User blog comment:Akvii/Natlang vs. Conlang Discussion/@comment-1589986-20100427030220

I made a conclusion:

it's not imperfections or culture that make a languag; it's history. I got to thinking about why English is so neutral even if you dislike Mounties or Gold Rushes or commonwealths. The truth is, many people are fascinated by the history of the English language. What foreign studier of Chinese history does not feel an urge to learn Mandarin, Cantonese, Manchu, Fukienese? Could one go to the ruins of Machu Picchu and not want to learn Quechua? IALs can never be so splendid as to connect you to a past of revolutions, wars, patriotism, dynasties, and fierce emperors. Filipino was popular because it had all the history of Tagalog behind it and gave a feeling of Filipino unity and nationalism. But an IAL can do no such thing. Yet we need an IAL for this world, but there is no way to get the necessary bellyfeel. Any comments?