What's the idea? Use the vocabulary of a natural language. That is, use the dictionary of a natural language. This means people can easily buy dictionaries. The clever part is to create a new, simplified grammar.
A good candidate vocabulary preferably should: have easy, phonetic spelling; use the Latin alphabet; use relatively few diacritical marks; have a large, modern vocabulary; have readily available multilingual dictionaries.
Recently, at the end of Stage 1 of this competition, I selected three languages to go into Stage 2: Estonian, Indonesian and Afrikaans.
Stage 1 was a quick, high-level comparison of the languages. Stage 2 is a detailed analysis of the remaining three languages.
Unexpected Outcomes
This process has had two surprising outcomes:
(1) Two of the finalists have turned out to be so easy to learn, and already so effective as auxiliary languages in the real world, that I doubt it would be necessary to simplify or change them at all. Afrikaans and Indonesian seem to be so easy that they are probably no more difficult than Esperanto. That is, I think about three years of serious, dedicated study could allow a person to speak Afrikaans or Indonesian very well (not merely to a mediocre standard). Which is probably about the same time as is required for flawless mastery of Esperanto.
(2) Two of the finalists have turned out to be complementary to each other despite being in very different geographical regions: Afrikaans and Indonesian. Afrikaans is essentially a dialect of Dutch which contains numerous Malay words, not to mention words from many other languages, especially African ones. Indonesian is essentially a dialect of Malay which contains numerous Dutch words, not to mention words from many other languages, especially Asian ones. Afrikaans and Indonesian complement each other nicely.
One could certainly invent a good constructed language based on a blend of Indonesian and Afrikaans, possibly also influenced by English: for example my proposed Austrakaans project. And for a bit of additional flavour, one could add some Interlingua (with suitably simplified orthography) into the mix as well; this would be justified due to the great influence of the Portuguese language in both southern Africa and in Timor, not to mention French and Spanish elsewhere.
So, unexpectedly and usefully, I have arrived at the following conjunction of four complementary languages which are all closely interrelated:
Afrikaans
+ Indonesian
+ Interlingua
+ English
= harmonious constructed language
(worldlang).
This was unexpected.
Think about it. Not only are the source languages of the lexicons of these four languages (at least in part) largely compatible, but their orthographies are quite compatible also; in writing they all look, to the uninitiated, pretty much the same, and many of the consonantal sounds are the same. Suppose you spoke no language except Persian or Chinese, and you took a quick look at a page which contained four consecutive, unrelated paragraphs: one paragraph each of Afrikaans, Indonesian, Interlingua and English. You might well not notice that they were different languages. You might think the whole page was one language. This is because they all use the Latin alphabet with very few diacritics, and random, unrelated words in all four languages appear vaguely similar in form.
Of course, if one made a constructed language from these source vocabularies, English orthography would not be used: it is too hard to spell, except where it happens to coincide with Interlingua orthography. One would probably simplify source words from English and Interlingua by writing them in the orthography used by either Indonesian or Afrikaans, or a blended orthography of the two. Indonesian and Afrikaans simplify consonantal clusters and are more phonetic.
But I digress. Back to the competition.
Estonian Eliminated
I am sad. I would love to study Estonian. Really, truly I would. It sounds great. It has marvellously phonetic spelling. It has a wonderful, modern, useful vocabulary. It has an unusual grammar which potentially could be usefully simplified for use an an international auxiliary language. And I have bought a textbook and accompanying audio recording which are a joy to use. I would like nothing more than to sit down and spend a few months learning it properly.
But, if I do that then I would not have the time to do the same with either Indonesian or Afrikaans, not to mention taking time from my French studies. There simply isn't the time to do everything I would like to.
At the end of the day, Estonian is for me in the same study category as Latin: languages I would absolutely love to study but not of enough practical use to justify the expenditure of time compared to other available languages. Both are highly inflected or declined languages: the form of nouns changes quite markedly depending on grammatical case. Unfortunately the changes are moderately irregular and therefore very demanding of study time.
One day I will probably study Latin. Similarly, one day I will probably study Estonian; perhaps next year, indeed. But for the current competition, to find a language whose vocabulary could be used as the basis of a constructed language, Estonian simply cannot compete with Afrikaans and Indonesian.
Here are the reasons why:
(1) Too many diacritical marks. I tried to invent a system of writing Estonian words without diacritics, without changing the pronunciation, but after further analysis I realise this is impractical. It is impractical for two reasons: (a) Estonian relies upon its vowel diacritics to bring about correct, sensible pronunciation and it is too difficult to remove them in a sensible manner; (b) students would sometimes find it difficult to look up words in the dictionary, which would defeat the whole purpose of the proposed project (to use existing dictionaries). The only practical option would be to use all the same diacritical marks (which is still worth considering but unfortunately the points below still rule-out Estonian).
