Oh, I want one of these. What’s it called?
Oh, I want one of these. What’s it called?
I predict Olent will never answer you, my friend.
And, if he does, you won’t be able to lacate any reference to it on Amazon. Perhaps not in other places, either.
But keep looking! It’ll be right on that shelf, next to the Snipe Hunter’s Guidebook & the spooted paint, two doors down from the Lost Ark Of The Covenant. 
On the same shelf as the Necronomicon and the collected works of Kilgore Trout, I assume.
Isn’t it enough for Esperanto to be a stimulating hobby that allows the people who speak it to communicate with each other? Is it useless just because it doesn’t have the same goals as a national language? Why does a language designed to allow people from different cultures to communicate have to have its own culture? That isn’t what it’s for. Demanding that Esperanto have a unique mythology and symbolic structure in order to be successful seems a bit like calling my toaster unsuccessful because it doesn’t effectively heat my soup.
Shalmanese seems to say that a language like Esperanto cannot exist, which is kind of an odd thing to say about a language that has had hundreds of thousands of speakers over a period of a hundred years. Clearly it does exist, and is working in some way for its speakers, or it would have disappeared a long time ago.
I would agree that for it to still exist is, in itself, an impressive achievement. Do you think anyone will still be speaking Klingon a hundred years from now? I don’t. But Esperanto has lasted this long, and although it’ll most likely always be a minority language of hobbyists, it seems likely to stick around. Maybe the dream of it changing the world by allowing everyone to communicate won’t come true, but certainly that minority who speaks it has the opportunity to connect with people of many nationalities in a spirit of mutual cooperation and a desire for peace, and that can’t be a bad thing, can it?
I’m studying Esperanto now, though I’m still a beginner. I think that, if by some miracle it were to catch on, it could change the world. But I think that isn’t too likely to happen. It’s still fun, and I like being part of keeping alive a tradition that depends on the enthusiasm and labor of each succeeding generation. I don’t think I’m wasting my time, just because my interest is a little bit obscure. On the contrary, I feel like, in this obscure area, I might eventually be able to make a real contribution.
Ethnologue: Languages of the World (Fourteenth Edition).
References to the 13th edition and earlier, but nothing for the 14th. Moot point, since you can buy the latest edition direct from the site I linked to.
I know not what the consequences may be for saying this, Bosda, and I will not contest anything the Mods or Admins see fit to do in response.
Quit being such a fucking ass.
I’m saying that it cannot exist the way esperantoists want it to exist. Right now, its merely a language for the bored and geeky who are willing to invest time learning it. But its not a language that you can teach to children growing up and still expect it to be the same. If it ever wants to be a language and not just a hobby, it has to let go of the stifling design-by-committee aspect and let it decay like every other language into bizarre grammer and non-sensical word formations.
I think one of the weaknesses of Esperanto is its original construction. It purports to be a language constructed from parts and similarities of all (or at least many) existing languages, but it borrows most from Indo-European sources, and not at all from Chinese, Hindu or other Eastern languages.
The theory was that if you didn’t have to learn a totally new grammar concept, an entirely new word list, etc., it would have less of an entry barrier.
The European, especially the Romance, languages have many common derivations. Example: When I attended my first High School French class, the teacher put several sentences of French on the blackboard, and challenged those of us who had never had any French instruction to translate. Surprisingly, with a little fumbling, we were able to do so. Of course, teach probably constructed an artificial example, but it did illustrate how close the languages can be. I doubt if a similar exercise could be made from Japanese.
Similarly, Esperanto doesn’t sound or look all that foreign to an English, French or German speaker. I once saw an example of what a truly international language might look like if Eastern languages were incorporated, and it was totally unrecognizable.
So a native Chinese speaker would find much less attraction to learning Esperanto than the more widely-distributed English. If both are equally foreign at first, then why not pick the one that is most useful by a huge margin?
I don’t think regional accents would be a problem. Just pick one and stick with it for international purposes.
1—Midwest American accent without the twang --as used as a model by American broadcasters+.
or–2--the BBC accent.
Both are easily recognized and understood by just about any English speaker.
Wasn’t an attempt made (about 50 years ago) to simplify Esperanto as well? thought the simpler version of esperanto was called “Ido”-WHAT happent to it?
Wassa matter, Olent? You’re repressing! Tell us how you really feel!
Does this have anything to do with those deep, personal, issues you’ve had ever since millions of the Proletariat told Marx to go take a leap, 'bout 10 years or so ago?
No, it has something to do with you all but calling me a liar as regards my reference to Ethnologue and your continued objectionable behavior here in GD. Both posts have been reported to the Moderators and I leave it to them to deal with as they see fit.
You don’t agree with me or my opinions, fine. But there is absolutely no reason to act as you have about it.
So report it. It isn’t a violation to disagree, or even disagree strongly with somebody in GD.
Similarly, throughout this thread, you have continually evaded any attempt at actual intellectual engagement. Instead, you play a little game, in which you concentrate on minutae rather than addressing the actual debate. In which you evade the shortcomings in you positions, rather than defend them. As I recall, and my memory isn’t perfection, you tend towards “one-trick pony”-ism in this regard.
I point out you violation of the Posted Sticky regarding flaming in GD.
[Moderator Hat ON]
Olentzero, Bosda, kindly take your personal tiff to the Pit and stick to the debate here. Olent, if you know something is against the rules in GD, don’t do it. Period.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
It wasn’t 50 years ago, it was nearly 100 (1908). “Ido” was an attempt not really to simplify Esperanto, but to make it closer to French. Many of the coherencies of Esperanto such as predictable endings for adjectives, correlatives, and a great deal of non-Romance wordstock were thrown out. Ido now only has about 200 enthusiasts, most of whom are actually Esperanto-speakers primarily who dabble in Ido for fun.
As far as the OP goes, Esperanto has made quite a few strides. It is now spoken on every continent, by enough people and in enough conventions that one can now live their entire social life entirely in Esperanto, and get most of their news and entertainment in it. Esperanto media is right up there with many other minority languages, even some that have a considerably greater amount of speakers.
Many of these threads end up with people feeling smug and superior who say “But English is the international language, Esperanto isn’t going to catch on like you want it to, hahahaha.” Actually, few Esperantists care if it catches on or not. A great deal of the idealism within the movement was gone by the 1970’s. Right now most of the movement uses Esperanto because it is interesting and useful within its own right. You’ll get a few Esperantists (mostly American, who barely speak the language, never go to congresses or otherwise travel with the language, and who have no real familiarity with its actual culture) who love to wave green-starred flags around and write webpages about the coming of Esperanto’s victory, but trust me, they are pretty much outcasts for most people in the movement. If such a person showed up at IJK (International Youth Congress) or IS (International Seminar, a congress in Germany over New Years’), they be laughed out, but of course they never do.
English is incredibly useful, there’s no denying that. However, Esperanto has the advantage of being internationally spoken but by a small community. If I was headed for Chile, I couldn’t just call up a local English-speaker and ask for lodging help and tourist advice without knowing him. Esperantists, however, frequently help out travellers, to surprising lengths. Many of us have stories about asking some Esperantist in city X about some minor tourist fact or another, only to have him or her not only answer the query, but provide lodging, and take the day off from work to act as guide. Unlike English, which is forced on the majority of its learners at school, Esperanto is learned by people who are interested in language. As a result, there’s a higher percentage of intellectuals within the movement, and I like that.
Anyway, for those who want to be negative about Esperanto, that’s understandable. Esperanto is like one’s favourite novel. It’s not for everyone, and one would be a fool to argue that it is for even most people, but it has proved itself special to me and I’m quite happy with it.
UnuMondo