Is there a wrong way to speak Esperanto?
----2/25/17 Update---- Personal Thought Update:
So I feel like this has been an insightful conversation. Not that I think it matters I thought I'd update on where I stand on this based on input and conversation between those open to conversate with me on the matter.
I will approach the gender problem with Esperanto using some of the proposed ideas presented by others who also speak Esperanto and use those proposals consistently. Some people will agree, some people won't, but that's what makes the world interesting. I can see the benefit of the accusative, and occasionally I will drop Ĉu but only in the same way that I occ. accidentally drop the ¿Question Mark? in Spanish. As I gain confidence I'll probably get better at adding my -n to an object and my Ĉu (it's definitely nice to have) though I can't promise that all of my words will be made to reflect -n, that will just be bad grammar on my part. Like when I forget to make sure that all the plurals are reflected. In time I imagine I'll get better with it and forget what it was like to even want to drop it.
I still plan on using some words in Ido to avoid mal- , I see that more people will disagree than agree but as long as it is peaceful disagreement I'm ok. I imagine it will be likened to Spanglish, or like I'm injecting Elvish into my English vocab.
To share a feeling not for debate but for discussion (how can we debate what is a subject and personal feeling?), I guess for me adding mal- just feels like it assumes that things are the opposite of the other and removes the essence of what those things are. How can I think of dark if I am only thinking of it in terms of opposite of light. How can I think of what it means to be open if I am only thinking in terms of what it means to be closed. This is more philosophical for me but my work largely involves philosophy. It's in many ways the same issue people have with the gender but with the essence of objects instead. Even then mal- is rooted in being wrong or bad or evil. The same issue I have with gender I have with mal-. By saying something is 'not-young' with mal- we're assuming it's wrong to be anything other than the default. To be mallongaj vs. altaj, mallumo vs. lumo -- nothing mal-icious about these things. Perhaps people will say I am overthinking it, in the same way they say we overthink gender. That's fine, it's part of my job description, it's just a small part of my discomfort with it. Obviously no one else has an issue for it for the same reasons but for me that is 1/4 of my issue.
I suppose I could think of everything as yin/yang polarity and the language reflects that, and creatively describe that, but philosophy aside the problem comes when I try to translate my work to reflect Esperanto. The other 3/4ths of that issue comes with the mal-tongue twisters that result when I use it and the problems that occur when I try to translate my work.
I can see a lot of my writing in Esperanto being filled with 'mal' overkills as an example:
Because: La malbela maljunulino mallaŭte malfermis la pordon al sia kelo kaj malrapide malsupreniris la ŝtuparon.
Has Esperanto tackled the problem that mal creates? Is there other ways to trackle these problems?
I want to use 100% Esperanto but when my sentences become mal-tongue twisters as a consequence of the type of things I write for a living well...If Esperanto has a built in solution to this problem then I will readily adopt Esperanto's built in solution for mal- for well everything. But until it does because a direct translation of a lot of my work into Esperanto would lead to these mal- situations what I will be speaking will be Esperanto-Ido, and not pure Esperanto. To be fair only about 1-2% of what I speak and teach will actually be Ido at this point. 98% will be Esperanto. If I can find alternative ways to tackle my issues or learn of new ways to do that while keeping to Esperanto 100% I will do that.
I do know the goal of Esperanto was to be easy for people to learn. In the same way that gxi was meant to be gender neutral and that the reason it's not used is because English interference. So I get it; but still adopting it has not been without issue.
Conclusion: I feel very strongly about Esperanto as a language and spreading Esperanto and sharing the language with my family, and teaching the language. But it's because I feel that strongly about it that it's important that I get feedback from all people and sides, so there's that thought stream.
--------------------The original post----- Ĉu tie (en) malĝusta maniero al parolas esperanton? vs. Ĉu ekzistas malĝusta maniero parolas esperanton vs. Mi estas bone vs. Mi fartas bone.
When I practice Duolingo I often get it wrong because my brain might say something in one way, but Duolingo (la strigo) says there is only one way to say it.
Speakers from Esperanto come from all over the world; most people who learn Esperanto probably learn it through a book(s), videos, online literature, and have to create and find opportunities to speak it. Surely each person with a different language may bring different idiosyncrasies to the language based on their mother tongue, particularly for those like myself who are clumsy about word structure. I've read that Esperanto is a creative language in that there is more flexibility to phrase things in certain ways and people still understand you, but I don't get the opportunity to interact with people enough to learn if this is true?
