Forigite

Hyperboreus:Neither can you expect to join the forum of the Westboro Baptist Church and not be bashed if you start critizising christianity.

I think a better analogy, with perhaps fewer negative undertones, might be that of a piano player going to a forum for guitarists and talking about how stupid guitar playing is. Why play guitar? It's a waste of time. Piano is SO much better. In EVERY way. Chopin, Beethoven, all the greats played piano. Where are the classical guitarists from that era? There aren't any, and that's because piano is just plain and indisputably the winner in the who-is-better contest. In fact, the guitar is a negative influence, since the time spent learning and playing guitar could more profitably be spent learning a superior instrument: piano (of course), although if you don't like piano there are many other keyboarded variants. Heck, even the accordion is more valuable to learn than the guitar, which is obvious because so few people play it.

And so on; you get the point.

You see, this piano player isn't going to find himself very warmly received. And that's because he's behaving like a jackass. Telling the guitar players how great piano is and how stupid guitar is just isn't going to go over very well with the guitarists. Which ought to be obvious to him before he even creates an account to log in with. And his "point" is completely pointless. The fact that he's even bothering tells us way more about him than it does about either piano or guitar.[1] Even if he really, really, REALLY believes that he is totally right, and that piano really, truly IS better than guitar and that the guitar is just a stupid instrument that distracts people away from learning the truly valuable instruments (like piano, or harpsichord, or organ, etc.). Even so, it just isn't going to matter to the guitar players. Their "thing" is the guitar. Period. Full stop.[2]

So, yes, coming into a forum about Esperanto and dumping all over it is entirely trollish behavior. It is the same sort of jackassery the piano man is demonstrating in the above analogy.

Don't be the piano man.[3]

But if you are determined to be the piano man, then as far as I am concerned this discussion is done, as there's little else to contribute. You are welcome to have the last word.[4]

--------------------
[1] For the record, I play piano and not guitar. But I like both instruments, and certainly don't believe learning guitar is a total waste of time. In real life, I'm the piano man myself, but metaphorically, in the above analogy, I'm totally in with the guitarists.

[2] And, of course, it's likely that some of the guitar players ALSO like, and even play, the piano or other keyboards. But since they probably also have developed some perspective, the anti-guitar message won't likely be appreciated by them either.

[3] And for GOD'S SAKE don't be the drummer, either. But that's a different analogy entirely.

[4] I'm hoping it contains the word "elitist". If you can make it smugly arrogant while at the same time laughably uninformed, I'd much appreciate it.

Hmmmm, "jackassery". I like it. It has a nice flow. Don't believe I've ever heard it before.

And just for the record, while the piano and the guitar are both fine instruments, my favorite is still the violin. Vivaldi and Rossini are fine but any proficient fiddler can get my feet to tapping -- especially the Irish.

Don't anybody get upset. I'm just trying to introduce a little levity into a thread that's gotten all too serious.

I like this analogy a lot.

The author is very right. If someone is very prejudiced against any language including
one designed to help end troubles with language prejudice, then, it would be difficult
to convince them otherwise. Many great critics very infrequently really offer any solutions
and often don't even really have a point.

quieta:Hmmmm, "jackassery". I like it. It has a nice flow. Don't believe I've ever heard it before.

And just for the record, while the piano and the guitar are both fine instruments, my favorite is still the violin. Vivaldi and Rossini are fine but any proficient fiddler can get my feet to tapping -- especially the Irish.

Don't anybody get upset. I'm just trying to introduce a little levity into a thread that's gotten all too serious.

Husaaved: One could argue that creating a language, teaching it to enough people to form a substantial movement and then advocating for its international adoption in order to enhance global communication is impractical - but as all of you can see, its "practicality" has no bearing on whether or not its possible. Arguing from that defeatist position of "practicality" is limiting and justifies the maintenance of unjust status quos. It keeps us from testing the limits of possibility. I believe instead of advocating for Esperanto or another IAL, we should be learning the languages of our ancestors, and if we are lucky enough to already speak them then we should encourage others to do the same and learn other natural languages. Many of you already are learning natural languages - great! That's one of the reasons the Esperanto movement attracted me in the first place, but I came to realize that its aims are in direct opposition t...

My country's nearest neighbour is Papua New Guinea ... PNG has a population of just over 6 million and they speak over 800 different languages. Yes.... over 800 different languages for just 6 million people. It is one of the most linguistically and culturally diverse places on earth.

Now .. PNG is also a neighbour of Indonesia. Indonesia has around 700 languages.

