To Auxlang and Conlang mailing lists, and to certain other persons:      I am withdrawing from the Auxlang and Conlang lists.  My interest in constructed languages has always been almost entirely constructed international auxiliary languages (conIALs), so after the establishment of Auxlang, I continued on with Conlang more out of habit.  However, I now have occasion to withdraw from both lists, so this is my goodbye.      Recently there has been some discussion of Rick Harrison's farewell statement to auxlanging (http://www.geocities.com/Athens/5383/... ...farewell.html).  I do disagree with Rick in his final conclusion, namely, that no constructed language has any real hope of ever becoming an IAL.  Unlike Rick, I still think that there is a possibility that a conIAL is a realistic and feasible task and goal.  However, I do agree in large measure with the rest of his criticisms of the auxiliary language design world.      The IAL world, quite honestly, is a bizarre zoo of wrangling, impossible hair splitting, and misleading expectations.  Frankly I am tired of the wrangling.  (Some of it goes on as well in forums like the sci.lang newsgroup.)  People continue to strive for alleged perfection in a conIAL -- but there is none and will not be.  No interlanguage, constructed or natural, will ever be perfect in practice, if for no other reason than that there is no agreement what such a perfect language would be like.      No realistic conIAL will ever be "fair" in practice.  Unless we construct some horrendous monstrosity equally bizarre and difficult to everybody, somebody, somewhere, is going to be unhappy about design decisions or language contents.  Fairness in a conIAL, like perfection, is a will o' the wisp, no better than swamp gas.      Chances are good that there will be no new earth-shattering design breakthroughs in conIAL design.  Some of the endless disputation that goes on in the auxlang world may be due in part to new people entering the field who are unaware of what has gone before and who think that their insights and objections are something new, when in fact they are as old as mouldy bread.  Some of it may simply be contentiousness.  I really do not expect any new major design to some sauntering down the pike: mostly it is a matter of "been there, done that" already.      Also, and I think this is critically important, many conIAL designers cannot seem to quit tinkering.  Some time, at some point, the tinkering simply must end and the using begin.  I wonder how many conIAL  designers even thoroughly learn and use their own creations?      Still, I said above that I think a conIAL is a realistic and feasible task and goal.  Recently, in a public forum, I said that with respect to conIALs, we cannot bet on every nag at the track: sooner or later, we have to pick a horse, blemishes and all, and lay our money down.  I have picked my horse, and it is Esperanto, for all it faults (although I do retain some secondary interest in IALA Interlingua).  I will not try to justify my choice here or defend it against all comers. For the time being, I am simply not interested in re-engaging the IAL wars.  I have made my choice; others are free to make theirs.  But having made my choice, I am withdrawing from the battles.      (I am not presently entirely adept at Esperanto, although that situation may change.  I am generally set up for it, and I can handle ISO Latin-3 text in email and news, by MIME or straight 8-bit.  I have PC conversion utilities and can print text, so the accented-letters objection is not one I have to deal with.)      Many people on Conlang, of course, are primarily interested in artistic or hobby languages.  This is a perfectly legitimate endeavor, and I wish you all well.  As for the conIAL people on Auxlang, I wish you well, too, but having made my choice I am taking my leave.  As Rick Harrison said in his farewell, there is a more than ample supply of languages already, and I doubt that any real improvements are to be had. I suggest you pick one and go with it, and possibly even disband Auxlang.  (My only slight exception would be in the matter of a conIAL only intended to be regional, possibly in a non-geographic sense, although even in this matter I remain slightly dubious of further enterprise.)  Regards, Paul Bartlett                    <pobart /c`e/ access.digex.net> ---------------------------------------------------------- Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA Finger, keyserver, or WWW for PGP 2.6.2 public key Home Page:  http://www.access.digex.net/~pobart