I am not a social person by nature, I don't have a lot of time for forums and chatrooms, but enjoy making few but close friends that share common interests with me and talk through telegram. For interest I develop games and books and am building a school, orphanage, job environment, connected system of ecovillages and a decentralized ecosystem that comes together to help resolve conflicts, bring peace, and equip people with the tools they need to take part. I discovered Esperanto only a few months ago and decided that the 'micronation', the network I am building will focus on Esperanto-Ido as it's primary/second language. This means that our games will have an Esperanto version, our books will be written in English and Esperanto, our courses, books and curriculum will be taught in those two languages, the primary language we speak in our village will be Esperanto-Ido. I love Esperanto and what it stands for so much because it works for what I've spent years building, but I don't have many opportunities to speak with other people who also speak it, as none of my friends speak Esperanto and I am often very busy with my day to day life so my only access to Esperanto is listening to videos, writing, and home. I believe strongly in what Esperanto stands for. But I've run into a strong problem --- how can I build a community in Esperanto while being disconnected from the speakers who speak it?
Will I create anger within the community if I implement Esperanto within (my) intentional community but apply standards that may not conform to the overall consensus of the Esperanto community or that is disconnected from it?
I read from some esperanto discussion somewhere that Esperanto is not meant to have 'dialects' that it's supposed to be one world language, that conforms and agrees with all people. But any language that is isolated and spoken in a community will develop dialects and even accents unless they intentionally work to conform with the international standard. Take Australian, New Zealand, African English, British, Canadian and Mid-Western American vs. Southern Belle vs. The Broncs English...often English gets affected and sort of mixed like a creole at times, that's how modern languages came to be today, a mix and corruption of former languages that influenced present day. I don't know how to prevent that with forming an intentional international community or cluster of people in an area who speak Esperanto.
So here are some problems I am having right now:
I plan to use some words in Ido to avoid mal-, dropping the accusative, and for mother/father rather than using the traditional male roots, and perhaps some gender neutral terms. Right now I'm still getting comfortable talking in Esperanto, my fluency is maybe 14% or less so these changes will come as I build a working and functioning relationship with Esperanto, but feel strongly in adopting those changes.
Focusing on just Esperanto I notice I word things in ways that Duolingo says is wrong and that perhaps other Esperantists may disagree on were I to word them in a specific non-standard way. I keep telegram open to read conversations and I notice the way people say things there not only may differ from person to person but also differs from the way I might have been saying it at home.
Sometimes I drop "Ĉu" altogether in writing and just use a ? question mark, or inflection.
I often ignore the terms "Krokodili" and malkrokodili exist as words to describe people who don't speak Esperanto because I feel it creates an outsider/insider mindset and want to avoid that with I'm creating -- I don't think that will matter to people, but I worry that by striking it from the vocab and teaching an alternative term that does not put down non speakers might cause trouble.
Any consequences for these for better or worse?
It's OK not to like some of Esperanto's design decisions.
What I think is not OK is to make different decisions but still call the result "Esperanto".
Imagine if someone decided to simplify English by removing do-support, plurals, verb inflections for person, articles, and cases.
Hello! Know you my brother? - No, I know he not. - Here he is. He is doctor. He have three child: two boy and one girl. Boy is ten and fifteen and girl is six. All child still go to school. They like not do their homework. - Ah! I is happy to know your brother and his child.
Would you call that language "English"? I think it would be confusing to do so.
If you would like to drop the accusative and use patro, matro rather than patro, patrino etc., then you are no longer speaking Esperanto, I would say, and calling the result "Esperanto" seems odd.
Of course you can decide to create your own language based on English (or Esperanto) and teach it to other people and speak it with them. If your changes are not too great, you may even be able to speak with people who only know English (or Esperanto) and not your language.
Instead of creating your own language, though, you could also consider learning Ido? You seem to agree with some of their decisions. But if I remember correctly, they have a question particle ka? corresponding to Esperanto's ĉu?.
So I will say: if you want to learn Esperanto, then learn Esperanto. If you do not want to learn Esperanto, then do not learn Esperanto.
