Esperanto is Easiest Language ever!
No conjugation, no reflection, 1:1 match between letters and pronounce, and no gramatic gender!
Hmm maybe second easiest language will be english..? I am not native but English seems fairly easy (In fact I thought it is hard before starting learning german...Aweeee)
I think English is pretty easy to get okay at, pretty hard to be really proficient at.
Esperanto was designed to be easy, and that's fun!
I actually got 5/5 on the progress test for Esperanto this morning, and I haven't quite finished the tree yet, which is kind of nuts, really!
Good to see that you're enjoying learning Esperanto. This language is supposed to be easy for everyone and because of that there is no place for any regularities, unlike to natural languages.
I don't know what your native language is, but speaking as a non-native speaker, I have to admit that isn't one of the easier languages. Spelling, grammar, pronunciation can be a pain in the neck. English seems easy, as there are much resources to learn it and you can come across it everywhere.
Anyway, good luck with learning!
Hmm, i'm quite reluctant to make such statements. Esperanto is very simple and thus easy to learn, yes. But i'm sure that there are other languages, that are even simpler. But English is definetly not the second. I can name a dozen of languages (not only constructed ones), that are easier.
Ido ( Internaciona Dualinguo por Omni ) would be a candidate. It started as a series of suggested simplifications to Esperanto, and evolved into a separate language. Word building in Ido is 100% regular with NO exceptions. In Esperanto there are 20 family words that have male roots. Ido has two gendered pairs, patro/matro (father/mother) and viro/muliero (man/woman), all other words describing people or animals have neutral roots, and suffixes to show sex, eg frato (sibling) fratulo (brother) fratino (sister), kavalo (horse) kavalulo (stallion) kavalino (mare).
It would be interesting to see a real comparison of the two in terms of complexity - the little I've seen, it looks very much like the Ido of Esperanto it started out as and on a similar level of complexity. That said, it isn't a language I've looked into deeply, so I'd be very interested to know if there's any concrete evidence it's actually easier.
(Even if it were, at the moment it wouldn't tempt me because there are simply too few speakers to talk to in it and it doesn't have anything else to tempt me with write now, but I'd still be most interested in learning about any ways it was demonstrably easier than its parent :))
1) Esperanto has special letters not shared by any other language. To type them properly you need special software running on your computer. In The Fundamento (Esperanto holy book) it says you can use "h" after these letters if you can't use the special letters. Since typewriters became common people started using "x" instead of "h". So English "sh" can be spelled three different ways in Esperanto, ŝ, sh, sx.
Ido uses the standard Latin alphabet. No need for special software or workarounds. Anyone with a standard Latin keyboard simply types "sh".
2) Esperanto word building is irregular. Comb =kombilo (combing tool), but brush=bruso ( no "ilo" suffix). How do you tell when to use which? You just have to remember. Bovaro= herd of cattle, ŝafaro= herd of sheep, but arbaro=forest (not just any group of trees).
Ido word building is 100% regular. There are NO exceptions. Kombilo=comb, brusilo=brush. Bovaro=herd of cattle, muttonaro=herd of sheep, arbaro=group of trees, foresto=forest.
3) Family/relationship terms. Esperanto has 20'ish male roots for family words with no sex neutral equivalent. Father/mother=patro/patrino. Parent= unu el la gepatroj (one of the parents). Some words can be either male root or neutral depending on the opinion of the person using them, eg amiko = friend or male friend depending on the opinion of the person using it.
Ido has 2 gendered pairs. Father/mother=patro/matro, man/woman=viro/muliero. Parent=genitoro. All other words are sex neutral. Amiko=friend, amikulo=male friend, amikino=female friend. No ambiguity or possible misunderstanding.
Thanks, this is interesting :)
I wouldn't actually count point one as necessarily a difficulty. Different alphabets/letters are, IMO, sometimes easier than having to learn a new pronunciation for a letter you're familiar with, just my experience.
Point 2) yeah, I can agree with that. Point 3) yes, I know some people have issues with the gendering of certain nouns in EO.
And again, thank you. Interesting to hear comparisons from someone who actually knows enough about both languages :)
I had never heard of Ido before reading this. THanks. As for the 2 gendered pairs, I still struggle with patro/patrino. Having the gender "marker" in the middle of the word is not that helpful.
One obvious candidate is Toki Pona. But i'm not sure if that is an unfair competitor. But there are hundreds of constructed languages (see http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listo_de_planlingvoj_kaj_planlingvaj_projektoj for a almost complete list) and though i can't tell for sure, i'm quite confident, that there are some, which are easier than Esperanto.
Hmmm, Toki Pona has fewer words, I'm not sure it makes it easier, particularly to actually use, because the lack of vocabulary means that there are a lot of ways to say a given thing and it's not always that easy to understand what someone is saying.
For example, ways to say coffee, courtesy of a quick Google:
telo pimaje wawa
telo ike mute
telo pi lape ala
telo seli pimeja pi lape ala
telo seli wawa
Simple to learn the vocab? Sure. Simple/easy to use? Not so convinced. And honestly, I'm not sure that a language where it's easy to learn the vocabulary really counts overall as an easy language.
Having a small vocabulary actually makes Toki Pona more complex in some ways. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of the concept and I totally plan to learn TP at some point, but I'm not convinced it qualifies as an easier language in any practical sense.
(I'm also not by any means claiming that Esperanto is the easiest language ever, but saying "hey, here are lots of constructed languages, one of them is bound to be easier" is not a very convincing argument ;-))
Is there a scientific study telling that Toki Pona is easier than Esperanto? (For whom?)
I am not asserting Esperanto is the easiest language - but out of the fifty most used languages on wikipedia, it's probably the easiest, at least for speakers of European languages, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#100_000.2B_articles . Maybe even between all 288 languages which have a wikipedia...
With the disclaimer that my knowledge of Toki Pona is almost entirely second hand, I think the "Toki Pona is easier" argument is based in the assumption that "simpler" or "fewer words" must necessarily mean "easier". Toki Pona has fewer words to learn but that means a certain amount of mental gymnastics to express even quite simple concepts, and also means that the gymnastics must be performed by listener/reader as well as speaker/writer.
In short, I share your scepticism on that one.