Thread: Planned Russian

An interesting suggestion is discussed in Лингвофорум now. A user, Alone Coder, is developing a new language - Planned Russian (ПР). This language must be fully based on real words and forms which are really used in dialects of Russian and Belorussian languages. It must have minimum exceptions and limited, although very big, vocabulary. It is to be taught to foreigners, and exams must be taken on it. In future it is to replace Modern Standart Russian. Here the article about this language Плановый русский — LingvoWiki
What do you think of that?

You can't replace standard languages. Though there is some merit in trying to develop a basic dialect for teaching the language to freigners. Ogden did that for English (Basic English), and you can even access a version of wikipedia in basic English. In its simplest form Basic English makes do with less than 20 verbs.

Basic English - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But I think that such a language can only ever be an entrance way to learning the proper language.

Это должен быть полноценный язык с тысячами глаголов, а не с двадцатью.

I think it's a great idea. But I am rather extreme about things like this... For example, I think that the EU should use Esperanto as a language of communication between the countries... Not English.

I suppose the complicated Russian grammar is one of the charming things about the language. Once you DO know it, you can do fantastic things with the language....
But to learn it for a foreigner is really hard.

I think that the EU should use Esperanto as a language of communication between the countries... Not English.

So do I.

I suppose the complicated Russian grammar is one of the charming things about the language

Russian grammar is not more complicated than any other grammar.
Planned Russian will be still real Russian language with all its declensions and conjugations. But some irregular paradigmas will be replaced by regular ones, EXISTING IN THE SPOKEN LANGUAGE. The irregular verb хотеть will be replaced by a regular желать or something like that.

Originally Posted by Hanna

I think that the EU should use Esperanto as a language of communication between the countries... Not English.

To be honest, I think a language like Esperanto should be used worldwide and being taught as a second language in all schools worldwide. Selecting one language among the others and giving it an unfair preference is not the best idea. Unfortunately, the great idea of Esperanto did not shoot very well [yet] because of the two world wars and the rise of the nationalism self-identification. So, these days the schools teach the second most practical language. It's English in many countries, but Spanish in the US and French in English Canada. What a mess!

Nice to see that Crocodile and I agree about something!

I don't know Esperanto myself but I like the look of it, and it seems very simple to learn. You CAN speak it in your everyday life - there are some Esperanto-fanatic families who raise their kids with Esperanto as "mother tongue" and additionally, lots of books are written in Esperanto. The potential is there.

I like English for what it is; the language of countries like the UK and the USA and the language of plenty of good literature. Knowing English has given me access to media that would otherwise not be available.

But as means of communication in Europe, I don't like it one bit... Not the politics it represents, and not the unfairness it presents, whereby it's easier for speakers of Germanic/latin languages than for others. The fact that I personally speak it well is neither here nor there. That is due to specific circumstances of my life which do not present themselves to most people. Strictly speaking, to be good at English, you have to immerse yourself in the language. What if you don't want to, can't or don't have the time or talent?

90 % of Europeans do not feel comfortable about their skills in English and use it only when they absolutely have to. This includes many of my relatives for example. It's particularly awkward to speak bad English to a native speaker. A lot of people (understandably) lie about their English skills in work interviews and are then worried about being exposed. The effort needed to get to a near native quality of English is really substantial - this time could be better spent at other pursuits; science for example.

If you think about it, it's crazy that I, a Swedish person, go to Romania (I was just there) and then expect people to speak English with me (although hardly anyone there can....) The foreign language that some Romanians seemed to know, was Italian, which I can't speak... In Moldova, people already had a second language; Russian, which they were happy to speak. Asking them to also learn English seems crazy, yet I saw some posts on Lonely Planet, complaining that nobody in Moldova can speak English.

To learn Esperanto is both MUCH quicker than to learn English, and it is a language that belongs to nobody, no political or national movement. The grammar is completely regular and the pronounciation is always completely clear from the spelling. Nobody will have a right, wrong or ugly accent or an unfair advantage.
I think it's perfect as a language of cross border communication in Europe.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Nice to see that Crocodile and I agree about something!