(2) Too many irregular changes to the stem of words to form the different grammatical cases, and too many irregularities in the suffixes used to form the different cases. One could regularize these but this would cause three massive problems: (a) the language would immediately be rejected, by anyone who knew proper Estonian, as a pidgin-like toy language; (b) the language would perhaps often not be comprehensible to speakers of Estonian, destroying its potential value as a language facilitating tourism; (c) most importantly, existing Estonian dictionaries would probably cause a great deal of confusion to the hapless student of the constructed language (this is a consequence of how the unusual grammar of Estonian works; it is integral to the words in any dictionary).
(3) The remaining reasonable option would be to use Estonian words, probably retaining the diacritics, but to completely abandon all Estonian grammar. Estonian words are fundamentally suited to be used in the context of Estonian grammar, so this would be a rather bizarre thing to do. However, it is okay to be bizarre since in taking this option we would not be aiming for any comprehensibility to Estonians. The thing is, once we have completely abandoned any grammar even remotely resembling Estonian, there is no justification for choosing Estonian vocabulary rather than Afrikaans, Indonesian, or Interlingua vocabulary. Even ignoring the greater recognisability of the latter vocabularies, which is beside the point, Estonian words simply have too many diacritics.
And so, with no time for sentiment, we need to keep moving, moving, moving forward in order to get some sort of useful result from all this investment of study time and not just end up wasting a year with no literary outcome.
The competition is down to only 2 languages from the original 12:
Afrikaans
Indonesian
Time will tell whether: one gets eliminated; both get eliminated; one gets retained and studied as a natural language; one gets retained as used as the vocabulary of a constructed language; both get retained and studied as natural languages; or both get retained and used as the vocabulary of a constructed language blended with Interlingua and English, possibly called Austrakaans and possibly used in a novel describing an alternative history of Australia (in which the Dutch settled the west coast and the English settled the east coast, and a vigorous trade occurred with Malay- and Portuguese-speakers to the north).
I'm sad to see Estonian gone but you have to admit it has all worked out rather nicely. The current languages this leaves me to study and use all fit together extremely well and offer many exciting literary opportunities: Afrikaans, Indonesian, Interlingua, French and English.
Reaching the World
Think about how nicely this has all worked out: between Afrikaans, French, Interlingua and English I can communicate with readers in most of Africa.
With Interlingua most of Europe is potentially accessible, providing Europeans are willing to do some study to learn Interlingua, which isn't too hard. Europeans who speak Germanic languages but not English could probably decipher Afrikaans reasonably easily, with a little prior study and a dictionary.
South America is completely accessible with Interlingua, almost without prior study by readers. North America is accessible by my native language, English, and by Interlingua for Spanish-speaking readers and by Interlingua or French for many Canadian readers. French of course will take me many years to learn.
Indonesian contains many Arabic words, and is simple to learn, so if I wrote in Indonesian then interested readers from the Middle East who do not speak English could conceivably learn to read Indonesian in a couple of years. (Obviously it would be ideal to write in Arabic but it is very difficult.)
And the most difficult continent to accommodate, Asia, contains at least 200 million speakers of Indonesian or Malay; those who do not speak Indonesian could probably learn it with great ease, much more easily than learning either Interlingua or English. Indonesian seems like a viable lingua franca to reach Asian readers, providing those readers are willing to put in a couple of years of study. Many people probably study Indonesian anyway, for business.
So, hypothetically speaking, if I were willing to put in about three years of study learning to write well in Indonesian and Interlingua, I could reach between 1 and 3 billion more readers (the lower figure indicates the number I could reach without requiring much study on the part of readers; the latter figure indicates the number I could reach if readers were willing to study the language in question for three years themselves). You see, I doubt many Asian readers could be bothered to learn Interlingua but I do not doubt that many would be willing to learn Indonesian (two reasons: Indonesian is a widely-spoken natural language, and Indonesian is much easier for speakers of Asian languages to learn).
One might ask, why not immediately eliminate Afrikaans since only about 20 million people speak some of that language? Answer: because it is not only about numbers. After all, Interlingua probably does not even have 1000 speakers but has very great potential. The same goes for an already-successful natural Germanic auxiliary language like Afrikaans, and anyway Afrikaans is of enormous interest to me for a potential literary project.
