Meaning: This quote by Edward Sapir, a renowned American anthropologist-linguist, addresses the idea of a constructed international language. In this quote, Sapir expresses surprise at the commonalities found in the proposals of advocates for such a language, particularly in terms of vocabulary and general spirit of procedure.

The concept of a constructed international language has been a topic of interest and debate for many years. The idea behind it is to create a universal language that can be used by people from different linguistic backgrounds to facilitate communication and understanding across cultures. Proponents of such a language argue that it could help promote global unity, facilitate international trade and diplomacy, and reduce language barriers.

Sapir's quote suggests that despite the diverse backgrounds and perspectives of those advocating for a constructed international language, there are striking similarities in their proposals. This observation raises questions about the underlying motivations and influences that may be shaping these proposals. It also implies that there may be certain fundamental principles or features that are consistently being emphasized in these proposals, regardless of the specific language being advocated.

One of the key aspects highlighted in the quote is the commonality in vocabulary across different proposals for constructed international languages. This raises the question of whether there are certain words or linguistic elements that are universally recognized and deemed essential for effective communication. It also points to the challenge of creating a vocabulary that is both comprehensive and accessible to speakers of diverse languages.

Furthermore, Sapir mentions the "general spirit of procedure" in relation to the proposals for constructed international languages. This likely refers to the overall approach or methodology suggested for developing and implementing such a language. It suggests that there may be shared principles or guidelines that advocates believe should be adhered to in the process of constructing an international language. This could encompass considerations such as phonetics, grammar, syntax, and cultural inclusivity.

It is worth noting that Sapir's comments on the commonalities in the proposals for constructed international languages may also reflect his broader interest in linguistic diversity and the ways in which languages evolve and interact within societies. As a linguist, Sapir was deeply engaged in the study of language and its role in shaping human perception and cognition. His work contributed significantly to the understanding of linguistic relativity, which posits that the structure of a language influences the way its speakers perceive and think about the world.

In the context of the quote, Sapir's observations could be interpreted as a reflection of his interest in the universal aspects of language and the potential challenges and opportunities associated with the creation of a global lingua franca. His statement invites further exploration of the commonalities and divergences in the proposals for constructed international languages, as well as the broader implications of such endeavors for linguistic diversity and cultural identity.

In conclusion, Edward Sapir's quote provides thought-provoking insight into the commonalities found in proposals for constructed international languages, shedding light on the shared vocabulary and general spirit of procedure that seem to characterize these efforts. It prompts consideration of the underlying principles and challenges involved in creating a universal language, as well as the potential impact on linguistic diversity and global communication. The quote serves as a starting point for deeper exploration of the complexities and implications of the quest for a constructed international language.