Re: Espo question for you

[Nick Nicholas <nsn@MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU>]

Lojbab writes me re Esperanto on the conlang list:

>This sounds like E. is going through a le'avla vs. lujvo internal
>battle.  Is this the case, are the lujvo people winning as he says, and
>is your sense of the wider E. community not-on-net that it follows the
>trend Rick states is evident on s.c.e.

This debate has been going on in the language from its inception --- where
it's known as the "neologism" debate ---and in fact, Zamenhof more often
than not found himself on the neologist side of the debate, having people
like Theophile Cart and Captain Cap'e out-maestro-ing the maestro. All
Esperantists do have an alignment on this question; the masses and a
sizeable portion of the intelligentsia against neologisms; the intelligentsia
for them; and fringe groupings --- Schultz and Nagata against, Pic and
Urbanova for --- carrying things to extremes. The debate happens in
many national languages too. Trends? Frequently neologisms displace
the original compounds; less frequently compounds displace neologisms
('disauxdigi' is now universal for the '20s word 'brodkasti'); Esperanto
now exists in a small number of --- well, it would be rash to speak of
dialects: stylistic variants, more polemically adhered to than in natural
languages; a sort of busy chaos, with everyone trying to 'save' the language,
and much crying of 'heresy'. I find myself so aligned too, and I don't think
the cries of heresy are all counterproductive --- but it makes the language
very self-conscious, you never just sit back and *use* it like you do English,
anything you say takes on political dimensions. (Greek literature, caught
between archaic usage and colloquialism, is in a similar quandary.) As has
been already predicted on lojlist, the chaos in lojban based on individual
decisions as to le'avla, as well as which parts of the grammar one stresses,
will be greater (I think it's starting to show up already), and it won't be
debilitating ultimately, but it will mean Lojban won't have the homogeneity
of the natural languages we're accustomed to.

>Does this teach us any lessons for Lojban?  (I hope so.)  Your
>thoughtful opinion on this subject and ramifications posted to Lojban
>List (and maybe also conlang), and possibly in JL, would be welcomed.
>Examples encouraged assuming you are writing for a
>non-Esperanto-knowledgeable audience:  what types of things ARE suitable
>for le'avla, and which for lujvo, under the various factions in this
>issue.

>Feel free to bring others (Mark, etc.) into this discussion/project)

I regret to say I simply have no time to *initiate* such a discussion
(I only get an hour or two on the terminal each night now that I'm
working :( ), but I will do as many follow-ups as you want...

In other news: I'd support Colin and Mark against John on the {xai}
issue (I'm trying to pick out commonalities between their positions,
but again, lack the time to :( ), I also regret I don't have the time
to respond in detail to the Marquis' excellent article on tanru; and
Colin's {xa'o} sounds suspiciously like {pu'o}; could you describe
their differences more explicitly?

*******************************************************************************
 A freshman once observed to me:         Nick Nicholas am I, of Melbourne, Oz.
 On the edge of the Rubicon,             nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: nicxjo)
 men don't go fishing.                   Account expires end of February 1993.
   - Alice Goodman, _Nixon In China_     Mail me! Mail me! Mail me! Or don't!!