In an ideal world with ideal language development ... how do you think the people of Indonesia and the people of PNG should communicate between themselves and between nations? They have both developed relatively easy to use lingua francas ... but what would you have suggested?

The Declaration of Boulogne says (in Esperanto):

Materiala mastro de tiu ĉi lingvo estas la tuta mondo kaj ĉiu deziranto povas eldonadi en aŭ pri tiu ĉi lingvo ĉiajn verkojn, kiajn li deziras, kaj uzadi la lingvon por ĉiaj eblaj celoj

which I translate as follows:

The rightful owner of this language is the entire world and everyone who desires may publish in or about this language anything which they desire, and use the language for any possible goal whatsoever.

So, in otherwords, if we accept a literal interpretation of the declaration, then the only thing stopping the "Esperanto movement" from being whatever evil thing anyone wants to claim, is the people who are already involved in the movement. As far as I am aware, despite the so-called elite and privelged nature of having internet access, few if any Esperantists are either racists or pro-genocide.

Yes, please keep in mind, that there is a difference between Esperanto and the Esperanto movement. The former is just a language anyone can use for or without any goal ((s)he becomes an esperantist just by using it, see Bulonja Deklaracio), while the latter has a common ideological ground (worldwide peaceful communication on an equal base).
lernu.net is for learning the language and not necessarily for becoming part of the E-o movement.

Kirilo81:Yes, please keep in mind, that there is a difference between Esperanto and the Esperanto movement. The former is just a language anyone can use for or without any goal ((s)he becomes an esperantist just by using it, ...

Theoretically jes, Kirilo, but it is quite difficult, I would have thought, to learn Esperanto, at this stage of its development, without being influenced by the political purpose it is imbued with.

Indeed the very act of trying to speak and write correctly in Esperanto is inescapably linked with its raison d'être.

One of the strongest traditions in the Esperanto-speaking community is that the language should not be allowed to develop randomly in a way which undermines the systematicity of the language - which tradition derives 100% from the view of its intended role.

sudanglo:Theoretically jes, Kirilo, but it is quite difficult, I would have thought, to learn Esperanto, at this stage of its development, without being influenced by the political purpose it is imbued with.

Indeed the very act of trying to speak and write correctly in Esperanto is inescapably linked with its raison d'être.

I disagree entirely, simply because I have no interest whatsoever in the Esperanto movement and yet here I am trying to learn the language. Esperanto is a fascinating language in its regularity, and that, compounded with its ease of learning, is reason enough to study it. If anything, with growth of the internet and English, Esperanto's political purposes are less relevant to a new learner today than ever.

I don't care about international communication, or visiting other cultures, or peace through language or any of that stuff -- because I can already do most of it in English. I'm studying Esperanto purely for Esperanto, and all the political and philosophical trappings that come along with the education materials are merely nuisances.

Nobody I've mentioned Esperanto to has been jazzed about the old Zamhenhofian au'xiliary language goal, but they all find my descriptions of its highly regular nature to be captivating.

But Esperanto's regularity and the principles which guide its evolution are intricately bound up with the reason for it being created in the first place.

Frequently the discussions in these forums as to whether this or that form is acceptable or consistent with the language are an arena in which the overiding tradition of conservation of its suitability for its destined purpose are paramount.

So, Kirilo, whilst you personally may have no interest in promoting the spread of Esperanto, in order to use the language correctly you have to accept the sociolinguistic values of the community - which are inseparable from the notion that Esperanto is an appropriate solution to the language problem.

An irregular Esperanto makes no sense, not because it couldn't one day evolve this way, but because it is inconsistent with its role.

Should Esperanto ever go the way of the national languages it would be reduced to being a meaningless hobby. Therefore if you want to continue to be fascinated by its structure, it is in your interest to align yourself with the majority view.

To argue that Esperanto's political purposes are less relevant to a new learner today than ever before, is to hasten the death of the language that you find so interesting.

Any language exists to serve the interests of the community that speaks it. This is no less true of Esperanto, and the interests of the community of Esperantists is to see the language used on a much wider scale for the reason its inventor had in mind.

That political purpose has kept Esperanto alive through many setbacks for 125 years.

Without this compelling motivation there really is no point to Esperanto at all, and no reason for the dedication of so many of its users which has kept the language going through thick and thin, constantly adapting the language to a changing world without loss of the languages's essential characteristics, which you find so intriguing.

It is perfectly alright for any individual to take up Esperanto for any reason at all, but to advocate a universal disregard for its raison d'être is to consign the language to the rubbish heap of history.

Esperanto lives and endures because it has political purpose. Without it, it would be a mere transient intellectual curiosity - probably long since forgotten.