But do not say that you want to learn Esperanto and then speak something that is not Esperanto.
Short answer: yes. There absolutely is a wrong way to speak Esperanto.
Esperanto wasn't born yesterday. It's an established language with a 130 year history. It is used in families and is the common language between countless people who might describe each other as best friends. If you're interested in learning Esperanto, you should be interested in communicating with the people who speak it. To make up your own rules will simply make you sound weird to these people. This will draw attention away from what you're trying to say and onto how you're saying it.
Imagine if you need to use the toilet and rather than getting an answer you get 20 questions about where you learned to speak and even more helpful suggestions on how to improve. It's like any other language. When you learn the language, you learn the language. You don't just make something up.
You can speculate about how people "probably" speak Esperanto, or you can come out and meet some people who do.
how can I build a community in Esperanto while being disconnected from the speakers who speak it?
This is a very good question. Why not just learn Esperanto as it's used? Then, if you have a community where Esperanto is welcome, this could attract attention from the greater community.
But any language that is isolated and spoken in a community will develop dialects
Exactly. Esperanto is not meant to be isolated.
Side note, this happens in families who speak Esperanto but who are isolated from the community.
I plan to use some words in Ido to avoid mal-, dropping the accusative, and for mother/father rather than using the traditional male roots, and perhaps some gender neutral terms.
Quite frankly, this is weird. Why on earth would you do this? Just use Ido. At least then you could read Ido books and use Ido dictionaries. Maybe you could host the Ido world convention and get some publicity that way. Why mix them?
For that matter, I think you'll hurt your own community doing this. Stick to one fringe idea. Esperanto is kind of a fringe idea. So are eco-villages. Ido is a fringe idea on a fringe idea. An eco-village where they speak a mix of Esperanto and Ido is a fringe idea on a fringe idea with in a fringe idea mixed with a fringe idea. Try to explain that in 20 minutes to a potential community member.
I notice I word things in ways that Duolingo says is wrong and that perhaps other Esperantists may disagree
This is actually fairly rare. A specific example might be nice.
Telegram, on the other hand, is the rapid writing of people, many of them are still learning. I just checked my telegram window. I didn't have to page down to find an error. Someone left off the word "estas". The easiest explanation is that this was a typo.
I mean, nothing's stopping you from doing these things. However, Esperanto being an artificial language doesn't change the fact that it operates largely like a natural language: we agree on the rules of the language to facilitate communication. That's why changing things on a whim will result in person not undersatnding you speak goodly. (ha)
I could always inject my favorite Crimean Tatar vocabulary into my everyday English, but it will result in me having to explain what I'm saying, assuming the person I'm talking to asks after they give me a weird look.
You can always make up your own variety of Esperanto and hope it catches on. That's basically what Ido is. Of course, in the same way Ido isn't Esperanto, no other variety of it will be either.
Also, I don't think it's that strict of a rule to keep "ĉu" on questions. Many languages can just take a statement and add a question mark to it.
"Krokodili" is a term to refer to someone who refuses to speak Esperanto in an Esperanto context, like at a gathering. It's not used to shun non speakers.
Thank you for the explanation of krokodili.
Yes that (describing what I meant) was what I was running into, since it was so few words I could just add a footnote to those vocab differences. For instance when I write a fictional novel in English the characters use a few different words to represent certain words in their vocab, I add a footnote to the word and a lexicon in the back for those few differences. In this case , where I would just highlight words that are different and explain what they mean when the mouse hovered over. In this scenario I think it'd be like spanglish "Que pasa me homey? Mes Amigos and me are gonna kick the frijoles out of jou"
- Switching from English to Spanish rapidly
Using spanish words in an English conversation or vice-versa
Hey Chica you looked muy caliente today *--:D
Your suggestion seems to be to greatly decrease the internationality of the language by greatly increasing its difficulty in favor of your own personal language and philosophical preferences.
To truly understand what you are suggesting, I would suggest speaking with non-English speakers. In particular, find Esperantists who do not have a Romance or Germanic language as their native language and ask them about things like dropping "ĉu" - which for languages that don't use inflection to mark questions is a great boon - and removing mal- words - which for languages without Latin/Germanic vocabularies cuts in half the number of basic words one must learn. Maybe I'm wrong, as I don't fall into that camp, but I would think that many would not want to increase the burden of learning vocabulary just so that you can feel more comfortable using expressions like "malfermi."
