Rosenberger to Peano

Idiom Neutral

29 oktobr/11 novembr 1908

A s. prof. G. Peano in Turin

Sinior multe estimed!

Usk sitempe sirkular de s. Holmes di votr selektasion kuale direktor de Akademi no ankor aparav; ma it aparero serte e mi es konvinsied, ke vo es direktor, e ke it es temp konvenabl komunikar a vo, kekos s. prof. Couturat skribav a mi in yuli 1908 di fusion eventual de Komitet de Délégation e nostr Akademi. Mi mit a vo kopi (deskribad) de sie letr d. 14 yuli 1908, in kel s. Cout. skrib intr otri, ke kolaborasion de nostr instituti es desirabl, ke Délégation av intension instituar sue Akademi pro perfeksion de lingu, noun element de kel es konsidered fi[...?] ke ili komensero organisasion de Association International aproksimative in oktobr. — Et noi komens organisasion nov de nostr Akademi. Posible moment pro fusion de ist du instituti es favorabl.

Mi pens, ke, if vo konsent ko prinsipi de s. Cout., vo kontinuero ist korespondens, e no mi. Pro ist kasu mi volu adyunktar, ke et sekuantu mie opinion, fusion[1] es desirabl e mi pens, ke it es posibl, no in manier proposed per s. Molenaar, ma personale. Mi pens ke it es posibl, ke membri de nostr Akademi deveni membri de Komitet (u Komision Permanent u Akademi nov) de Délégation; otrflanke mi truv, ke it es multe desirabl, ke membri de Komitet de Délégation deveni membri de nostr Akademi, vo aut es membr prim in omni du instituti. If it es tale, mi no vis kaus sufisik pro kreasion de Akademi nov; noi deb proposar a Komitet intrar in corpore in nostr Akademi, kel av statuti bon[a] e plasi sufisik pro omni membri de Komitet (mi no konos kuant membri it av, ma it es irelevant), ipse pro s. Jespersen[b] sekuantu §6; sine dubi omni membr de Komitet potes intrar sekuantu §6, if omni plasi normal es ya okuped. 

On no deb timar §15, kel potes esar interpreted per Akademi (cf. §16 de Regulativi) if Akademi kontinu labor, it okupero se in kompletifikasion e plubonifikasion de I.N.; inventor de I. N. es Akademi aut.

In omni kasu du instituti, kuale on vis in letri de s. Cout., av ist sem tendens; ili no deb damnifikar se resiproke, ma sukursar unotre. Akademi, kuale institut bon, no deb esar anuled, ma konserved. Kekos s. Couturat dik di feblitet de Akademi — es ver: it no av problem de propagand, it no av propaged sue lingu e it no av suport sufisik in publik, ma it resiverio it nemediate, if it poteserio laborar ko Délégation. — Mi no konos votr proyekt nov de Regulativi, ekslabored ko s. Monkar; ma mi pens, ke in omni kasu, if vo proposar kolaborasion a s. Couturat, ist proyekt deb esar monstred a il; sine dubi s. Couturat es organisator perfekt e propagandist multe apt. 

Regrete mi no konos detali de votr proyekt de organisasion de diurnal de Akademi. S. Bonto[c] skrib a mi, ke il desir fusion de diurnali 1) Progres, 2) Idéi int. 3) Kor. Int. e il desir akseptar et publikasion de votr sirkulari. Eske vo av konsented pro tal kombinasion e ki esero otr sekretar? 

Mi resignero editar Progres in anu 1909, ma sole favoru organ de Akademi. — Mi preg multe avisar mi di votre intensioni.

Ko respekt grand e saluti kordial votr serv leplu devot

Rosenberger

_______
[a] Mi dubi, ke Délégation ekslaborero statuti plu libr; otrflanke, if nostr Akademi kolabor ko Délégation e if on voluero mutar kelkun paragraf, it esero plu fasil kovokar Kongres Internasional.
[b] Mi pens, ke s. Jespersen no esav selekted kuale president de Komitet, in omni kasu il no es (u il no ankor es) direktor de Akademi.
[c] It es regretabl, ke Bonto sekuantu sue manier brusk no av relasioni bon a prof. Couturat.

Lingu anglik

29 October/11 November 1908

To Prof. G. Peano in Turin

Much esteemed sir!

Until now, Mr. Holmes' circular concerning your election as the Academy's director has not yet appeared; but it certainly will appear and I am convinced that you are the director, and that it is a suitable time to communicate to you what Prof. Couturat wrote to me in July 1908 about the possible fusion of the committee of Délégation and our Academy. I am sending you a copy (a transcription) of his letter dated 14 July 1908 in which Mr. Couturat writes, among other things, that the collaboration of our institutes is desirable, that the Délégation has the intention to organise their Academy for the perfection of the language, no element of which is considered [???] that they will begin the organisation of the International Association around October. — We are also starting a new organisation of our Academy. Perhaps the moment for fusion of the two institutes is favourable.

I think that if you agree with Mr Couturat's principles, you will continue this correspondence and not I. For this issue, I want to add that also in my opinion, fusion is desirable and I think that it's possible, not in the manner proposed by Mr. Molenaar, but personally. I think that it's possible for members of our Academy to become members of the Committee (either the Permanent Commission or the new Academy) of Délégation; on the other hand I find that it's very desirable for members of Délégation's Committee to become members of our Academy; you yourself are the first member of both institutes. If it be so, I do not see sufficient reason for the creation of a new Academy; we should propose to the Committee to enter in corpore into our Academy, which has good statutes[a] and enough places for all members of the Committee (I don't know how many members it has, but it's irrelevant), even for Mr. Jespersen[b] according to §6; without a doubt, each member of the Committee can enter according to §6 if all normal places are already occupied.

One shouldn't fear §15, which can be interpreted by the Academy (cf. §16 of Regulativi) if the Academy continues work, it will busy itself with the completion and improvement of I.N.; the inventor of I.N. is the Academy itself. 

In any case, both institutes, as one sees in the letters of Mr. Couturat, have this same tendency; they should not harm each other, but help one another. The Academy, as a good institute, should not be eliminated, but conserved. What Mr. Couturat says about the weakness of the Academy is true; it doesn't have the task of disseminating, it hasn't propagated its own language and it doesn't have sufficient support in public, but it should receive it at one, if it could work with Délégation. — I am not aware of your new outline of the Regulativi, developed with Mr. Monkar; but in any event, I think that if you propose collaboration to Mr Couturat, this outline should be shown to him; without a doubt, Mr. Couturat is the perfect organiser and a very skilful propagandist. 

Unfortunately I don't know the details of your project to organise the journal of the Academy. Mr. Bonto[c] writes to me that he wants the fusion of the journals 1) Progres, 2) Idéi int. 3) Kor. Int. and he also would like to accept the publication of your circulars. Have you agreed to such a combination and who will be the other secretary?

I will forgo the issuing of Progres in 1909, but only in favour of the organ of the Academy. — I ask you to inform me of your intentions.   

With great respect and cordial salutations, your most devoted servant

Rosenberger

_______
[a] I doubt that Délégation will come up with more liberal statutes; on the other hand, if our Academy works together with Délégation and you will want to change any paragraph, it will be easier to convene an international Congress.
[b] I don't believe that Mr. Jespersen was elected president of the Committee; in any case, he is not (or he is still not) the Academy's director.
[c] It is regretable that Bonto, because of his blunt manner, does not have good relations with prof. Couturat. 

NOTES:

[1] Fusion is not attested in either the 1902 or Reform-Neutral (1912) dictionary; however, see: fusion (e f d), fusión (s), fusione (i).