I don't know Esperanto myself but I like the look of it, and it seems very simple to learn. You CAN speak it in your everyday life - there are some Esperanto-fanatic families who raise their kids with Esperanto as "mother tongue" and additionally, lots of books are written in Esperanto. The potential is there.

I like English for what it is; the language of countries like the UK and the USA and the language of plenty of good literature. Knowing English has given me access to media that would otherwise not be available.

But as means of communication in Europe, I don't like it one bit... Not the politics it represents, and not the unfairness it presents, whereby it's easier for speakers of Germanic/latin languages than for others. The fact that I personally speak it well is neither here nor there. That is due to specific circumstances of my life which do not present themselves to most people. Strictly speaking, to be good at English, you have to immerse yourself in the language. What if you don't want to, can't or don't have the time or talent?

90 % of Europeans do not feel comfortable about their skills in English and use it only when they absolutely have to. This includes many of my relatives for example. It's particularly awkward to speak bad English to a native speaker. A lot of people (understandably) lie about their English skills in work interviews and are then worried about being exposed. The effort needed to get to a near native quality of English is really substantial - this time could be better spent at other pursuits; science for example.

If you think about it, it's crazy that I, a Swedish person, go to Romania (I was just there) and then expect people to speak English with me (although hardly anyone there can....) The foreign language that some Romanians seemed to know, was Italian, which I can't speak... In Moldova, people already had a second language; Russian, which they were happy to speak. Asking them to also learn English seems crazy, yet I saw some posts on Lonely Planet, complaining that nobody in Moldova can speak English.

To learn Esperanto is both MUCH quicker than to learn English, and it is a language that belongs to nobody, no political or national movement. The grammar is completely regular and the pronounciation is always completely clear from the spelling. Nobody will have a right, wrong or ugly accent or an unfair advantage.
I think it's perfect as a language of cross border communication in Europe.

I'm working against my own cause by saying so, Hanna, because I'm an English speaker and at the moment, that's the only language I can speak confidently in. =) But I will say that your theory is sound. It makes sense on all moral levels.

But human history has shown in many cases that we (humans) don't make these choices based on what makes sense.

I keep thinking about Latin's ubiquitousness across the entire (discovered) planet from ~(x)00 BCE - 1000(+) CE ... Was Latin the easiest language to teach or to learn? The Romans seemed to think so... But it wasn't put to debate. =) For better or worse, the world seems to have the habit of electing the "Empire" tongue as the Common Language. (Saying nothing of my country's Empire-Staying Power, which personally I question and wouldn't bet on, but I digress...)

After reading this, Ms. Hanna, I am strongly considering learning this odd little language. Kio felicxa surprizi. =)

KidK - I love it that you understand and respect my view on English, even though you are a native speaker. Thanks for taking the time to say so! And I DO realise that my vision of Esperanto is completely utopian and will never happen. It's going to be the language of the currently most influential nation, and at the moment that is the USA. Does anyone believe that our grandchildren might be speaking Chinese as a foreign language instead?

As for planned Russian: Well after reading more about Kasus for the nouns - YES, I support it. It should be done!
Russian is fantastic, but the grammar is just out of this world. I have a completely new level of respect for Baltic people and others who speak fluent Russian as a foreign language. It must have been really hard work.

There have been several major reforms of Russian, right? Maybe another one to clean up the grammar a bit?
The spelling is fine I think, once you understand the rules and how the "soft sign" works.

There have been several major reforms of Russian, right? Maybe another one to clean up the grammar a bit?
The spelling is fine I think, once you understand the rules and how the "soft sign" works.

Well, we cannot change the grammar of the language. People will speak as they do. The use of cases with nouns will stay the same because we really speak in such a way. Planned Russian will only eliminate extra irregularities, exclude rare irregular forms or words. For example, more and more people say махает instead of машет.
Do you understand the spelling rules of Russian? Children spend 7 years at school for spelling, but people still make mistakes.
Rules about soft sign are not very complex.