[Foundation-l] policy on languages without native speakers

[Crazy Lover]

--- White Cat <wikipedia.kawaii.neko at gmail.com> wrote:

> I strongly suggest we avoid a policy on the matter -
> rather we should
> explicitly list what is allowable rather than what
> is banned. More like a
> guideline than policy.
> 
>    - White Cat
> 



a classification of languages?. some like this:


____________________________________________________

FIRST CATEGORY: LINGUISTICS (ARTICULATED)

I.- Natural languages:

1.- Reconstructed languages. nobody knows how it was!
hypotetical rebuilded. all the "protos":
proto-indoeuropean, proto-afroasiatic, proto-sinaic,
etc

2.- "dead languages" (without native speakers)

a.- with some modern use (liturgical, source of
neologism, some modern literature, etc). example:
sanskrit, classical chinese, classical arabic, ancient
greek, latin, and some others.

b.-without modern use: phrygian, Etruscan, etc

3.-modern languages (with native speakers)

a.- written languages.

b.- no written languages.

II.- Artificial language.

1.- engineered language. example: lojban, etc. they
could be, sometimes, linked with auxiliaries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_language

2.- auxiliary languages: that pretends to be a real
medium of communication among humans, specially in
international contexts: esperanto, volapuk, glossa,
etc

3.- artistic languages: only created for aesthetics
purpose. to have fun: tolkien's and star trek
languages, etc.

SECOND CATEGORY: NO LINGUISTICS (NOT ARTICULATED)

all the sign languages, deaf-mutes language, braille,
etc.

_____________________________________________________


except better approach

L.C



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