|                                               |
|            (-:   VORTPUNOJ   :-)              |
|       ^Jurnalo de nenecessaj lingvoj          |
|    Neksta eldono, la 32-an de februaro, 1993  |
|            S. Brewer, redaktoro               |
|             brewer@cs.wmich.edu               |
        The Contest Winner                      
        Esperanto: The Unnatural Language       By Edsel Miro
        Recently seen in Pheronet               By D-ro M. Bontrompon
        Proposed reforms the Ido                By R. Pipiens
        Propono de klasoj de nenecesaj lingvoj  By Vonzan D. Carrion

Contest Winners!

In the contest for best contributions to Inoffensish, we have
awared the highest honor to Jaques Guy and runner up position
to F. Foceno.  Although there is a seeming contradiction between
point 3 of J. Guy's entry and point EeeE of F. Focena's entry, 
we feel that  offered valid support for their positions and
should be included in the final version.  Be first in line at
your local bookstore when _Inoffensish:_Disputed_Methods_of_
_Persons_or_Possibly_Some_Other_Sentient_Beings_ becomes

Here, then, are the winning entries:

From j.guy@trl.OZ.AU Wed Sep  2 00:49:55 1992
Subject: Inoffensish: my entry

Ladies, Gentlemen, and Unspecified,

First allow me to take my hat off to you all and sundry in your noble
enterprise. Next to submit with much trepidation my humble entry:

1. No sentence shall be allowed that does not start with:

             "It is disputed..."

2. For stylistic variety, "disputed" may be replaced by: a moot point,
under scrutiny, a matter that calls for further research, etc.

3. No member of a set shall be referred to without reference to other
members of that set, in the approved form: "perhaps... or possibly some

Thus "Columbus" becomes, in Inoffensish: "perhaps Columbus or possibly
some other navigator".

4. No set shall be referred to except through a member of itself, rule
3 applying. Thus "native Americans": "perhaps certain person born in
America or possibly others born elsewhere".

5. Beliefs, theories, and opinions shall be mentioned only by reference
to those who hold them, rule 3 applying. Thus "Christianity" may only
be mentioned by reference to a particular christian, e.g., after the
application of rule 3: "perhaps Father Maricon y Cojones or possibly
some other member of a religious order".

Now for a complete example:

"It is a matter that calls for further research that perhaps in 1492 or
possibly at some other date, perhaps Columbus or some other navigator
discovered perhaps America or possibly some other continent, and
brought perhaps Father Maricon y Cojones or possibly some other member
of a religious order to perhaps certain person born in that selfsame
continent or possibly other persons born elsewhere."

Nota bene: It is hoped that, once Inoffensish is firmly ingrained,
its users will be able to dispense with the words "perhaps" and 
"possibly" without any significant semantic loss. Until then, I 
however, I cannot overemphasize the dire need not to omit those
disambiguating particles, the very sun around which orbits Inoffensish.

It is disputed whether perhaps I or possibly some other writer, remain
perhaps yours or possibly someone else's perhaps faithfully or possibly
somehow other.

Upon which it is a moot point whether perhaps I or possibly some other person,
                        Perhaps Jacques Guy or possibly someone else.


F. Foceno's plan:

Eeee Eee EeEeeEeeE eeEeeEe.

eeeE: eee EEE eeEeeeE e eEeeEE eeEe eE ee EeeEEe.
eeEe: EeEEE EeEee  eeee EEEeeeeEEEE EeeeEEEe ee.
eeEE: EEE EEEe eEEEee eEEeeEEE eeEEeeEEE eeEEef eEEeeEEee.
eEee: ee e e e EE EeeE.

EE E eeE Eeee Eeee EeeEEE.

F. Focena


Why Esperanto is an Unnatural Langauge
By S-ulo Edsel Miro

It is obvious to anyone who has made a selective reading of linguistics
that Esperanto is an unnatural language.  Linguistics is an extremely
complex endeavor.  I have devoted weeks to this issue and, although I'm
a long way from satisfying myself with respect to all of it's mysteries,
I know enough to tell a natural language from an unnatural language.

First of all, natural languages are listed in certain books.  Just like
for hundreds of years before Galileo, if you needed to understand physics,
you simply read Aristotle and learned the truth.  This is true of
linguistics today.

Secondly, like most phenomena, languages can be neatly classified into
exclusive groups.  'Naturalness' is a misnomer because there are not
levels or degrees -- it is a black and white issue like rich and poor,
night and day, or male and female.  It is obvious that my definition
of 'natural' is right because I can apply it indiscriminately.  This
wouldn't be true if it were false.

