| 
                        
                        
                        Kotava, the universal language of communication 
                        I : Why Kotava ?
 Kotava was born from a deep need. Already very young I wanted to 
                        communicate with the whole world. I learned and am interested to 
                        me in many languages to this aim. And more I discovered some, more 
                        my universe widened and more I tested a painful impression of it. 
                        A life would not be enough for me with all to know them and even less 
                        to practice them. Never I could return in direct communication with 
                        any of the humans which carry and are our Earth.
 
 With travelling much one learns how to go to simplest and most effective 
                        immediately. With the English one manages from now on about everywhere; 
                        the French sometimes; the Spanish also a little. For the remainder, 
                        one returns in the anecdotic one. Marvellous T one will conclude from it. 
                        And then the tendency is stronger and stronger and seems to be binding 
                        on us all. One can thus from now on travel everywhere in the world and 
                        find there to communicate with many people.
 
 Sorry not! All that is actually very factitious. Indeed, one quickly 
                        realizes that each one, the majority of the individuals at least, does not 
                        have and includes/understands really only bits of these languages, 
                        reducing them to the state pidgin, of lowest common denominator. 
                        Who was frustrated to be able to express another thing only utility 
                        sentences such as “how much this object costs?” or “thank you, 
                        I am very happy”? Who couldn't continue a conversation with a foreign 
                        interlocutor because obviously the words employed on both sides did not 
                        mean similar? Who didn't smell confusedly that these controls and these 
                        vocabularies impoverished and crushed with low did not enable him to be 
                        able to express with tact, nuance and richness his thought?
 
 A Westerner will be able to always say that for him there is no problem. 
                        Finally, with a few efforts he manages always more or less. 
                        In any case is with different to adapt to realities of the world globalized 
                        company. If they want to speak their idiom, free on their premises with them, 
                        but when they communicate with the world which counts, in other times one 
                        would have spoken about civilized world, which they use like all one each one 
                        the dominant language.
 
 Beyond are the easy caricature, how much many those which wonder sincerely 
                        and without a priori about the difficulty that many meets while having 
                        to adapt to a linguistic and cultural system sometimes very distant as of theirs?
 
 But the movements of globalisation are with work in all the fields, in particular 
                        that of the communication, and one unfortunately attends a dramatic retreat of 
                        much of natural languages, which are found rolled by such a road roller.
 
 However the need for an international language of communication supporting 
                        and simplifying the exchanges between the human beings is not any more to show. 
                        This need is almost as old as the man himself.
 
 Which solution thus? A new language.
 
 
 II : Existing alternatives
 
 A new language. This obviousness was essential on me with more and more 
                        insistence with the passing of years. And how to answer this formidable 
                        challenge and this adventure?
 
 Compared to many projects of international language, of interlingua in 
                        the jargon of the specialists in the question, were proposed since more 
                        than one century. The great majority were only relatively summary outlines 
                        which quickly fell through. Only four or five really had a certain impact, 
                        sometimes very temporary like Volapük. At the day of today the only attempt 
                        which truly reached part of its goals is Esperanto. This is 
                        currently quite alive and would count can be a million speakers, primarily 
                        in Europe. Then why not to adhere to this one to help to make it emerge like 
                        true language of universal communication?
 
 Without returning in “technical” considerations too much or Byzantine discussions, 
                        and it is not to make insult to say it, the problem with Esperanto, 
                        and it is irreversible, is that it was built, in a way very assumed by its 
                        originator L. Zamenhof, like a synthesis of Latin and principal Indo-European 
                        languages (and especially Western). Thus all its basic lexicon is built on 
                        this substrate. It is one of the aspects. But in addition to that it developed 
                        a great part of its grammatical system and expression, roughly speaking by 
                        simplifying and harmonizing the architecture and the mechanisms of these languages. 
                        What does not prevent it besides from having also developed original and productive 
                        morphological principles, the such system of the affixes or modularity of the lexemes.
 
