It is a lot of fun trying to come up with new words – and it is not some old beurocrats that make up the words – everyone has a voice. Throw your idea into the mix, and if it sticks, then we have a new word.

Example of words that “stuck”:
Tölva (Computer)
Þota (Jet)
Sími (Telephone)

Example of words that did not “stick”:
Video (Myndband – video just sounds better)
- Can´t think of any others, must be a testament of our ability to make up new words );

You’re correct that the link to the list of language regulators doesn’t indicate a collective severity or approach. I was just highlighting that there *was* such a list of organisations intent on somehow moulding language. I also agree that in most cases even when there is a dictating body, their cause is becoming increasingly futile, as language is a slippery fish to control.

However I think that Esperanto (and other constructed languages) largely fall outside of typical memetic evolution. They are engineered to follow and subjectively improve on patterns observed in the “natural” languages. Because of this, aren’t they left wide open to criticism from their followers? You can’t complain about language features that formed over 1000’s of years, but when you’re trying to design the perfect (or better) language there’s an infinite debate on the best way to go?

I don’t think my comment about the internet fast approaching the sum of human knowledge is too wild. There has never been such an open and globally accessible medium that has contained so much formal and informal language, or one that has so many projects aiming to make it into the ‘complete’ resource (example, example, example, example).

I think at one time we would have approximated that world’s libraries contained the sum of current human knowledge. If you look at the rate of information upload to the internet over the last ten years, then I don’t think it will be too long that we can approximate it to human knowledge.

Of course there will always be holes in the resource, but your comment about local Welsh history sounds like a calling to open a Wikipedia account ;)

Thanks again for adding to the discussion.

By the way, I think that your comment, “The internet is fast approaching a tipping point where it will contain almost all human knowledge, past and present, in textual form and from a multitude of different authors and viewpoints” is somewhat exaggerated. Whole acres of things of interest to me, such as local history in my part of Wales are not available on the web.

The ‘Welsh Not’ is a contentious aspect of Welsh culture – in fact, it’s rather a disputed aspect as it seems increasingly evident that it was never used. The Welsh language was deemed not to be the language of the state by the 1536 Act of Union, and was replaced with English.

Welsh continued to be spoken etc, (it was the language of the Church in Wales) and indeed the first schools in Wales used the Welsh language. The 1847 (i think) Inquiry of the State of Education in Wales – The Blue Books – deemed that it was the Welsh language and the non-conformist Chapel movement that had cased the Welsh people to be lascivious, immoral, simple and a cause of social inrest. As such, Welsh language education was stopped, and many of the people were encouraged to see the language as an obstacle – the only way to improve themselves eductaionally and socially was to abandon it, and ‘buy-in’ to the Empire, as English woul improve even the lowliest of lives. The report rally created a divide in the nation; people argue that immigration to the Coal Field caused the language to decline, but this just isn’t true when you look at the census data. The langaueg declined in those area a good few years after the surge (and the majority of those moving into the areas learned Welsh as it was the language of the mines). Welsh was just seen as a problem, but this opinion was arrived at due to manipulation by Westminster….

(end of sermon….)