International Intellectual Language (IIL)

IIL is not an already designed language. It is a language that is going to be designed by the novelist, journalist, poet and masses by the linguistic law. The target is to make sure that every single person who speaks this language will enjoy the maximal information during his lifetime, comparing with the other languages.
Around 50,000 years ago, the Neanderthal and our ancestors lived on this planet together. The Neanderthal had much stronger muscle than our ancestors had. Yet, they disappeared and our ancestors survived. The only reason was that their vocal cord was not so developed as our ancestors.
From this event we may find that there is a certain linguistic law that directs and controls the varied languages in the world. Once we find this law, we may understand what will happen to our language next.
The information explosion and the globalization forced us to find a solution to the language issue. That is a language with the property of the largest memory ability the easiest to learn the best ability to imitate all the rest language and the fastest thinking speed.
First, let us explain what is largest memory ability. Comparing with a compound of basic word 'lowest-female-voice' linguists call the word 'alto' as synthetic word. While we call the 'lowest-female-voice' as analytic word. They have the same meaning, the only different is once knowing these three words, for the analytic word, we can use them easily. Yet for a synthetic word, we have not only know the three basic word but also keep an extra form 'alto' in mind. If a language has few such extra words, it would be not a problem. The question is that the current English has more than one million such 'extra word' that no one can learn them during life time. In fact, the basic words in a certain language are just five thousand. Some dictionary has proved it. For there are many dictionaries using five thousand word to explain all the entries. If we put all the key words in those explaining sentences together, they will create a new vocabulary. Each entry in this new vocabulary will be like the analytic word of 'lowest-female-voice'. Without any extra memory, every people will understand them. That is to say, once you remembered those five thousand words, you may learn all the meaning that carried by the current one million English too. In this way, we increased the memory of single person dozens times. Yet, why our ancestor don't design a language like this. The reason is lacking phonetic patterns. You may understand it after read the next paragraph.
I don't want explain what means easiest to learn but I want explain what is the fastest thinking speed. This is the nature of the linguistic law. What is linguistic law?   
Before we explain what is the linguistic law, we have to define a new phonetic unit-- 'phonetic pattern' (PP). Current alphabetic world classifies the unit of our pronunciation as syllable. No one had given a clear answer of why they would classify like this. But my answer is the ancient people care about the distance, only a group letter with a vowel could be heard far away. They didn't care about how long it lasting. So 'a' is a syllable 'sprint' is also a syllable. Obviously they are different in time. (You may prove it by repeat each of them several times) That means to say the time of syllables is irregular. Today, what we cared is time. So we need a new phonetic unit with regular in time. I call it as 'phonetic pattern' (PP).
We know that a sound created by articulator is but some vibration caused by some muscle. We could not denote it by a simple alphabetic letter. So we define PP as a sound lasted 250msec. The reason is from laboratory study, we know that within 250msec, one can send or receive a phonetic signal only. If you want squeeze two or more signal in this period, then the signals of them would be obscure from both sides.     
Now we can explain what is linguistic law. We know that the computer use only two codes to describe the whole universe. Can people using two phonetic symbols, for instance A and B to describe the world too? Definitely, they can. The only different is that the expressing speed may be very slow. If a language has 400 different phonetic patterns (PP), supposing there are only 400 different things waiting to be expressed. The 400 PP's speaker can easily use each PP to indicate each of those different things. While the two PP's speaker, some times has to use nine PP to express one of those different things, for ninth power of two is greater than 400. Just imaging, English say ; correspondingly, the two PP's speaker perhaps must say <abbabbaaa>. While, what if the 400PP's speaker gives out four to five phonetic patterns in one second? We do not say a faster expressing language is a smart language, but obviously it is a language with faster thinking speed. The reason is that as our thinking system is a sort of 'speaking in mind' so a faster expressing system means a faster thinking speed. Supposing 400PP's speaker using five times 250 that is 1250msec to finish a sentence, at the end, what is in his mind is the idea of the whole sentence. While at the same time the two PP's speaker gets only one ninth of the same idea. From psychology we know that a word like <abbabbaaa> is much harder to remember than . So the linguistics law is that when the phonetic patterns increased in a language, the thinking speed and vocabulary-in-mind of the speakers would be increased also, vice versa.