 The defenders of Esperanto affirm, in a sincere way for the majority, that this 
                        reproach “of occidentality” is a false lawsuit. That its lexicon has indeed a 
                        Western origin – to make simple would be in oneself only one secondary aspect and 
                        that it would be all the remainder and in particular its original faculties which it 
                        would mainly be necessary to consider. It is all this remainder which would give 
                        it quality and legitimacy to be essential as international language of communication, 
                        while remaining neutral with respect to the natural languages.
 
 This argument must obviously be considered with attention. The lexicon does not make 
                        the language with it all alone. The examination must be done on two plans, of which 
                        second is far from being the least important.
 
 First of all, from a “technical” point of view strictly, the use of a Western gasoline 
                        lexicon induced, that it or not is wanted, an obvious filiation. The basic terms of 
                        Esperanto have for the majority a semantic field copied exactly on the Western languages. 
                        Simple example, colors of the rainbow: same seven colors in Esperanto as in “Westerner”, 
                        where certain languages inuit differentiate from them only two and on the other hand 
                        any African languages more than twenty. Without speaking about many concessions made 
                        with the plurality of the languages substrates on the level of a number of affixes for 
                        example (e.g. -ist, -an, -estr, -ul).
 
 But in addition to the lexicon, the Western origin of Esperanto is also undoubtable 
                        and deeply subjacent in most of the grammatical system. Among the most known features, 
                        let us quote construction and the use of the passive mode, the concept of direct object, 
                        the expression of plural, the vous system, the principle of the articles, the subjunctive, 
                        etc. That is far from being secondary and is very foreign being, from a linguistic point 
                        of view, with a number of individuals whose mother tongue is not Western. Part of the 
                        structuring and expression of the thought depend on the structuring on his own mother tongue.
 
 The second plan of examination is that of perception. This one nourishes characteristics 
                        and analyzes objectify such those shown above, but also of more subjective elements which, 
                        that one admits them or that one is afflicted, are with the final good more important 
                        than the first. And there, it si obvious. Esperanto is perceived very mainly like 
                        a Western language moreover, one submarine of civilization and Western culture. 
                        Seen from Asia or Africa that is general, but even also in Europe or America.
 
 The Esperanto speakers will be grained and say that is unfair and reflects 
                        only imperfectly the reality of the things. Can be, but the contingency of the facts 
                        is strongest. And despite everything the efforts which could be made to erase this 
                        negative perception, from the roots and same foundations of Esperanto, those will 
                        prove always vain.
 
 I spent years to arrive at such conclusions. Afterwards many gropings, of the 
                        successive outlines, the returns behind, the difficult questionings, I threw myself 
                        to water and Kotava was born.
 
 
 III : Kotava was born
 
                        So that Kotava reaches and plays, one day, the role of language of alternative 
                        universal communication, I built it and developed starting from the principles 
                        following founders, his basic postulates all in all : 
                          
                          Neutrality : that one cannot, contrary to what I evoked above, 
                          to reproach him for being a submarine of the Western languages 
                          (or others besides).
                          Originality : counterpoint of neutrality; that it is an original 
                          system drawing its qualities from its own and basically self-sufficing genius.
                          Universality : that its logic, its mechanisms and its possibilities 
                          are based on principles existing or who meet universally (or almost).
                          Simplicity : only a system of easy training is likely to function. 
                          To make simple is quintessence, it is finally most difficult.
                          Regularity : complement of simplicity. An “own” language banishing 
                          the various exceptions, ambiguities and complications.
                          Richness : a rich language of potentialities and variety. Each 
                          one must be able to be expressed with its logic and to develop its 
                          expression without restriction.
                          Evolutionarity : that it can evolve/move in the future in order 
                          to adapt to the evolutions of the world and the thought. That it is 
                          equipped with « genetic »mechanisms and resources. 
                        
                        These principles are truly fundamental and constitute the imprescriptible 
                        base of Kotava. Some are rather easy to respect, the such Universality, 
                        the Regularity or Simplicity. Others are more subjective, like the Originality 
                        or the Richness. Some finally will probably always cause impassioned debates, 
                        Neutrality initially.
                        