I really feel, intuitively, that somehow one could blend Indonesian, Afrikaans, Interlingua and English to produce a good worldlang; its lexicon would thus indirectly cover all of the official languages of the United Nations excepting Russian (the others are Chinese, Arabic, Spanish, French, English). Such a language would seem harmonious and balanced. It would be believable as a natural language which might have arisen in an alternative history.
Onward...
English also has diacritical marks. These are letters "i" and "j". The dots above these are diacritical.
ReplyDeletePlease therefore eliminate English as the language of the future. Perhaps a language without diacritical marks may bring a future international language nearer ?
@ bonan tagon Brian: The dots on "i" and "j" do not count as diacritical because they are already included within the letter and can therefore be used on every keyboard without any problem. However, we must admit that Afrikaans uses diacritics too, though at a lesser extent than Estonian; ex: "brûe" = bridges, "hê" = "to have", etc.
ReplyDelete@Robert: It seems to me that Afrikaans has indeed a very low number of loanwords. At first sight, there is a significant number of French words (fontein, plesier) but these ones already existed in Netherlandic, so they have nothing to do with the Huguenots. If I look at my own Afrikaans phrasebook, I can find only a few Malay (piesang, baie) and African (gogga, bontkwagga) loanwords. Some others come from English like "koebaai" or "konstabel". Finally, Afrikaans may be "purer" than modern Netherlandic.
@cafaristeir: Thanks for the correction about Afrikaans vocabulary. I had read the following quote from Wikipedia and had remembered the influence of Malay, but I had forgotten the more important thing, namely that 9 out of 10 Afrikaans words are reportedly of Dutch origin.
ReplyDeleteFrom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikaans
"Although Afrikaans borrowed from languages such as Malay, Portuguese, the Bantu languages or the Khoisan languages, an estimated 90 to 95 percent of Afrikaans vocabulary is ultimately of Dutch origin."
Oh well, at least I can put Afrikaans vocabulary together with Indonesian vocabulary if I do end up creating a hypothetical, alternative-history literary language, Austrakaans.
Incidentally, regarding diacritical marks, I believe they are only a problem in the short term. Within a decade or two Chinese may be the most popular language on the internet, along with vast use of other languages online which do not use a Latin alphabet.
Unicode character-encoding (UTF-16 or similar) will be universal and input devices will be far superior to current keyboards. Diacritical marks will be no problem at all; they will be trivial compared to entering all the Chinese characters we will have to enter. But for now, since input devices are often designed for English, diacritical marks are a temporarily significant problem. It is nice that Sambahsa doesn't use them.
Ironically, I have decided to add a single diacritical mark when I write texts in Interlingua: the acute accent to indicate stress. Without it, Interlingua is too difficult to pronounce correctly and it would probably fail in the competitive marketplace against, say, Spanish which is easy to read aloud correctly based on its orthography. Of course any such marking of stress in Interlingua should be optional.
Hı Brıan,
ReplyDeleteSurely you are beıng humorous here. Delıghtıng us wıth some of that whımsy that ambassadors of Esperanto are famous for. Thank God they are not serıous and bıtter lıke those treasonous İdısts are.
Unless of course maybe you are from a Turkısh speakıng background, ın whıch case dots over ı's are somethıng that are worth splıttıng haırs about. Those dots don't even appear over the letters when ın capıtal forms. The capıtal letters were the orıgınal forms ın the roman alphabet, the lower case letters appeared ın the mıddle ages. THESE LOWER CASE LETTERS WEREN'T PART OF THE ORİGİNAL ALPHABET, SO WE SHOULD ELİMİNATE THEM ALSO. İT WOULD DEFİNİTELY MAKE LİFE EASİER FOR ME, NOT HAVİNG TO REACH FOR THE SHİFT KEY OR WORRY WHETHER İ HAD ACCİDENTALLY ACTİVATED THE CAP-LOCKS KEY AGAİN.
İ think that a language intended for world wide use, especially when it is in a nascent state, can not afford to erect practical difficulties to it's usage. For a new language to get aloft, there has to be some pretty damned compelling reasons to adopt it, and as few negative barriers to using it. It has to be the most beautiful, easy and practical language ever. It needs to promise to help you loose weight and cure cold sores.
The basic 26 Roman alphabet character can be entered easily on every computer keyboard in the world. Even on keyboards designed for languages that use non-Roman alphabets, they still need the ability to type Roman for URLs and scientific symbols and measurement units.
Robert's argument isn't about whether dots on i's or j's constitute diacritical marks -- he's not trying to elimate dots, graves, circumflexes, accutes, cedillas, tildes, haceks, macrons and umlauts for the sake or it, or because he has a dislike of languages that employ them -- it’s about the practicality of using them, on any computer, anywhere, by anyone, without them losing patience after 2 minutes and giving up.