As for your "mal-" sentence, I don't see anything wrong with it. I understood it just fine and it actually seemed sort of fun. Such a thing is harder to do in English, but not impossible. "The overdressed, overbearing overachiever overcharged on overcooked eggs over-easy overnight."
I don't think speaking to non-English speakers would help :P I grew up in a bilingual household and speak more than one language. I was married to a linguist and also was an aspiring lingustic and conlanger. I have a lot of respect for Esperanto, I realize after research and reflection that I don't necessarily agree that Esperanto was designed very well or efficiently and that my desire to improve and tweak things would not be limited to a few vocab words as I had planned. The language I want to use and spread seems to be something like interlingua with simpler grammar that improves upon Esperanto entirely, is easy to learn, grasp and learn but open to reform and able to be understood without prior background in it. That is a new language, and not something I set out intending to do, at least not with this. I had intended to stick to Esperanto and be as pure to it as possible only going off a little with Esperanto-Ido. In the past 24 hours I've continued to research and study the issue at large and realize Esperanto is a great stepping stone, and it's a tool that will allow me to continue to make great friends, but one that in it's current form can't meet the needs that I have on a larger scale. Still I speak Esperanto, feel more confident each day, and will continue to do so until I have no one else to speak with it :). It's been a great help.
Well, if your idea now is to fix problems in Esperanto by creating a new language, then your idea is likely to be met with indifference by most of the community. Many have tried, with varying degrees of success, to create something inspired by Esperanto that is better. Ido is probably the most successful attempt. Interlingua is arguably an attempt to improve Esperanto, but its history is quite complicated. (It was created by a team over 14 years and looked at many languages. Some of its creators sought a better alternative to Esperanto specifically and others didn't care much about Esperanto. But I think it is fair to say that Interlingua was, at least, an attempt to create a language that was better for European communication than Esperanto.) Even Zamenhof tried to fix Esperanto, and even his reform was rejected by the community.
Zamenhof himself seemed to see Volapuk as you see Esperanto: Good, but not good enough. If I had been writing to him at the time, I might have told him to just learn Volapuk and give up on Esperanto because Volapuk was "good enough." So, I won't say you can't do this, but I will say that I don't think your ideas actually improve on Esperanto. At least, not from the perspective of being an IAL.
As for your thoughts on "mal-" I did have a thought on that: When I first learned Esperanto, I thought it was strange that "open" was "malfermi" because, in my mind, "open" was the "natural" state and "closed" was the opposite. I later came to realize that "mal-" does not mean "bad" or "unnatural" - it simply means "oppositve." So, it is like yin and yang. "Mal-" applies to all things that have two opposite but required ideas. One cannot have good without evil. One cannot have darkness without light. It isn't that being "hidden" is normal when I say "malkaŝi," it simply means that there are two ideas: "hidden" and "revealed" and you cannot have one without the other. And, in a way, it is even like yin-yang that Zamenhof did not make south "malnordo" or west "maloriento." Within the yin-yang philosophy "north" and "south" are not absolute ideas. They are relative based on the point of reference. Yang refers to the north side of a hill, but to the south side of a river. I don't know Zamenhof's reasoning, but I did find the connection interesting.
I agree. My idea wasn't meant to fix the language. My idea was to originally speak Esperanto and to touch it as minimalistically as possible so that it was usable according to my needs but still understandable to other Esperantists -- I didn't want to change it and was willing to accept the flaws I didn't mention here and to embrace it as I would let's say akkadian or latin. Because this wasn't me writing about the problems with Esperanto and arguing for it to be fixed, just me asking if I spoke this way according to the needs of the culture we are building, if people would be upset.
The problems I ran into was I am or was learning Esperanto in isolation of the community and speaking it with my family and making in the lingua franca of our work. All translations of our games, novels, textbooks and courses were to be taught and offered in Esperanto-Ido. I would have modified slightly only just enough. I felt depending on how extensive the changes were I would simply make clear it was an Esperantido but make sure that it was still readable by Esperantists, at the same time I felt that I was speaking more a dialect than something new altogether since at the time Esperanto was the base and the changes to it with Ido were minimal, but upon further inspection the changes I have made and not listed here because it's irrelevant are a complete overhaul and better fit for Interlingua which I preferred over Esperanto at the time, but the issues with Interlingua had never been resolved. I don't make modifications with the hopes of my changes being adopted. I just wish to be understood when I speak which explains my tendency to stress that I'm not creating a new language or a standard for others to adopt. I am trying to ask if I do this will I still be understood and will I be breaking a taboo -- the answer is yes. Those within the community already know this, new comers who evolve in isolation of the community don't.
