Artificial Languages: Is There An Ideal Balance?

An Ideal International Language?

There are several elements that would likely be required for any artificial language to be accepted into official status as an international language. There are also several reasons why it would be difficult. The following arguments both for and against the concept are drawn from the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language by David Crystal (I’ve got an old copy I found at a used book store, it is really an amazing resource on world languages in general and on the Queen’s English in particular. I recommend it to anyone.)

Generally, an ideal artificial language (AL) would be:

Easy to learn The grammar should be regular and simple; the meanings of words and compound words must be based on well-defined principles; the spelling should be phonetic; and there should be no difficult sounds.

Able to be translated Translations into and out of other natural languages would be made easier by the use of universal features of languages and root words that have a history of international use. There would need to be a flexible structure that allows for the expression of idiom from each speakers own language.

Wide-ranging in function Besides the ordinary daily uses of language in speech and writing, the AL would need to work for specialized language uses in: technology, business, politics, religion, medicine and more. And it would need to be used in international media from satellite transmissions to video games.

Standardized Ideally, there should be no regional variations or dialects. The idea is maintain control over intelligibility in the long-term. Some sort of governing group would decide on any changes.