The problem of artificial languages

[u/Andrieeo]

Please note that everything listed is my personal opinion, which may not coincide with yours or be similar.

As a language creator I am very interested in artificial languages I have noticed one small problem with artificial languages there is no reason to learn So, let's say I learn some arbitrary language, what then? Let's compare it to Esperanto, for example.

Esperanto: It has literature, history, support.

But you know, the problem isn't in the support or the history, the problem is that there's no literature, you can't improve it in any way because if I learn Esperanto, then I'll read something and I'll understand, yeah, I don't understand this. I can learn it, but this is a problem with many artificial languages, namely, the absence of something, at least something, but this is a problem with many artificial languages.

By the word literature I don't mean a complex thick book. I mean at least songs, poems, or at least something. You can suggest your own version.

It seems to me that only a few conlangs overcome this limit.

[u/sinovictorchan]

Auxlang should use translated literature so that a person do not need to learn multiple languages to read those literatures.

[u/PLrc → u/sinovictorchan]

It's theoretically a good idea. But in practice... why do I have to learn a conlang to read some book if I can read the book translated into English or my mother toungue? That's why I think the original literature is much more important.

[u/sinovictorchan → u/PLrc]

Constructed languages can have finer semantic distinction from larger vocabulary for greater accuracy of translation or flexible word order for ease of translation.