My major concern was doing this independent of the community and creating anger in the community so I wanted to tread carefully and with an open mind. It would be very bad if I had (regardless of my personal opinions) done this and spread it as Esperanto without talking to others within the community first.
As someone mentioned Esperanto was here for 130 years, the time for change was 100 years ago. My major worry is that I do have an organization, we are implementing a school, we are bringing in children and looking for a language to speak as a bridge of sorts; I didn't need Esperantists to adopt my changes, but would have ignorantly spread it as part of Esperanto, and seen myself as someone supporting it. I really thought Esperanto was that language to use but now I feel that I might be better off using a different language and 'learning' from Esperanto rather than using Esperanto and building upon it to respect the Esperanto community as a whole. This doesn't mean I don't like Esperanto and won't speak it; on the contrary it's because I do like it that I'd rather learn from it rather than risk starting anything that might disrupt the communities order whether it be minor or extensive.
Just for fun, I think you can take the "mal-" prefix even further. What exactly would "mallakto" look like? Would you like a cup of "malkafo"? Esperanto is fun!
I can imagine malAndroid as iOS.
But is: kafo-mallakto = mal-malkafo-lakto?
In English, after the beach is clean (I mean the coast is clear) we could postexort the enemies to befriendment until we have freeship and brotherdom throughout the kinghood. And we won't settle for anything that only goes semi-way. That is if we can see our way transparent to do it.
Are we all in a concordance? Then let's initiate!
I think the goal of Esperanto is communication. If you want to create your own world in which you change Esperanto around and still want to use it to communicate, you will run into difficulties. I do not always agree with the way this course words things, but I DO understand it. If you want to create your own reality, you will have to decide if you want to communicate only with yourself or with the Esperanto community. If you want to communicate with Esperantists, you have to follow the rules closely enough to allow communication. I will occasionally hear minor disagreements about the "correct" word or phrase among Esperantists, but I have NEVER heard what I would consider a "fight" about it. Think of it as a game of chess: If you decide to start the game by moving the rook like a knight, it is still a game, but it is no longer chess. Learn Esperanto and use it as a language or don't learn Esperanto. Just don't try to change Esperanto and claim you are right and everyone else is wrong.
The purpose of any language is communication.
The right way to speak any language is in a way that other people can understand.
The wrong way to speak any language is with creative grammatical and lexical stylings that puzzle other people. At best they will think you talk funny and at worst they will think you are speaking in tongues.
Esperanto is a constructed language, not an under-construction language.
Orwell was wrong. You cannot change people's thinking by changing their language. You can be a sexist in Finnish (which has no genders) and you can be a feminist in Spanish (which has genders).
For all participants -- You probably know me by now how 'passionate' evangelist of Esperanto I'm becoming. Instead of learning faster, I spend too much time to analyse everything about EO.
In defence of inquisitive minds, including Iom_Korvo, I would like to point to this great statement from Pupeno.
>"But English already works quite well the way it is.” is the reason why not only 5% of the world, but almost the whole world choose not to learn Esperanto. I know Esperanto works and I know it is the best option out there and that’s why I defend it and advocate it as much as I can. But I will not stop raising the issues I see that could make Esperanto work better.
>~ people speak English and Spanish because it’s what’s around them, not by choice. It is not conceivable that they will fix them because something else that would be done by choice and they are not choosing anything. Pupeno.
It's fine when we debate without too much sentiment. Punishing every attempt to divert is not helping us to create a healthy cooperative community. The key difference with Esperanto is to consider everybody and nurture their attempt to communicate with the world in a neutral way.
PS. I prefer that a machine learning analysis is done to qualify the possible most optimal improvements. In the meantime we need to use e NEUTRAL ONLY solution that has the widest acceptance (and tested over 130 years).
