Re: Artificial "real" languages (was Re: pIqaD)

[PeHruS9@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/2/2002 10:10:19 PM Mountain Standard Time, 
aranders@netusa1.net writes:


> ja' charghwI':
> >[Turkish] is probably
> >as close to an artificial language actually spoken by a whole country's
> >population as has ever existed in the world, though it is strongly based
> >on the
> >natural language that had preceeded it.
> 
> Hebrew yIqel je.  mu'tay' law' 'ogh wa' loD puqloDDaj je.
> wa'vatlh vaghmaH ben, boghpa' Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, Hol Qop 'oH.
> wa'vatlh cha'maH ben, chenpa' Hebrew Hol rIp, Hebrew HaDlaHbe' vay'.
> Qatlh Bible Hebrew 'ej pIj pupHa'.  nap DaHjaj Hebrew.
> 
> -- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh
> 

While I will not claim that Spanish and Irish are created or recreated for a 
nation, about 600 years ago Sapnish underwent standardization of spelling and 
about 100 years ago the Irish government began a push for the renewal of the 
language.  Spanish was neither dead nor truly stale, it just need spelling 
standards.  Since then, TexMex Spanish has exhibited numerous variant 
spellings again.  Irish never really died out in northwest Ireland, the rest 
of the country lost use of it.

On a completely different line, lots of us are in the process of recording 
languages which will not endure much longer.  I am working on Atayal and Ute.

peHruS