Esperanto, no...isn't that why god created the WWW...
regs
Mikeg
On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, J B Owens wrote:
> I know that this was not the title of the original thread, but since
> I don't remember what it was, I invented another. Les pido que me
> disculpen.
>
> I have shared with my advanced undergraduate world history class the
> Wallerstein letter and some of the following discussion. One of the
> students has just posted to the course on-line discussion list the
> following message. Does anyone know anything about this League
> project and about its fate? Thanks for any help provided.
>
> Jack Owens, Idaho State University <owenjack@fs.isu.edu>
>
> ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
> To: Members of SPEMP-L
> Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 12:26:46 -0600, MDT
> Subject: global scholarly communication
> Reply-to: owenjack@fs.isu.edu
>
> On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Robert Schlader wrote:
>
> I remember watching a documentary about the League of Nations once
> where the members tried to form a new international language by
> combining the common parts of every member state's language into a
> single language. They used it for a while and then discarded it
> because no one wanted to learn it. When the U.N. was formed after
> WWII, there was no attempt to bring back the "common" language created
> for the League of Nations. Why is it that scholars don't use that
> language for global communication? If language is such a problem, and
> someone found a common answer to that problem, why not use it? Just
> wondering if you could shed some light on this for me.
>
>