The "war-at-any-price party," the whole-hoggers _à tous crins_ (the
juxtaposition of the two national idioms lends a certain realism, and
heightens the effect of each), are therefore driven back on their
second line of attack, if the Hibernianism may be excused. "Yes," they
say, "your language may be possible, but, after all, why not learn an
existing language, if you've got to learn one anyway?"

Now, quite apart from the obvious fact that the nations will never agree
to give the preference to the language of one of them to the prejudice
of the others, this argument involves the suggestion that an artificial
language is no easier to learn than a natural one. We thus come to the
question of ease as a qualification.


IV

THE QUESTION OF PRACTICE (_continued_)—AN
INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE IS EASY[1]

[1]Readers who do not care about the reasons for this, but desire
concrete proofs, may skip the next few pages and turn in to p. 20,
par. 6.

People smile incredulously at the mention of an artificial language,
implying that no easy royal road can be found to language-learning of
any kind. But the odds are all the other way, and they are heavy odds.

The reason for this is quite simple, and may be briefly put as follows: