Re: 90th World Esperanto Congress opens in Lithuanian
- From: Artem Baguinski <artm@xxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:20:27 +0200
Eugene Holman wrote:
In article <17125.16314.608529.709824@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ar an cúigiú lá is fiche de mà Iúil, scrÃobh Eugene Holman:
> > > Esperanto is by far the most successful auxiliary language in history,
> > > > Eh? Latin and Classical Chinese are chopped liver?
> > Latin and Chinese are not auxiliary languages, that is to say, languages
> invented for the purpose of serving as an additional language for
> facilitating communication between people who have no language in common,
> but not to serve as the native language of a normal speech community.
"Auxiliary languages" is not to say that at all, unfortunately for your argument.
A difference exists between an *auxiliary language* and a *lingua franca*. A *lingua franca* is a natural language that is used or communication between people who share no common language. An *auxiliary language* is an invented (e.g. Esperanto, Volapük) or radically simplified natural language (e.g. Latine sans flexione, Basic English) that is used for communication between people who share no common language. An auxiliary language is thus a lingua franca, but a lingua franca does not have to be an auxiliary language.
Interesting. But...
What "share no common language" means here? To be able to communicate in /lingua franka/ they have to share it. To be able to communicate in /auxiliary language/ they have to share it.
artm is picking on words and mimicking Des modulo his wit .
- Prev by Date: Re: Will 7-7 become a word because of the bombing?
- Next by Date: Re: USSR vs /hitler/
- Previous by thread: Croatian dialect 'brek'
- Next by thread: New Mel Gibson film to be in Mayan
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
