Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info

The LINGUIST List is dedicated to providing information on language and language analysis, and to providing the discipline of linguistics with the infrastructure necessary to function in the digital world. LINGUIST is a free resource, run by linguistics students and faculty, and supported primarily by your donations. Please support LINGUIST List during the 2016 Fund Drive.

Ask-A-Linguist Message Details

Subject: Are artificial languages considered real languages?
Question: Can artificial languages (from Esperanto, to Loglan, to Klingon) be considered real languages in the field of linguistics? What are the characteristics that would make them ''real'' or ''fake'' languages based on how linguists define language? I have read some of the previous questions and answers about artificial languages but I have not really found anything that specifically answers this question. One characteristic mentioned in the case of Esperanto was the fact that some Esperanto speakers are native speakers. Some linguists seemed to agree that having native speakers made Esperanto a natural language while others did not think so. I would greatly appreciate any input. Thank you very much.
From: Josephine
Date: 29-Nov-2012
  1. Re: Are artificial languages considered real languages?    Geoffrey Richard Sampson     (30-Nov-2012)
  2. Re: Are artificial languages considered real languages?    Anthea Fraser Gupta     (02-Dec-2012)

Back to Most Recent Questions