Sunday, January 8, 2006

Constructed language

A little while ago, there was a featured Wikipedia article on Ido, a reformed version of a "constructed language" called Esperanto. All languages are "constructed" so-to-speak, but the purpose of these languages is different from "natural" ones: it's to be easily learned and understood rather than act as an auxiliary extension to culture (and with that, expression within that culture).

The origin of language is cultural. There was a rudimentary system of communication that became used and later accepted on, and as it is continued to be used by that culture it got more and more subtle complexities. These complexities are almost the "beauty" of literature and poetry-- the right combination of meaning and phonetic tonality (and perhaps the arrangement of letters?). They also pose numerous hurdles to properly understanding a language.

I don't think constructed languages will ever be considered as "beautiful" as natural ones, if only due to their artificial simplicity. However, that's because it's not the intent of a constructed language. The intent is to encourage understanding among the numerous speakers of complex natural languages that, due to their cultural intricacies, have become difficult to learn. Also, if a natural language was to become a "universal" language, it would be preferential of that culture.. so constructed ones are more objective in that respect.

I think that the global community should look toward a international standard and encourage its use both socially and scholastically, as it did with the metric system (which we in the US should more stringently adopt, as there's no real lyrical "beauty" in gallons and yards as formal measurements). This is not to say, however, that universal standards in language and measurements should become primary, especially in the case of language. The cultural portions are still important. A balance needs to be drawn between culture and understanding. The easiest way is to make understanding secondary yet compulsory, which befits the goal of understanding quite well.

No comments:

Post a Comment