It tells you that since we haven't got so many PP in our language. We have to using them to combine each other to create more sound patterns in order to carry the meanings. The syllable of 'sprint' is in fact the combination of some phonetic patterns. Yet how many phonetic patterns enable us to find out the best language? The answer is that it needs 5,000 PP for the pronouncing system. The reason is from some English dictionary. We know there are some English dictionaries that using only 5,000 words to explain all the entries. If all the 5,000 words were denoted by a single phonetic pattern each, then all the key words that we used in the sentences that explain those entries would form a new self-explained vocabulary. For instance in the dictionary the explanation of 'alto' is 'lowest female voice'; let lo=lowest, fe=female and vo=voice, then the word 'lofevo'='alto'. In that case, since people find the word 'alto' would be useless, it would disappear later. Step by step, the current one million English word would turn to be 5,000 simple words. For one million words, no one can remember them during lifetime, but for 5,000 words, it is an easy job.
From the discussion above, we know that the synthetic word represents fast thinking speed while cost memory. On the other hand, the analytic word represents slow thinking speed while it can explain itself and save memory. In every language, these to trend keeps balance. When this language intake some new phonetic patterns, the original balance should be broken and a new balance formed.
The linguistic law gives us a new translation theory. Only the smaller piece of meaning carriers can denote the larger piece of meaning. For instance, we can use the three words 'lowest', 'female' and 'voice' to imitate the word 'alto'. While, it is hard denote these three words by the word 'alto'; we can say that 'lowest' plus 'female' plus 'voice' equals 'alto'. We can't say that 'alto' minus 'voice' minus 'female' equals 'lowest'. That means to say when translating a foreign language, the word of 'alto' may be useless (what if a foreign word means 'the lowest girl voice'? in that case the word 'alto' would be useless). In other word, this five thousand basic word would be the best set to bring the information of all culture into this language. When the languages of the world unified in one, we can't keep all the information in different cultures hundred percent, but we can do the best.
From the psychological view, such a language is not only easy to remember, but also clearer. Some language training process wants the student always comparing the different between pyramid and prism, pride (group of lion) and school (group of fish), brit (young herring) and parr (young salmon) etc. They call it as vocabulary map. They believe it is a technique that enable students understand those words better. Yet with the IIL this process would be unnecessary, for every word is a self-explain word.     
In the biology, the binomial nomenclature of Linnaeus is also a process of turning the synthetic words into analytic words. Most of scientists agree that it is the fundamental ground of Darwinist, without Linnaeus the evolutionism would be hard appearing in this world. Like wise the IIL is expecting more Darwinism-like discover taking place in this planet.
Another example was the ancient Grecian. Some one believes that the current culture of the western world is but explaining the culture of ancient Greece. Many philosopher have tried to answer the question that why this people got such a creativity? My answer is that since they recognized the vowels as information carrier, their thinking speed were faster and their memory was larger than the rest people of that time were.
That means to say there is a certainly linguistic law. It controls the thinking speed and the quantity of memory of human being. So our target is finding a language that has largest memory, fastest thinking speed and easiest to learn for the user.
Speaking language from A to Z is but some action of animal. In average, a PP is a CV note, but sometimes it is not. For instance, 'man' is also a PP. It includes a set of CVC. While the 'mad' is not a PP. You may repeat them to prove it. So if we regard letter-set 'an', 'al' etc. as vowels too, then we can say a CV note or a pure V is a PP. The target of 5,000 PP is but find out some consonants and vowels, when they multiply each other the number should be 5,000. Both 70C with 70V or 50C with 100V should result in it. Maybe some endangered language could offer a different solution. Any way, what we want is 5,000 PP. Those PP can distinct each other, spending 250msec and can be accepted by both speaker and listener.
I think the International Intellectual Language would be a mixer of varied language. In other word every country that has a special phonetic pattern could participate in and with this language, if they like.