28 May
2013
28 May
'13
1:07 p.m.
On Tue, 28 May 2013, Chuck Guzis wrote:
There are ongoing battles over whether American Sign Language (and
Esperanto) are "languages" or not. (Including whether they should be
accepted for the "Foreign Language Requirement" for college degrees)
The usual arguments against it are:
1) It doesn't have a written form, and a "language is spoken AND
written, and it is neither"
2) "It's just charades in English"
Opponents of it generally know NOTHING about it, but nevertheless consider
themselves "experts" (college administrators are uninterested in the
o[pinions of their own Linguistics department); they also reject
Esperanto, based on "it can't be a language, because it was artificially
created"
1) True. But, there are other "languages" without a written form
(Hawaiin?), and certainly some that do not currently have a spoken form
(Sanskrit?)
2) Although it DOES have grammar and syntax, neither match English.
"train go sorry"
So: If there
are children who speak it natively, then the answer to
Fred's question is certainly "yes". Given the very large community for
whom it is a useful second language, with literature as well, then the
answer is "yes, probably". If it were restricted (as it is not) to a
minimal vocabulary with no potential for growth, then the answer would
be "certainly not".
Ah, but Esperanto is just another language expressed
with vowel and
consonant sounds. I'd like to see Solresol as a natural language.