![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In the Land of Invented Languages
Apr. 9th, 2011 09:48 pmI've finally read this 2009 book by Arika Okrent, two years after everybody else did, but I don't recall what most struck me about it as having been pointed out elsewhere.
In her concluding section about her adventures in the Klingon Language Institute, Okrent recounts telling an Esperantist about it and receiving his baffled comment, "But what are they doing?" Her answer is that "They are enjoying themselves. They are doing language for language's sake, art for art's sake." (p. 280-1) The same thing would, of course, apply to Tolkien, whom she discusses next. (Briefly and inadequately, saying nothing about the extent of the Elven-tongues and what he used them for, let alone alluding to the existence of Tolkien language institutes.) (p. 282-4)
What intrigues me is that the Esperantist didn't grasp this motive. The Esperanto movement has as its purpose the quest to build a better human society through a universal language. By that criterion, "art for art's sake" languages, created for beauty or enjoyment, have no purpose. Thus the Esperantist's puzzlement. But don't Esperantists also enjoy their language, as well as having a social goal to pursue by using it? I would think that they do, given that Okrent reports that Esperanto grammar has spontaneously evolved over the century-plus of its usage, just as natural languages do: altogether appropriately as, for a small but real group of people, Esperanto is a natural language.
I would think that putting your energy and effort into some social project solely for its uplifting goals, and not also because you enjoyed it, would be a rather cold-blooded and soulless way to pursue life, though some of the utopians I meet - of a variety of ideologies - do seem to have that attitude. If that were the case, the Esperantists would be forced to acknowledge that their project hasn't worked very well beyond building a small community of like thinkers. Only enjoyment of what they're doing can paint their movement as anything other than an exercise in futility.
In that context, "language for language's sake" is a more robust argument than a social goal would be, since enjoyment is actually being achieved. For those of us pursuing projects purely for art's sake, I hope that is a comfort.
In her concluding section about her adventures in the Klingon Language Institute, Okrent recounts telling an Esperantist about it and receiving his baffled comment, "But what are they doing?" Her answer is that "They are enjoying themselves. They are doing language for language's sake, art for art's sake." (p. 280-1) The same thing would, of course, apply to Tolkien, whom she discusses next. (Briefly and inadequately, saying nothing about the extent of the Elven-tongues and what he used them for, let alone alluding to the existence of Tolkien language institutes.) (p. 282-4)
What intrigues me is that the Esperantist didn't grasp this motive. The Esperanto movement has as its purpose the quest to build a better human society through a universal language. By that criterion, "art for art's sake" languages, created for beauty or enjoyment, have no purpose. Thus the Esperantist's puzzlement. But don't Esperantists also enjoy their language, as well as having a social goal to pursue by using it? I would think that they do, given that Okrent reports that Esperanto grammar has spontaneously evolved over the century-plus of its usage, just as natural languages do: altogether appropriately as, for a small but real group of people, Esperanto is a natural language.
I would think that putting your energy and effort into some social project solely for its uplifting goals, and not also because you enjoyed it, would be a rather cold-blooded and soulless way to pursue life, though some of the utopians I meet - of a variety of ideologies - do seem to have that attitude. If that were the case, the Esperantists would be forced to acknowledge that their project hasn't worked very well beyond building a small community of like thinkers. Only enjoyment of what they're doing can paint their movement as anything other than an exercise in futility.
In that context, "language for language's sake" is a more robust argument than a social goal would be, since enjoyment is actually being achieved. For those of us pursuing projects purely for art's sake, I hope that is a comfort.
