Hic un interessante articulo in re le recercas de IALA
traducite del Esperanto al anglese. Io regretta non haber
le tempore pro facer un traduction al Interlingua mais io
volerea facer lo in le futuro.

Io crede que il ha plus detalios que Don H. hic non mentiona
e que son importante. Esque alcun altere INTERLNGIstas
pote offerer plus information?

Sincermente,
Jay B.
[log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]
 http://adam.cheshire.net/~jjbowks/home.html
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-----Original Message-----
From: Donald J. HARLOW <[log in to unmask]>
To: Multiple recipients of list AUXLANG <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, December 26, 1997 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: The Final Count


>At 08:12 AM 12/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>Zarz,
>>Based on what I personally feel is fairness to all, I am not
>>recording any further votes to our count. However, if anyone
>>wishes to keep track of any further votes they may do so.
>>
>A couple of comments below, just for the record.
>
>>I am posting my last count below. I have made a revision to its
>>status before the "extra" votes came in. I can see the security
>>council at the un inviting in last minute new nations to change a
>>vote they didn't like.
>>
>>So, unless someone wishes to carry on the record, the votes are
>>now closed.
>>
>>Here are the top ten as I believe, as close as I can make it,
>>they should be.
>>
>>1. Esperanto (18) [2 Esperanto sine Flexion, 1 Reformed Esperanto
>>by Zamenhof author named]
>
>Is there such a thing as Esperanto sine Flexion? In any case, IMHO neither
>it nor the 1894 Reformed Esperanto (which looks about as much like real
>Esperanto as a kinkajou looks like Albert Einstein) should be included
here.
>
>>2. English (13) [BE 3, Simplified Eng. 3, American Eng. 1]
>
>Too late, I suppose, but I was ready to withdraw my vote for English on the
>basis of the BE 3; I would support English, American Eng. or a regularized
>English (regularized pronunciation with accompanying phonetic spelling,
>weakening of all verbs, regular -S plural, etc.), but BE is definitely none
>of these -- it's merely English with an artificially limited vocabulary. I
>don't know what is meant by "Simplified English". Again, I believe that
>while American English can be folded into regular English, neither of the
>others should be.
>
>>Footnote 2: Someone in NY sent out questionaires to linguists to
>>get their feedback to words, etc. selected for Interlingua when
>>it was being developed. Who did that, and who talleyed the
>>results? The implication is, someone created the language and
>>then asked others to verify their decisions. Anyone know who did
>>that?
>>
>Here's the scoop as provided by Edo Bernasconi in "Esperanto au^
>Interlingua?" (La Chaux-de-Fonds: Kultura Centro Esperantista, 1977).
>Translation errors are my responsibility; factual errors may be laid at
>Bernasconi's door, if you can find it.
>
>---
>
>In 1939 the linguistic center of IALA moved from Liverpool to New York.
>Between 1939 and 1942 the American philologist and Esperantist poet Ezra
>Clark Stillman filled the office of directory (replacing the linguist
>Collinson). Alexander Gode was vice-director until 1948.
>
>According to Gode, it was Stillman who was the first to take steps to work
>out a methodology to extract the international vocabulary in the form of a
>prototype vocabulary (1), but only Gode worked it out in full and defended
>it against proposals of "linguistic compromise". (1)
>
>Gode's starting point was an a priori position of seeking a Platonic
>ursprache (though he limited this research to the field of the vocabulary,
>and did not widen it to the field of morphosyntax). Because of this several
>friends of Interlingua are of the opinion that their language was inspired
>by no previous language project (2). This is obviously an error of vision.
>
>In 1945 there appeared a "General Report" where three experimental
>languages could be found, constructed according to the principle of
>greatest direct understandability. One language is perfectly neo-Latin
>(very similar to today's Interlingua); another is more "modern
>language"-appearing; the third is partially autonomist. In 1946 IALA
>undertook an inquiry among the interinguists.
>
>But only in 1947 did IALA send out 3,000 test brochures to people
>completely outside the interlinguistic movement. In this brochure four
>experimental language-variants (P, M, C, K) were introduced, of which only
>two had already been introduced in the "General Report" of 1945 (3). In
>1948 the results of that inquiry appeared.
>
>This brochure contained a text in the four projects, and it was to be
>immediately decided (at first sight) which was the more attractive.
>Afterwords came several explanatory pages about their characteristics, and
>at the end of that text another judgement on the four projects was
requested.
>
>The 3,000 brochures were sent to the United States, Great Britain, France,
>Denmark, Czechoslovakia and Chile.
>
>-- Variant P (a prototypistic system analogous to Interlingua), very
>irregular, received 26.6% of the preferences.
>
>-- Variant M (a system more "modern-linguistic", between Interlingua and
>Occidental, but also somewhat irregular) received 37.5% of the preferences.
>
>-- Variant C (a "modern-linguistic" system, very similar to Occidental)
>received 20% of the preferences.
>
>-- Variant K (a nearly autonomist system, but less perfect than e.g. Ido)
>received only 15% of the preferences.
>
>So the naturalistic systems in an extreme position (P and M) received 64%
>of the preferences, while the modern-linguistic planned languages (M and C)
>received only 57%. This is probably why Gode felt himself given the right
>to continue his "prototypist" research.
>
>Concering the geographical origin of the preferences, we note the
following:
>
>*In the first ("first-sight") reply*
>
>Favorable to M and C: Mainly those from France and the United States
>Favorable to P: Mainly the British and Czechs/Slovaks
>Favorable to P and M: mainly the Danes
>
>*In the second ("post-explanation") reply*
>
>Favorable to P and M: Mainly the British, Czechs/Slovaks and Danes
>Favorable to C: The French
>Favorable to K: The Americans
>
>Such information is interesting, but how many replies actually came back to
>IALA?
>
>We know this: 11.9% of those addressed replied to the brochure tests, i.e.
>350 replies! Of these 350 responses, 18% were technicians or engineers,
>while only 6% belonged to rural or blue-collar media.
>
>(1) quote from GODE, found in: BERGER, Ric, "Historia del lingua
>international. Unua volumo", Morges, Editiones Interlingua, undated (b), p.
>17.
>
>(2) BERGER, op cit, undated, p. 19.
>
>(3) M. MONNEROT-DUMAINE, "Precis d' interlinguistique generale et
>speciale", Paris, Maloine, 1960, p. 134.
>
>---
>
>It would appear from this that Interlingua was developed in NY in the late
>forties by Gode; the advice sought from outside was not on individual
>words, etc., but simply on the preferred _type_ of language, within a
>certain range of acceptable types.
>
>-- Don HARLOW
>http://www.webcom.com/~donh/
>(English version: http://www.webcom.com/~donh/dona.html)
>