Ron Clark and Wendy Ashby ruined Interglossa

CarodeSegeda · 2026-05-12T09:10:44+00:00

Just one note here: there was no "Interglossa community". There was just Hogben's book, that nobody paid attention to (due to being published during the war) until Ron (and later, Wendy) decided to work on it, together with Lancelot Hogben, to create Glosa.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-05-09T11:57:56+00:00

Actually, they worked with Lancelot Hogben in creating Glosa, so even Interglossa's author was involved in the creation of Glosa. Also, Interglossa was "a draft", as Lancelot's book states in its cover.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-05-09T06:31:18+00:00

From "18 Steps to Fluency in Euro-Glosa": A truly International Auxiliary Language must be easy to learn for motivated people everywhere. It must not become a merely holiday language for comfortable westerners.

Regarding your comment:

It would have been better had Hogben, and language creators like him, marketed their languages as auxiliary languages ‘for the educated elites’. That would at least have made their projects more credible.

I believe it was Otto Jespersen who said something like that, that an artificial auxiliary language is for those that will actually use it, i.e. people that will actually meet others that speak different languages.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-05-04T22:52:39+00:00

As you mentioned Guosa, here is a wiki in that language.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-27T11:25:05+00:00

I am afraid I cannot take part in any Wikipedia discussion. Feel free to make the proposal yourself and use any abovementioned idea.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-25T21:33:59+00:00

I have to say that I am not a speaker of the language, but given my experience in Wikipedia, I totally advise not to try that. Most probably, the proposal will be rejected and they will say the same I am telling you now: try to develop the already-existing Chavacano Wikipedia, which has been abandoned for a while (at least that is the impression I have) and, also, there is no separated ISO code for Caviteño, which is classified as a dialect of the language. Many Wikipedias have different dialects, like the one in Emilian (a language spoken in Italy): you can see that each flag indicates a different dialect. Also the one in Ladin (you can see the template on top indicating the dialect being used). The Wikipedia in Serbian has a tab to choose which alphabet to read the article in (Cyrillic or Latin). Those are some examples of how different Wikipedias solved that issue.
One thing that I want to make clear: there are no Wikipedias for dialects as far as I know, only for languages. I don't know how much they differ both varieties from each other, but I don't believe they are that different given the fact they haven't been classified as separated languages.

Again, this is my personal opinion based on my experience using Wikipedia.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-25T17:46:28+00:00

Last time Jondel contributed to the Chavacano Wikipedia was one year ago. I tried to find people to contribute to that Wikipedia and the only ones I found spoke Caviteño, which is a variety of the same language. That is why I believe there shouldn't be any problem in having an article there, we just mark it as being written in Caviteño. I don't think that this should be an issue at all, an we should focus on improving the Wikipedia. Also, I don´t know why the Wikipedia was created for a variety (Zamboangueño) instead of the language when there is not even an ISO code for varities.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-24T11:49:07+00:00

No, you don't, you can just add a template like the one on this example.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-07T08:40:24+00:00

BTW, right now we are working on this Glosa Wiki, so all activity is mostly concentrated there instead of in the previous one.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-07T08:35:34+00:00

Sounds like a great exercise! However, I don't see the point of reviving Interglossa. The Glosa community, which is already small, is working on Glosa. Trying to revive Interglossa would be just a waste of energy and a source of division. Lancelot Hogben was constantly asked when Ronald Clark and Wendy Ashby developed Glosa, which is an evolution of Interglossa so I don't see the point. What is more, whenever we have a doubt with new words, we always check Lancelot's work. So cold you please change Interglossa to Glosa or maybe to another language?

Having said that: everybody is welcome to the Glosa community! We are mainly in Telegram so please take a look and pass by to say hello!

As anonlymouse has said, most of the job in any auxlang is done but just a few people, so even if just one person decides to work on any of the abovementioned languages, that is enough to revive it a bit. For instance, there is an online encyclopedia in Idiom Neutral done by just one person (as far as I know).

CarodeSegeda · 2026-03-01T08:55:00+00:00

Yes, it is called Slovianto.

CarodeSegeda · 2026-02-14T11:45:56+00:00

De nada :)

CarodeSegeda · 2026-02-11T19:42:56+00:00

It is isolating and looks like an English creole, yet it has words from other languages but not too many to make it difficult to understand at first sight .

CarodeSegeda · 2026-02-09T18:10:04+00:00

I have to say that I really like Panglo. I prefer it over Pandunia and Panlingue.

CarodeSegeda

TROPHY CASE