Meddelelser: 32
Sprog: English
tommjames (Vise profilen) 24. okt. 2012 22.46.55
sudanglo:So what is the problem?The fact that this:
"A good reading command of Esperanto can be acquired in 1-3 months"
is completely irrelevant to a forum purposed for discussion in English.
razlem (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 00.14.18
neutralAgh. This. No.
erinja (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 01.10.46
sudanglo:But obviously, it is much easier for many who can read English well enough, to post their contributions in Esperanto rather than English. If an active command of English were that easy to acquire, then one wouldn't need Esperanto.Wow, I wonder if we can get a 'beating a dead horse' icon to use in the new lernu forums.
A good reading command of Esperanto can be acquired in 1-3 months. So what is the problem?
I wonder what an appropriately international symbol of beating a dead horse would be...?
burungmarah (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 02.59.51
But I can still summarize what ĉevino said. As far as I can recall, s/he stated that Esperanto can't be forced upon the people or governments by means of propaganda or such, but it needs to be promoted based on its qualities. That's all I remember.
RiotNrrd (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 03.12.09
The idea of a mixed-language English/Esperanto forum is not without merit. However, I don't think that HERE is the proper location. I would say that such a forum would be more for intermediate students, whereas the purpose of this forum is to serve the needs of beginners.
I certainly would not argue against the creation of such a forum in the new Lernu (not that I have any actual say about such things). I would say it's a worthy experiment, at least.
antoniomoya (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 05.57.51
sudanglo:But obviously, it is much easier for many who can read English well enough, to post their contributions in Esperanto rather than English.I totally agree, because that is exactly my case.
sudanglo:If an active command of English were that easy to acquire, then one wouldn't need Esperanto.Amike.
burungmarah (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 07.08.08
hebda999:"The original Lingua Franca was a mixed language composed mostly (80%) of Italian with a broad vocabulary drawn from Turkish, French, Greek, Arabic, Portuguese and Spanish. It was in use throughout the eastern Mediterranean as the language of commerce and diplomacy in and around the Renaissance era. At that time, Italian speakers dominated seaborne commerce in the port cities of the Ottoman empire. Franca was the Italian word for Frankish. Its usage in the term lingua franca originated from its meaning in Arabic and Greek, dating from before the Crusades and during the Middle Ages, whereby all Western Europeans were called "Franks" or Faranji in Arabic and Phrankoi in Greek during the times of the late Eastern Roman Empire.[3] The term lingua franca is first recorded in English in 1678."To distinguish from the other use of the term 'lingua franca' that we are familiar with, the said language is also known by another name - Sabir, which is derived from the Italian word sapere "to know". It was indeed a very successful auxiliary language in its time; sadly it was more of an oral language; not much research has been made over the years due to lack of written Sabir sources and it's very hard to find any outside the French play "Le Bourgeois gentilhomme".
The wiki said Sabir was used from the 11th till the 19th century; it didn't state clearly why or how it fell out of use in the century that Esperanto was created, or even whether Zamenhof was aware of the existence of this peculiar contact language to the extent that Esperanto could be inspired by Sabir.
Learning about the history of previous linguae francae and the trends of the current one, English, could help us project and plan the future of Esperanto.
sudanglo (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 13.34.07
antoniomoya:And I am sure that you are not alone.sudanglo:But obviously, it is much easier for many who can read English well enough, to post their contributions in Esperanto rather than English.I totally agree, because that is exactly my case.
hebda999 (Vise profilen) 25. okt. 2012 13.38.56
sudanglo:What is then a language barrier for? It must have purpose to exist.antoniomoya:And I am sure that you are not alone.sudanglo:But obviously, it is much easier for many who can read English well enough, to post their contributions in Esperanto rather than English.I totally agree, because that is exactly my case.
sudanglo (Vise profilen) 26. okt. 2012 13.00.34
hebda999:What is then a language barrier for? It must have purpose to exist.A very interesting question, Hebda. It is a puzzle as to why so many different languages evolved.
I believe some academics have argued that it is to keep foreigners at bay. To flag that you are a member of a particular group and not some other group.
If inter-tribal cooperation had been maximal in mankind's early history then a common creole would have evolved. A pra-Esperanto so to speak would already have been invented.
You can't say that early man didn't walk about a lot. We are supposed to have originated from a very restricted location in Africa and then gone walk-about over the entire planet.
It would have been different for the English since it took a long time to invent the cross-Channel ferry. The French to would have had to have had a different language because they invented La Académie Française to keep out foreign intrusion.
Maybe the whole Esperanto enterprise is doomed because of a natural xenophobia built into our DNA.