Thirdly, Esperanto is unnatural because it is.  Anyone can tell.  When
you look at it without knowing anything about it, it looks like a jumble
of other languages.  What other evidence does one need?  It is as plain
as other so-called imaginary entities like 'cold', 'dark', and 'suction.'
Any ten-year-old can tell you it is suction that pulls water up a straw
and I'll bet the same ten-year-old could tell you that Esperanto looks
like a jumble of other languages.

Finally, a number of my critics suggested that I learn more about 
Esperanto before posting to an international forum expressing
and expressing an unpopular viewpoint. To them, I say, learning is
simply gathering more evidence to support the views that one already
knows are true.  So what if I had more evidence?  I already know
these things are true, so why bother finding out more.

S-ulo Edsel Miro


Recently seen in Pheronet

> From: Mifaras Bontrompon 
> To: pheronet@formiko.ant.edu
> Subject: Cockroach Translation
> In recent email with Dr. Carrion Beetle I received the following message
> which is purported to be from a cockroach.  He asked that I translate the
> cockroach language and determine what it says.  This task I have
> acomplished.
> The translation was hampered by the use of a non-standard transliteration
> of cockroach speach.  Normally, cockroach speach is transliterated with
> hand motions (corresponding to antenna), with two special spray cans of
> signal chemicals (one in each hand).  However, on close examination, it
> is obvious the characters here are in triplets, with the first two
> characters encoding the position of the two antenna and the third
> character indicating the chemical signal.
> Here is the original message:
> > jreifdnOo  woirjf
> Here is the translation, triplet by triplet:
> jre: Thus we bring down our enemies, no matter how many or how mighty! 
> ifd: The tools of our opressors are legitimate targets!
> nOo: Death to enemies of the master race!
> woi: Without their tools, humans are helpless to resist the onslaught of
>       cockroach kind!
> rjf: Please direct me to a nearby grease spot, preferable one in a dark
>       place. 
> (This last may be a transcription error, It is possible that this should
> be "ryf: We have crushed his exo-skeleton.  Let us move on to the next
> victim.")
> I hope this is of some help.  I'll send a full report via paper mail,
> together with my bill.
> -- 
> Profesoro Mifaras Bontrompon          mbontrompon@clrc.org
> Cockroach Linguistics Research Center uunet!clrc!mbontrompon
> Let me caress your antenna.  I'll still respect you in the morning.


        Proponoj de klasoj de nenecesaj lingvoj         D. Carrion

La homa cerbo volas grupigi ^cion.  La klasigado estas ilo
de sciencistoj kaj kleruloj kiu servas por helpi kompreni ne nur
la organizado de la universo, sed anka^u multe efikas por
priskribi kaj komuniki.  Nomoj povas servi por klare montri la
rilatojn inter aferoj.  Sed iu klasigo de nenecesaj lingvoj,
decas esti anka^u nenecesa afero.  Do, kun tiuj du kontra^uaj
pensoj, mi ofertas nenecesa klasigado de la nenecesaj lingvoj.

Unue, decas ke ni klare distingi inter necesaj kaj nenecesaj lingvoj.
Necesa lingvo vere uzi^gas inter popoloj kiel komunikilo kaj
servas kiel grava ponto de scio kaj informo.  Ekzemple, la praegipta
lingvo estas la nura komunikilo inter la praaj signoj kaj desegnoj
lasitaj sur la muroj de la egitaj ruinoj.  Sen ili, ni ne povus
kompreni la komunikojn de tiuj praanta^uuloj.  Pro tiu, ili restas
necesaj lingvoj.  

Je la alia flanko, nenecesaj lingvoj ^ciam kondukas scio trans malbona
vojo kiam ankora^u ekzistas pli bona ilo.  Se oni povas certigi
ke ^gi neniam kondukas scion kiu ne povas esti komunikata aliiel, tiam 
^gi fari^gos nenecesa lingvo.

Trovi^gas inter la amaso de nenecesaj lingvoj niveloj de nenecesado.
Tiuj, kiuj estas preska^u necesaj trovi^gas sur la unua nivelo,
ekzemple Volapuko.  Oni dum ioma tempo verkis Volapuke kaj la
verka^joj ankora^u restas.  Sed sur ili trovi^gas neniom de intereso
al la homo do, ^gi nur preska^u necesas.  Je la dua nivelo, trovi^gas
lingvoj kiuj estas plene nenecesaj, ekzemple Solresol.  Solresol,
kvankam ^gi estis interesa, ne lasis malanta^u si ion ajn krom 
notetoj en strangaj libroj.  Je la tria nivelo estas la tute nenecesaj
lingvoj, ekzemple Uni.


Reviziita 2-1-96 Limako