Esperanto, Ido, Lojban, Sindarin, Klingon and other game/experimental/invented languages’ supporters vs. Proto-Indo-European revival

To all of you well-minded Esperantists and the rest of artificial languages’ supporters:

First of all, thank you for your interest in Proto-Indo-European language revival. We appreciate your critics, whether constructive or (as usual) just annoying mails. To answer you all (we won’t do it individually),

  • No, we are sorry, but we didn’t unite at Dnghu to support languages different than Proto-Indo-European or other natural Indo-European languages or dialects.
  • No, we don’t think your games/experiments are usable, or fit, or even languages in the strictest sense, no matter the great critics/success/support/number of speakers/history/etc. you think it has or had.
  • Either yes, we knew about your great inventions, or no, we didn’t, but anyway we are not interested in learning or supporting them, however great you think they are.
  • You can read more about the usual questions emailed or posted to Dnghu about linguistic inventions in the Indo-European language blog by a co-founder.

Dnghu was created and works to discuss, talk, administer, give support, etc. to the widest variety of (Proto-)Indo-European studies possible, with the main objective of supporting PIE revival for the European Union, in the form of a Modern language. Please, don’t think we haven’t considered your old alternatives before trying to accomplish such a difficult and ungrateful task.

We are here to gather people to work together on our aim, not to convince you one by one about the advantages of reviving PIE.

Yours sincerely,

Your Indo-European Language Team.

P.D. – Obviously, how Wikipedia, Digg or other collaborative websites classify (or write about) Proto-Indo-European or its revival is not necessarily what we actually are or are doing: You shouldn’t trust any content outside without reading what We say we are doing in our association.

Still another change in domain names' strategy: stronger shift to 'Indo-European'

As the number of visitors increases, it becomes obvious that those coming from Google searches are also becoming the majority – instead of those coming from fixed external links, which was our best source until recently.

Now, even though we cannot know how Google’s pagerank (and thus search results) function, we do know that domain names are important.

Our recent strategy was to distantiate ourselves from Esperanto and other constructed languages’ projects; we wanted to be identified just with Indo-European language revival, with the modern use of a natural – althoug reconstructed – language.

Following this recent strategy, we have changed our europaio and sindhueuropaiom subdomains – a cheaper and more simple way of presenting the project – with different domains, selecting the most important languages in terms of population and Internet use, and also depending on the project (.eu for europaio, .org for sindhueuropaiom): (it), (fr), (en), (pl), (sv), (de), (nl); also (en), (es), (fr), (de), (ru), (pt)

Your Indo-European Language Team.

Indo-European quick reference dictionary based on Pokorny’s Indogermanisches Etymologisches Woerterbuch

Wlqo’s Europaio version of Pokorny’s main work, Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch (The Indo-European Etymological Dictionary) is now also available in the resources section of Dnghu’ website.

It has been posted mainly to show newcomers how Europaio (or modern Proto-Indo-European) resembles the Indo-European languages they speak, as many people are already saying Europaio is a language system too difficult to substitute English as Europe’s main language.

We think that cognate words are a great source for knowing Indo-European vocabulary better, and still better to show people how different Europaio is from a constructed language or conlang.

Your Indo-European Language Team.