bartlett scribeva:With respect to Esperanto, again, I maintain that it is the 300-kilo gorilla in the room.
Interesting note for any fellow ESL people: I wasn't familiar with this idiom but assumed it meant the same as "elephant ...". But I now see that that's not the case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/800_pound_gorilla
My observation has been that many Esperantists: 1) have little knowledge of any other constructed language(s); and/or 2) ignore them as "not serious" or "not real language(s)" (merely "projects" while Esperanto is a "real" language); and/or 3) hold them in contempt; and/or 4) consider that E-o is so far out in the lead that advocates of any other conIALs simply ought to give up and support E-o on the assertion that it is the only one with any faint hope of success.
I haven't dealt much with Eo speakers, but I have a feeling you're right. But in my opinion the key word here is "many (Esperantists)" - there certainly are exceptions. For instance, many Ia'ists of my acquaintance used to be Esperantists who switched to Ia once they became aware of its existence - typically because Ia's more natural quality pleased them.
I have also met (a few) open minded Esperantists who wanted to learn more about Interlingua. Some of course have no problem "adhering" to both languages (or even more than those).
Concerning social media, yes, it is possible that even some of us older individuals might be able to learn to use them, but also there is the issue that those Interlinguaists who there are outside of Europe tend be be in widely differing time zones, so this is a matter of consideration for "live" interaction.
You're right - that should be taken into consideration when planning such sessions.
Also, I grant that some Interlinguaists may not have the opportunity to speak the language frequently, so it could well be that when they get together it may take them some time to "get up to speed" (as we say in the USA).
You mean when they get together on-line? Sure, but that's only natural, right?
I have never had the experience, but it is possible that with some opportunity I might be able to understand more spoken I-gua, given the chance to do so (although again, as an older person, I have troublesome hearing), and still might make a fool of myself if I were to try to speak it.
Making a fool of yourself once in a while is a human right and privilege in my opinion!
But of course, I do understand what you are saying!
Again, it seems to me that in my own situation (as an older person), I ought to pick one language as a preference and do less with any others,
I see what you mean, I'm just not sure why it has to be a very long term (or even life long?) commitment, if that's what you're saying?
inasmuch as I do not expect to see a "final victory" (to use an Esperantist term)
for any one of them in my lifetime. But which? I genuinely esteem both Interlingua and Esperanto.
I know that was a rhetorical question, and you have no doubt already thought of the following considerations, but I'll still try to answer.
I suppose it must be a question of not only which language pleases you the most (esthetically) but also which features of an IAL are most important to you.
For instance, if you want to be part of a larger community with plenty of opportunity for correspondence and (text) chat and plenty of reading materials, that of course must speak in favor of Eo.
On the other hand, the fact that Interlingua's vocabulary is (at least an attempt of) a neutral standardization of the international vocabulary definitely speaks in favor of it, at least in my book.
From a selfish point of view I would of course hope that you would choose Interlingua!
What ever you do choose, you can always change your mind later on.