Dankon por via belaj vortoj. Thank you also for your openness and understanding. Yes I am new to the Esperanto world I agree. There have been things that have made Esperanto not so easy for adoption in my field of work. I am a philosopher who builds community services, develops games and publishes books. I wholeheartedly believe in peace, my work in life is to try to build bridges, connect with people, and unite. I am a lover of languages and when I discovered Esperanto I was hesitant. It took me a long time to pick up Esperanto but when I did and learned more about it I was in love with what it stood for and believed it to be in alignment to what my work was all about. My nonprofit organizations entire goal is to build solutions, not create problems, and Esperanto was a beautiful solution I wanted to implement and promote. Unfortunately the deeper I fell into Esperanto, and the more I tried to use it to translate, the more I ran into the mal- issue. (The gender issue at least for me being resolved as I found a solution that works for me in Esperanto).
I recall the story in Volapuk that fell in part though not completely as a consequence of not being open to change, to being too rigid; I also recall a story where Esperanto faced some criticisms and Zamenhof open to reforming not wanting to fall into the trap of Volapuk attempted to make a few changes that were rejected by the community at large, I believe he called it a wasted year of his life. So I know Zamenhof was not against improvement the way some people in Esperanto seem to be – at least as I recall the story and as it stuck with me. His openness to improvement.
I teach in my work the consequences of being too closed, and too rigid, and I have learned to appreciate the feelings of all people. But what does a person do when they love and believe in something they have picked up so strongly and want to root for it and promote it, but also has stumbled across issues and feel that for the sake of what they are doing with their work they have to adopt some small improvements they hope will not anger too many people; just so their work does not become tongue twisters or lose the essence of what they speak? (I also run into this problem in English, there is no gender neutral term for referring to people, and the clumsy pronoun solutions offered don't quite feel natural -- so yes, no matter which language I speak I sometimes run into problems where the language is limited to express what I need for it to express, to properly express the culture and mindset I represent, I just desire for Esperanto to be able to express my culture as well when I am communicating with others)
I wrote in my update the problem I am having with mal- ." La malbela maljunulino mallaŭte malfermis la pordon al sia kelo kaj malrapide malsupreniris la ŝtuparon", and I am open to pure Esperanto solutions on this probelm.
I think if I were writing a poem of sorts this would not matter; but I write books that frequently speak of things that are often seemingly on the yin or 'butt' of these 'roots', and I consequently focus on games and works that explore the dark side of life without labeling it as negative or mal-icious.
I am mindful people feel strongly. I thought and still believe that Esperanto is the perfect vehicle by which to speak, more people will understand me when I use it than not, and because my work is focused on developing healthy cooperative communities, and accepting people from all diverse backgrounds and viewpoints Esperanto continues to be that language. I appreciate the strong others who attack me saying I view Esperanto as a game, and I inject some humor as a game developer to say yes I view life as a very serious game and work to create a life you can play, but that does not mean that I can ignore problems I am having or flaws that may act as deterrents or roadblocks in my learning process.
To note further, if I did not care what the community thought then I would simply create and publish the games and textbooks we are developing with no consideration or sensitivity to the community at large. This post was a way of reaching out to the community at least in one area; I know there is a community on lernu and reddit. To get a feel of what I would be dealing with if I did. When studying the gender issue in Esperanto I came across a similar mindset, a set of people who were angry about it because of a decade of tradition and others who were unphased. In the end it doesn't matter what I say or do whether I am understood or not if people don't adopt those changes. This is the same thing with the gender; if people don't adopt the gender changes then it never becomes standard. I was noting while exploring the gender that a few books and organizations have tackled this issue in their own way, ri- was an example of an attempt to tackle the gender issue, to name a few and some books wrote and published in Esperanto using that adoption. No matter where we go we will always encounter people who feel strongly about something; and I am truly open to that constructive dialogue. At any point that the conversation becomes destructive and where it becomes clear to me that some people will not want to discuss it because it is so upsetting all I can do is be mindful and respectful that they feel that way but still be mindful of the issues I am facing and tackle them head on as true to my core beliefs, feelings and personal needs.
