The choice of an auxiliary language for the world. Perspectives within the context of contemporary linguistics

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1. PRELIMINARIES

1.1. Introduction

1.2. A word on Typography

CHAPTER 2. AN AUXILIARY LANGUAGE FOR THE WORLD: GENERAL OUTLINE

2.1. The Definition of an 'International Auxiliary Language'

2.1.1. 'international'

2.1.2. Worldwide Communication

2.1.2.1. Maximum facilitation

2.1.2.2. A Bilingual Global Speech Community?

2.1.2.3. All Kinds of Linguistic Communication

2.1.2.4. Use Between Native Speakers of Different Languages

CHAPTER 3. UAL TYPOLOGY

CHAPTER 4. UAL SELECTION: A POLITICAL AND/OR A LINGUISTIC ISSUE?

4.1. Whether and How to Choose a UAL

4.2. Which UAL to Choose

4.2.1. Survey of the Issue

4.2.2. The Relevance of Topics Within Contemporary Linguistics to UAL Selection: Language Universals and Linguistic Equality

4.2.3. Deductions

CHAPTER 5. THE INNATENESS HYPOTHESIS AND THE SIMPLICITY AND LEARNABILITY OF POTENTIAL UALs

CHAPTER 6. THE LANGUAGE BIO-PROGRAMME HYPOTHESIS: EMPIRICAL DATA

6.1. The Creole Connection

6.2. Structures of Creolization

6.3. Loose Ends

CHAPTER 7. THE CHOICE OF A SCRIPT (AND ORTHOGRAPHY)

Objective & Topics

This study aims to investigate whether contemporary linguistic research, specifically regarding language universals and learnability, can inform the selection of a Universal Auxiliary Language (UAL). It examines the premise that linguistic expertise is crucial to identifying optimal attributes for such a language, moving beyond purely political decision-making processes.

• Sociolinguistic definition and typology of Universal Auxiliary Languages (UALs).
• Evaluation of linguistic versus political criteria in the UAL selection process.
• Application of the language bio-programme hypothesis and innateness to structural learnability.
• Cross-linguistic analysis of creolization as empirical data for linguistic structure.
• Examination of script and orthography selection for a global language.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

CHAPTER 1. PRELIMINARIES: Introduces the scope of the study, positing the necessity of a cross-fertilization between the study of natural and constructed languages for UAL identification.

CHAPTER 2. AN AUXILIARY LANGUAGE FOR THE WORLD: GENERAL OUTLINE: Defines the UAL concept, arguing for its "universal" application and the necessity of "instituted" rather than "evolved" linguistic status.

CHAPTER 3. UAL TYPOLOGY: Provides a three-way classification of UAL candidates: a-priori, a-posteriori, and mixed systems, evaluating their suitability for global use.

CHAPTER 4. UAL SELECTION: A POLITICAL AND/OR A LINGUISTIC ISSUE?: Discusses the intersection of political discretion and linguistic expertise, arguing that linguistics is vital for structural selection criteria.

CHAPTER 5. THE INNATENESS HYPOTHESIS AND THE SIMPLICITY AND LEARNABILITY OF POTENTIAL UALs: Explores how innate cognitive dispositions, reflected in natural language, can inform the learnability of potential UAL structures.

CHAPTER 6. THE LANGUAGE BIO-PROGRAMME HYPOTHESIS: EMPIRICAL DATA: Reviews empirical evidence from creolization studies to demonstrate how structural similarities across languages reflect a universal linguistic bio-programme.

CHAPTER 7. THE CHOICE OF A SCRIPT (AND ORTHOGRAPHY): Examines the independent challenge of selecting an optimal writing system, comparing phonographic and logographic principles.

Keywords

Universal Auxiliary Language, UAL, Language Bio-Programme, Creolization, Linguistic Universals, Learnability, Language Planning, Linguistic Inequality, Innateness Hypothesis, Natural Language, Constructed Language, Phonography, Logography, Sociolinguistics, Language Standardization.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the primary objective of this work?

The research seeks to determine whether contemporary linguistics can provide meaningful criteria for selecting or constructing a Universal Auxiliary Language (UAL), rather than leaving the choice solely to political authorities.

What are the central thematic fields?

The work integrates sociolinguistic definitions, language typology, cognitive science (innateness), and the study of creolization to establish a scientific foundation for UAL planning.

Which scientific method is applied?

The author employs a comparative linguistic approach, utilizing the language bio-programme hypothesis and empirical evidence from creole studies to evaluate structural learnability and universal linguistic features.

What does the main body address?

It provides a typology of UALs, debates the role of political vs. linguistic criteria, evaluates the innateness hypothesis as a tool for measuring language learnability, and critiques current biases in writing system selection.

How is the term 'international' addressed?

The author argues that 'international' is insufficient and proposes the term 'universal' to better describe a language intended for all nations of the world.

What is the relevance of creolization data?

Creolization data serves as evidence for the language bio-programme, showing how structural expansion occurs in a predictable way that may indicate optimal learnable features for a UAL.

Why is script selection treated independently from language selection?

The author notes that choosing a language does not automatically determine the best script; the two are independent problems requiring their own sets of linguistic criteria regarding decoding speed and memorizability.

What is the role of political neutrality in this study?

The author concludes that while socio-political neutrality is often cited in favor of constructed languages, it is a complex, often non-linguistic issue that cannot be resolved through scientific linguistic analysis alone.