[...]

> And how many times have I not heard Esperantists say that you cannot
> speak Interlingua.

All right then: there _are_ pronounciation rules for Interlingua,
even if some of the words in the dictionary don't have a full
orthograpic indication of it (irregular stress, divergent
pronuciations of c, s and x etc.). It probably _can_ be spoken, it's
just that very few actually _do_ it.

> Either they don't know what they are talking about
> or they are right out lying. One of the two must be true, as I myself
> speak Interlingua, and I know a lot of other people who can as well.

Well, if you count the Italian- and Spanish-speaking people in, that
will be quite a lot...

> I'd be dishonest, if I stated that Esperanto were as good an
> international auxiliary language alternative. Why, do you thin, did I
                                                            ^^^^
> become interested in Interlingua and learnt it without too much use of
> energy, if I did not thought that Esperanto were OK?=20
                       ^^^^^^^                      ^=20
Because the letter "k" abhores you, unless it's capital. (Cetere la
cxi-supra frazo sonas kvazaux vi lernis Int'an gxuste _cxar_ Esp'o
estis bona. Se vi ne estas vera interlinguano, sed nur uzas tion por
teni la diskuton bolanta, provu kasxi tion pli bone).

> English rules, that's a fact. To me Interlingua already to-day is an
> alternative that I can use for communication with other people who
> know it actively and with the big number of persons who understand it
> passively.=20

Not a psychologically consistent position...

> Interlingua is the alternative that I can use when I want to give more
> than I take. If others prefere to use Esperanto, be my guest!

Out of listening and speaking to someone, what is giving and what is
taking? Well, maybe it means that using Esp'o makes you feel equal
with your interlocutors, and you want to feel inferior...

> He who does not feel any need to change anything, of cource shouldn't
> do it. =20

The most natural interpretation of this sentence would be that using
Esp'o changes something that shouldn't be changed. Could you
elaborate on that?

/Jens Stengaard Larsen ( =3D jens@cphling.dk )

"Dio benu vin!" - diris la ateisto.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--
 Esperanto parolata * English spoken * Deutsch wird gesprochen * Dansk t=E5=
les
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--