Message: "Re: On constructed languages"

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

Re: On constructed languages

by Phyllis (guest)

11/19/2002, 9:26 PM

I may be wrong here, but I think that ASL (American Sign Language) is a "constructed" language (as usual, please correct me if I am.)

Second, what, exactly, do you mean by "constructed"? Is there any real time limit that you are giving the language? Sorry for this stupid question. :blush:

Phyllis (aka Sidhe Uaine or Gaia Euphoria)

Replies

- Pavlos (guest) +2

11/22/2002, 2:20 AM

Good question, I used the term loosely, I guess its a matter of degree. Of the three examples I use, I guess Esperanto is the only genuinely "constructed" out of scratch, using ingredients from other languages. For Hebrew, a better term would be "revived". As far a "Macedonian" is concerned, the language pre-existed as a Bulgarian dialect for ages. In 1944 it was named "Macedonian" out of the blue by Tito's government, and its grammar was codified so as to differente it from Bulgarian.
I agree that sign language is constructed. It is unfortunate that nobody thought of constructing an *international* SL. It is tragic that a user of American SL cannot communicate with a user of, say, Italian SL...

- Yahalome (guest) +1

11/22/2002, 4:02 PM

Pavlos:

Didn't you read my reply?? There IS an International Sign Language, called ISL. Go to dww.deafworldweb.org/asl/ and click on More... under International Sign. Y

- Pavlos (guest)

11/22/2002, 11:51 PM

Aha :)

- Yahalome (guest)

11/19/2002, 11:11 PM

I guess it must be; I never thought about it. I think, though, that ISL (International Sign Language) is even more so than AMSLAN is constructed. :)

View Message

Replies