# Rudolf Carnap an C. K. Ogden, 7. Februar 1934 Februar 1934

Dear Mr. Ogden‚

I was very happy to see in your kind letter that my first attempt in Basic was better than my opinion about of it. With this letter I send you again a copy. If you have time enough, would you be so kind as to send it back with your notes?

I got the 4 further Miniature-booksI Psyche Miniatures for which I gave an order to Kegan PaulI Kegan Paul, Verlag. But so far they did have not send sent me their account.

I made some did a short front-notes (named “The Vienna Circle makes no Philosophy”) for to go at the front of the book put into English by Mr. BlackP Black, Max, 1909–1988, brit.-am. Philosoph, and I sent them it to him. He put them it into English and, as I see from his letter of 26. Jan. 1934, he sent all together to the printer (or possibly to you?). So I am looking forward to its coming out.

I sent my book “Logische Syntax der Sprache”B 1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934 to the publisher (Springer, Vienna) in December to SpringerI Springer Verlag, (Vienna) who will be getting it out, and in January I had the thought that it was in printing was hoping to see it in print on January 1. But than then they sent it back to me, because its print-size was seen to be greater than when it was put into print it was seen to be longer than had been fixed before by our agreement. That was very unpleasing sad, but, being unable to change the complete work give the bookB 1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934 a completely new form in a short time, I had to take out some parts and to make some little changes in the rest. I got through this in one week and sent the book back to the publisherP Springer, Julius der Jüngere, 1880–1968, dt. Verleger at 15. Jan. Now I am looking forward for to the first test prints. Than Then I will send a copy of them to the Countess von 🕮 ZeppelinP Zeppelin, Amethe von, *1896, brit. Übersetzerin, verh. mit Leo von Zeppelin. I had a letter from her, making the suggestion to meet that I might see her in Vienna, but I was not able to do so. Now her last letter gives me the hope to see of seeing her in Prague in on her journey back from England to Austria. From the test prints she and you will see, that in the bookB 1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934 there are some parts full of “technical” matter discussion. She says in her letter that she was a learner of had WhiteheadP Whitehead, Alfred North, 1861–1947, brit.-am. Philosoph as her teacher. So I have the opinion that she will not have much trouble in putting it into English.

Will it be possible to give in the English form of the book those parts which I had to take out from the German bookB 1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934 as I said before? I would be very happy if so. The reason for my desiring this is not only my regret that my working out of what has been worked out these parts would will have no effects value for a if they were are not printed. In my opinion the cutting out of these parts is a very does great damage for to the bookB 1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934. If the English bookB 1937@The Logical Syntax of Language, London, 1937 will have these parts complete, it will be of special value even for the owners of those who have the German bookB 1934@Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien, 1934.

To your question: I give you with pleasure my approval to put my name on the list of those who give their support to Basic. But I would not say that I am “unable to accept as satisfactory for the purpose any artificially constructed system” (as it is said in another list). Certainly Basic is much simpler than ordinary normal English; and I see no other language than English (and probably there is no such one other language) from which it would be possible to take out a part-language as simple and at the same time as full of power as Basic is. And from of the different possible ways to take of taking out a simpler part-language from English your way is better than any other I see. And in my opinion there is nobody who would have been able to make a better one. This is a fact, but it is another fact, that a constructed made-up language like Espe🕮ranto is still even more simple than Basic. (Much more, in my opinion, than you seem to see; what you say at some places f. e. about Esperanto is not quite right; but this question is not very important). Now the present situation position is this: we see from the facts – or at least it seems very probable – that the much greater number of men most persons are not ready to make use of a not-natural made-up language system; they have even a feeling of disgust against a such one a system. For this reason a part language which is part of a natural language has much more chance to be taken in use of being used by a great number of men in the near future, (on the condition that) if this language is simple enough (though not so simple as a constructed made-up one). Now, in my opinion, your Basic system is in this condition simple enough. It is possible to make use of it even at present in the relations to between a very great number of men. You are right that this gives to Basic the greatest chance of being the help-second language in future. I will say to you openly, that I have a feeling of regret about the fact that a constructed made-up language – though much better, if seen from the angle of theory– has no chance in fact. But facts have more force than feelings; and so we have to take Basic. (I myself am a man more of theory and system than of fact and doing. That I am looking now at the question of Basic from the angle of fact is chiefly the effect of the words of my friend Neurath). It was ever has been quite clear to me from the start that an international help-second language is very necessary. In the past I saw – like all but you – only two ways of making a such one: either to construct make a new system or to take one of the natural languages. I took the first way, because the second seemed – and seems still now– to me a bad one. Now you have made a third way in the middle of between the two, and by your discovery the situation position is completely changed. Because your system is more 🕮 simple than any natural language and at the same time of very much greater use even at present than any constructed made-up system: it is the best way. In addition to this I see the very good effect of writing in Basic: it gives a self-control to which makes one’s wordings language– and thereby for this reason ones thoughts – more simple and more clear; that is of very high value specially in “philosophy”. These are the chief reasons for which I will not only give my approval to Basic, but in addition to this I will make use of it and, if I am able, give help to the working on it in taking it forward.

The notes which you gave so kindly to my last letter are of great value for me.

Yours very truly
R.C.

Brief, msl., 4 Seiten, RC 081-13-05 ist ein offenbar an Ogden mitgeschickter und von diesem wieder an Carnap retournierter Durchschlag, der hier farbig markierte Korrekturen von Ogden enthält (Dsl. RC 081-13-17 ohne Ogdens Korrekturen); Briefkopf: gestempelt Prof. Dr. Rudolf Carnap  /  Prag XVII.  /  N. Motol, Pod Homolkou, msl. 7thFebruary, 1934  /  C. K. Ogden Esq.  /  London.

Processed with \(\mathsf{valep\TeX}\), Version 0.1, May 2024.