I strongly disagree with your statement that English works well as an international language. It is, right now, the language of economic opportunity. Historically, French USED to be the language of diplomacy. A couple of thousand years ago, Latin and Greek would have been extremely useful around the Mediterranean. Economic power does not make a language easy to learn or "good." It simply means you can pound a square peg into a round hole if you have enough force. If you want to talk about how well it works, based on what it is, Esperanto is easily the most successful!
The "quote" comes from http://ayadan.moosader.com/2013/11/08/esperanto-controversey-the-ic-suffix-2/ by Pupeno, and means the opposite (as we here agree). Based on that "justification" many decide to ignore Esperanto (neutral auxiliary languages).
The point is that, even we should not mess up with Esperanto the way English was done, we can discuss potential improvements, primarily for the purpose of using as AI/robot's language. Controlled community experiments can also be beneficial.
I think the best way if via research/Machine Learning algorithms and socio/linguists recommendations.
This time I tried 'less strong' approach with Iom_Korvo and it worked much better. Let's continue with learning, promoting, and communicating in Esperanto. ĝuu
Very good to have this discussion. I believe it helps "us" to get our heads around the whole concept of an "International Language".
Today's Esperanto has changed from Zamenhof's original ... Esperanto does need to grow with other languages. I do believe we all must work hard to hold to Zamenhof's principles. We need to keep the language simple and easy to learn. We need to carefully choose any new words and "grammar" so that they work for users from other languages as Zamenhof did.
The Universal Esperanto Association is made up of Esperanists from around the world. This association (& committee) has the ability to ensure that the language continues to conform to Zamenhof's principles, stay as simple as possible and work for as many people as possible. I suggest we should all support Esperanto through the UEA. Lets fall back to this "authority" rather than going off on our own. Whenever we teach (or learn) lets try to hold to the universally agreed to rules.
Je via sano.
I appreciate your effort to analyse possible improvements in Esperanto.
Remember that Esperanto is international language and don't try to correlate it with messy English. Dropping the accusative may sound like saying 'I love she' (see, EN has partial accusative not lost yet, and doing complete conversion sounds odd).
If you like to introduce matro instead of patrino, then you are complicating the single root (patro) grammar principle (do you see what happened to EN with no grammar principles?).
Option would be patriĉo for masculine version, or vir-patro (I don't prefer prefixes) but for majority of speakers it's completely natural to accept the standard and focus on clear communication. Best to assume patro=parent, not the sexist father.
As a fun exercise, try changing the sexist wo-man/man into fan/man, and see how you go.
Might be best to have machine learning processes to identify improvements that are good for all cases. ĝuu
My original reason for dropping the -n was more because of an accident, I have been having a hard time placing the -n correctly and most of the time was dropping it when writing without meaning to. So when I discovered that Ido dropped the -n I really liked that and assumed others had had difficulty with the -n too which is why it had been dropped in Ido. I've studied a handful of different languages (not reflected in my duolingo :D) but in my studies until now I have never paid attention to what type of object the word in my sentence is, I just tended to need to know what was a verb, adjective, or noun and place it in the right order so it just feels right. In this scenario with the -n the struggle has been such a pain that at times I've just dropped it altogether. I don't know why it's not easy , maybe because I have to figure out/think about which one is the subject which one is the object, and these are pretty good points. Thank you for the article you linked I'm going to read it thoroughly. I've seen a few discussions tackling gender in Esperanto and one person I read had a great idea I think similar to this article about how to keep to Esperanto I like the idea of patro as parent, thank you!
Even English has the accusative case, it isn't "I like he", but: "I like him", "mi ŝatas lin".
I don't know why but this was a simple explanation that helped me immensely with putting the pieces together, thank you.
Learning about the grammar rules is like better knowing your tool (language). You can learn skills (eg. play instruments) without paying attention to principles (like native language), but knowing the principles makes you better at expressing the message with less ambiguity for the receiver. By knowing music theory you can play without trying many times, like in our language learning by heart instead of creating new expressions by logic.
Regarding accusative -n, you control the meaning of the sentence, rather than the receiver assuming what they want. eg. La kato saltas sur la tablo-n means jumps onto the table , while 'sur la tablo' would mean 'on the table'. Some might incorrectly assume that the cat wasn't on the table in the 2nd case if you don't use explicit onto which is equal to -n in EO.
True. I have never been strong in this area, so I just need more time to focus on accusatives. I can see their benefits.