 It is the total respect of the whole of these principles that it will be 
                        advisable always to keep in mind, of preserving and of developing more in addition to.
 
 If one approaches the effective contents of Kotava, I will quote like major 
                        variations of these principles the following elements: :
 
                          
                          A sound system simple and reduced to the fundamental sounds present and 
                          pronounceable immediately by the whole of the human beings. From where only 
                          5 fundamental vowels and a simplified consonant system.
                          A grammatical system simple, rigorous, deprived of exceptions. A unit 
                          built around mechanisms and of modes of expression which are found in 
                          the greatest part of the languages of our planet. In particular with 
                          regard to the verbal system, pivot of the language.
                          A particularly limpid and powerful morphological system. The form makes 
                          the bottom could one say while simplifying. With each element a function 
                          or a well defined and exclusive role. From where an extraordinary freedom 
                          as for the site of the words in the sentence for example.
                          An innovative lexicological base, completely invented and absolutely 
                          independent of any existing language or having existed. It is a party 
                          taken absolute.
                          Clearly identified and significant basic radicals. No homonym. 
                          A word = an object or an idea.
                          Mechanisms of extraordinarily broad and productive derivation and 
                          composition, allowing the language to develop in an quasi-infinite 
                          way and authorizing a varied expression and a expressivity, being able 
                          to go from most general to most precise and the most extreme nuances. 
                        Many other characteristics are attached to these structuring principles. 
                        Kotava comprises moreover considerable clean mechanisms which make of it 
                        a system linguistically deeply original and which attach it to no one other. 
                        The grammar supplements which is published describes them in a detailed way.
                        
 Paradoxically, one of the most difficult problems that I had to slice will 
                        have been that of the alphabet. Currently Kotava uses, with its simplified 
                        and regular way, a written form based on the Latin alphabet.
 
 It will be objected to me that it is a mark one cannot more explicit of 
                        occidentality. They are not completely false, but I answer it as follows: 
                        The alphabet is actually only one visual normative system intended to 
                        transcribe sounds (and in the case of absolutely regular Kotava) and does not 
                        have an intrinsic clean direction. The alphabet is dissociated easily from 
                        the language which it expresses, the best proof while being than languages 
                        as distant as are the Turk, the Vietnamese, Quechua, Afar or Lingala use 
                        without problem an alphabet of the Latin type. The example of the Serbo-Croatian, 
                        who can be written as much by means of a Cyrillic alphabet that Latin, is also 
                        very convincing. I thus decided to also choose such a diagram, rather than 
                        to propose a new alphabet made up of absolutely unknown signs. The principle 
                        of realism should not never miss reflection.
 
 
 IV : Kotava, 
                        today and tomorrow
 
 I created and developed Kotava since now more than 25 years. A long time 
                        I thought that to want to make it reach the row of alternative universal 
                        language of communication was, taking into account the power of the daily 
                        facts, pure Utopia.
 
 But many people, some very enthusiastic and others simply peacefully 
                        trustful, convinced me that it was finally time to really believe in the 
                        idea and to do everything to give it body, ambition and reality.
 
 Today, Kotava escapes to me from now on as creator. It belongs henceforth 
                        to its speakers, va kotavusikeem, 
                        the kotava speaking community. That those are the ambassadors, the vectors and 
                        the leavens. That they spread it around them, everywhere where the men need 
                        to communicate without disavowing themselves.
 
 Kotava is a project humanistic and universal, utopian and realistic.  
                        Each one can take part and contribute its share in it.
 
 To paraphrase somebody of famous, and it will be my last word 
                        as founder: « I made a dream, that which one day, in Paris, Istanbul, Beijing, 
                        Kinshasa, Mexico City or Sydney I can request my way in Kotava from somebody 
                        in the street ».
 
                        Kloká ! Kotava, 
                        tamefa golerava ! |