The LangX approach, à posteriori not only in vocabulary but also in grammar and organisation, follows the precedent of “jargon -> pidgin -> vernacular progressions” (JPVPs) - the only unconditionally successful IALs in terms of pan-societal penetration. The JPVPs are historic occurrences where a “trading pidgin” – a very basic auxiliary language – has subsequently become “vernacularised” or “creolised”, as the rising generation has adopted it as a mother tongue. Although most JPVPs have failed to complete all their internal stages, a number of languages have come into existence via this route, and there is no inherent reason why a new world language should not come into being in a congruent way via a “global pidgin” IAL.

JPVPs have been inaugurated throughout history – Greek Koiné was in existence two millennia ago – but they reached their zenith between the 17th and 19th Centuries along with the merchant adventurers of the imperialist powers. Although there were many variations, according to language and circumstance, certain features were more or less universal. Thus, they all started at the first level with a jargon, i.e. words without a defined grammatical structure, as in the normal process of individual language acquisition. Similarly, authorship was collaborative and “scientific” for no reason except that the JPVPs were commercial and pragmatic initiatives concerned only with what had been proven to work. Words etc that were accepted in one part of the world were tried in another, and linguistic features common to a number of existing pidgins are the result. The very vernacularisation of these pidgins constitutes a progress to monolingualism within their respective societies.

Conversely, the Fairly Typical Modern Auxlang (FTMA), including much of Esperanto and other IALs, has started at the second level with a developed grammar. This approach has been predicated on the notion of IAL selection by the appropriate global authorities in preference to less regular and politically neutral existing languages. However, and as experience has shown, it is very difficult to promote a language from the top-down that does not also have wide acceptance from the bottom-up – and the sole authorship and consequently limited empirical base of these languages has unfortunately disqualified them on the latter account. Moreover, only a language capable of being willingly adopted in due course as a mass mother tongue might successfully transition from the limbo of permanent auxiliary status to something greater.