@David: tio estis esperantala humoro :-)
ReplyDeleteOf course, I share your opinion about the practicality of diacritics. Useful for the pronounciation, but often a problem with many modern keyboards. Let's not forget that as conlangers, we mostly use the Net for communicating to each other; that's why an engineered language should preferently avoid them. And my (our) experience is that still many interfaces can't read diacritics, even if your keyboard enables you to write them (ex: this happens on Yahoo). That's why, for Sambahsa, I have invented the Sambahsa Phonetic Transcription (SPT), a system that can be used anywhere on the net, unlike the IPA.
Sometimes, I wonder if I should not publish Sambahsa texts with the stress indicated for polysyllabic words. Example:
- Mégil biédas stahnt ant nos. Nies fràters nos gnopéihnt od id cult ios Aunnàm Div dact sémper meis tarafdàrs in ia ìnsules iom Cyclòps. Id materdòm tos sect wehst ep oin iom westìnsules. Tétos id téntet exténde sien magh vàsyims ìnsules ios archipélegv. Yu tehrpte spehde tòyghi tenisùnus behànde un mier nùmer em àgents ed spions. Plurs iom sàker amulétts wéhsent ja in ir hands. Mermydiòn est oin ìren creatùres. Is behrt un amulétt quod tehrpsiét ses ròhven ex iom ye càda pris. Bet excùset mien bowrléyia, yu sollte ses hùngric. Mien fràters vos preparesiént un chifàn.
this is so interesting, i remember learning Esperanto at school about 15 years ago. We had a semester of classes learning it, but then it was dropped from the curriculum and I never heard anything about it again.
ReplyDelete@ Liron: Fascinating. I have million and one question for you: Where did you have Esperanto taught in school. What country? How much did you pick up in a semester? Did the teacher look like he/she knew what they were teaching. Was it dropped because the one teacher in the state who knew it left the school? Was it an optional subject or compulsory? In other words, was it dropped because not enough interest?
ReplyDeleteIn a searing indictment of the state of my school's education system, FRENCH (yes French!) was dropped due to insufficient interest. This left Maori as the only "foreign" language taught. Actually in New Zealand, Maori isn't foreign, English is the real foreigner.
@David Parke: Nice trick with the -i-s. How did you get those pesky little dots to disappear? And even better, you managed to get the pesky dots back again over the -I-s. Full marks for maximum comic effect! Pun intended...
ReplyDelete@cafaristeir: I'm not sure, Olivier, if you are still operating in comic mode or are being serious when you wonder about possibly marking the stress of polysyllabic words in Sambahsa. I'll assume you are being serious. Here are my thoughts: (a) I don't understand why some words have acute accent and others have grave accent (it would be better to use one kind only); (b) actually I think optional marking of stress is a great idea, except if the pronunciation rules are so easy that there is no need; (c) however, consumers shopping around for an IAL to learn and being confronted with such marks may not understand they are just helpful, easy indicators of stress and do not change the vowel sounds, and therefore might get scared off by them before finding out more about the language.
In the case of Interlingua, maybe marking stress is okay since anyone interested in Interlingua is probably also interested in Spanish and quite likely to just bypass Interlingua and go straight for Spanish anyway. So Interlingua needs to make sure it is not hugely more difficult to pronounce than Spanish: marking stress achieves that end and does not disadvantage Interlingua compared to Spanish, since Spanish also has such marks.
@liron: Welcome! I hope you enjoy the blog. There is lots of information here about many different international auxiliary languages. There are quite a few to choose from these days and many of them help you to learn related natural languages too.
In fact, I should have used "è" instead "é"; of course, I did not mean any difference between acute and grave accents. The system with accent is meant only to ease the learning of Sambahsa and to be optional, since Sambahsa is entirely regular in this respect.
ReplyDeleteİt's not dıffıcult to remove and add dots to an ı - just use the Turkısh keyboard.
ReplyDeleteAnother humourous comment, hopefully :)
ReplyDeleteIf we removed the dots from "i" and "j" would this make it acceptable as the future international language !
@Brian Barker: Well, at least removing the dots from "i" and "j" would save some ink! :)
ReplyDeleteOh wow I come across this post in 2013 :p Great article! I'm an Indonesian native, and I must add that the Indonesian language has so many loan words, not only from Dutch, but also from Sanskrit (keep in mind that Indonesia was a strongly Hindu-Buddhist region for centuries---Islam only started out in 1500's), Chinese, Arabic, English, and Portuguese.
ReplyDelete