I just finished reading that article you linked and I truly enjoyed it. It circled back to my question "Is there a wrong way to speak Esperanto?" and she concludes:
"But here’s my perspective: Speak however you want to speak. Some people do use -iĉ and deal with it when people immediately point it out and start complaining. If enough people use it, it will catch on. If enough people use it, maybe we can gain more respect, rather than abrasiveness, from fellow Esperantistoj.
I would perhaps ask those who are anti-iĉ to view it like religion: I’m atheist, and you might hate atheists and completely disagree with me, but if someone found that out about me while out in the world, I wouldn’t expect to be shamed or continually challenged for my beliefs. "
I thought it was beautiful ending and gave me some perspective.
I'm against that, and I'm not discussing it. That's not Esperanto. It changes Esperanto and creates compatibility problems and makes the learning harder because you should to learn too gender systems even in the most compatible (yet not compatible) way of use it. So, no, it helps nothing. Esperanto works not only fine without that, but better, and complaints about it proof nothing.
It's really absurd to think that a non existing problem is going to be solved creating a real problem.
You are aware that in all the languages Zamenhof spoke (he did not speak English), O is the neuter ending. All Esperanto nouns are neuter. Gender is only in the meanings of words. An instruisto can be a man or a woman, and you can tell the difference by the pronouns that refer back to it. An instruistino can only be a woman. Gender is not a grammatical feature of the language, which you can see because you don't say la faminaj lertinaj instruistinoj or la etina amantina patrino
People who aren't sexist don't tend to see sexism under every bush and stone. They just talk.
Yes Ken you are right Esperanto does not have a Gender problem at all. And all the people who are arguing for gender reform are just completely and absolutely sexist filling the air with noise...
Look. This book has been written before by others, so no point in going back and forth, at the end of the day this is your opinion, that's fine. My opinion is in line with the group of Esperantists and non-Esperantists that feel that it is a problem. Whether we disagree or agree is not a problem for either of us, you speak and think as you wish and I will do the same.
Iom_Korvo, you are right, but the problem is not in the speaking, but in the contents of speech. These aspiring Orwells don't realize that you can't change thought by changing the language, but you can change the language by changing the thought. Sometimes you just have to change the usage, such as making "actor" inclusive by referring to women as "actors" and never saying "actress." That change is in progress. A change that is complete: a manager includes both men and women; we don't say "manager" for men and "manageress" for women any longer. It's now an inclusive word.
Feminists prefer the word "woman," even though its original meaning is "spouse of a man." The original word for adult female human was "wife," but that has changed to mean "female spouse." Usage changes meaning and that is the important part.
No language is sexist. Some of the people who speak them might be.
You just don't have interest at all in learn and speak Esperanto. You are just another beginner who thinks Esperanto is a game and don't take it seriously and you think your own unexperienced opinion is as worthy as the one from experienced people. That's all. When people take the learning of a language like you, they are loosing their time and other people's time.
Mia amiko, mi pensis ke vi diris " I'm against that, and I'm not discussing it." Se vi estas kontraŭ tio, kial tiam ĉu vi daŭrigos? kaj kun insultoj ne malpli. Mi komprenas viajn sentojn, sed, ne estas necese al ataki iun kiu vidas malsamajn de vi en penso.
First: I'm not talking Esperanto with you.
Second: It's not surprising to see that you don't understand the concept of context.
Third: I'm sure I haven't used any insult. If you felt insulted it's your problem. Anyway I see you too much worried about whether other people is insulting you or not, but not worried at all about offending Esperanto speakers.
Mi parolas Esperanton por mi ne por vi. Ke vi komprenas min estas sufiĉas. Tiu diris via punkto estas prenita. Mi komprenas.
You are effectively creating a personal language that is based on Esperanto. Since a language is a social convention, Esperanto has become one, too. If you violate a social convention, such as greeting people by slapping your forehead instead of waving your hand, others won't understand. That's true for your vocabulary salad as well. Unless, of course, you begin conversations by handing out pamphlets in standard Esperanto defining your words.
You could use your modified Esperanto in a personal journal. Since a journal is designed to communicate only with the writer, you'd have no problems. You could make even more changes, such as expressing evidentiality in the verb or subtracting the accusative case (since your native language indicates the accusative by strict word order rules, which you subconsciously follow in Esperanto).