Fenris_kcf:Which level does one have to reach in order to be "allowed" to propose reforms?

bryku:I want to reform German and you must follow my concepts unconditionally because I know better:

Seems that a better qualification than Esperanto speaking proficiency would be English reading comprehension: As one can read for himself at the beginning of this thread, ASCarroll never said anything like “Here are my reforms. Obey them and live.” He asked if people would be able to understand him if he started using them.

Which might still be annoying for some, amusing for others, but if people are going to keep beating his virtual corpse, let at least be for something he actually said.

And maybe for something so many in here didn’t also do to a greater or lesser extent when they were new to Esperanto. (This in reference to confessions by several people on another thread.)

Like I said before, many long-time speakers can sympathize with beginners having reformist ideas. We just expect that the beginner will take the wise advice of laying off the reforms till they actually speak the language well (and also, not to get offended when no one is interested in hearing about the reforms and the reaction is negative).

How fluent? Able to write a paragraph or so, at least, of Esperanto that is mostly without errors. Able to present their ideas in the Esperanto forums with relative ease. If you don't speak well enough to present and discuss your ideas in the Esperanto forums, you definitely aren't there yet.

On the English reading comprehension, ASC knew what he was getting into, because the idea of reforms had already come up in another thread and he was taken aback by the strong negative reaction. Sure, it could/should have been politer, but if you have already been bitten once, what would you realistically expect when you bring up the topic again? He did acknowledge as much, that he had a feeling that that bullet point would become the focus of the thread.

Fenris_kcf:@erinja
You mentioned several times that reforms of any kind should not come from beginners, but from a base of experienced speakers. Though i don't agree on that totally, the real question, that hunts me is: Which level does one have to reach in order to be "allowed" to propose reforms? And don't you think that the hardcore-Fundamentistoj would reject his/her proposal nevertheless?

yyaann:I might be wrong, but pacific coexistence of both variants doesn't seem possible to me. If, as an example, some speakers consider patro to mean "father" while others understand it as "parent", wouldn't it be unmanageable?

OMG, how often does this has to be repeated? To avoid this inconsistency one can just integrate new words as neutral counterparts to the immanent mal roots like "patro" or "frato" (e.g. "parento" and … urm … i don't know … "vedo" (from Norwegian "ved": "next to" or "aside of"; similar to the english "with" )) and understand the old male words as synonyms for the iĉ-form of the new words (e.g. "patro"="parentiĉo" and "frato"="vediĉo" ).

I'd say that until you have at the very least reached intermediate level you have no business talking about changes to Esperanto, but then as you point out it would ultimately be a purely academic exercise since Fundamentistoj would continue to reject the changes. In reality it should not be "allowed" unless you are part of the regulating body that is capable of actually enforcing such a change.

I completely disagree that the inconsistency can be so easily overcome by merely introducing neutral counterparts to the male roots. It is entirely un-Esperantic to needlessly introduce new synonyms, which will never obviate the need to learn the traditional roots since they are so ingrained into the literature and common use. I don't know how many inherently masculine words exist, but do we really want to add that many new words to gain an artificial symmetry? Unless we completely outlaw inherently masculine words, the "purity" of -icx will be forever stained by this doubling of the required vocabulary associated with it. I just don't think it's possible for -icx to add any real value to the language without causing a break in backwards-compatibility.

morfran:

Fenris_kcf:Which level does one have to reach in order to be "allowed" to propose reforms?

bryku:I want to reform German and you must follow my concepts unconditionally because I know better:

Seems that a better qualification than Esperanto speaking proficiency would be English reading comprehension: As one can read for himself at the beginning of this thread, ASCarroll never said anything like “Here are my reforms. Obey them and live.” He asked if people would be able to understand him if he started using them.

Which might still be annoying for some, amusing for others, but if people are going to keep beating his virtual corpse, let at least be for something he actually said.

And maybe for something so many in here didn’t also do to a greater or lesser extent when they were new to Esperanto. (This in reference to confessions by several people on another thread.)

He did ask if people would be able to understand him when he used these reforms, not if. He clearly stated he was going to use modified Esperanto from the beginning, and was merely asking us how we think people would understand and react to it. It's true that he didn't say "here are my reforms; obey", but in a way you are forcing others to use/learn reformed language when you choose to use it to speak to them. This is no different than me deciding to use the base-12 number system regardless of whether or not others use it (even though it is better). If you have to use data I've recorded in base 12 I am exactly forcing you to learn it and to use it.

This was an interesting thread. The lessons I'm drawing from it are:

The community is still just as devoted and capable of protecting itself against reformistoj and their attempts to destroy this language.
This ASCarroll fiacxulo could pose a continuing threat to his local community if he didn't take Novatago's advice to stop messing with everything.
We should remain vigilant against trolls and reformists, especially in this section. Why isn't there a watchlist for the worst of them anyway?
The Fundamento is still the unchanging, unchangeable basis of the language.
Erinja, Novatago, and several other community members are obvious authorities in the community and I should take care in studying their Esperanto to improve my own.
Esperanto remains free from change and canonical to this day.

kaŝperanto:He did ask if people would be able to understand him when he used these reforms, not if. He clearly stated he was going to use modified Esperanto from the beginning, and was merely asking us how we think people would understand and react to it. It's true that he didn't say "here are my reforms; obey", but in a way you are forcing others to use/learn reformed language when you choose to use it to speak to them. This is no different than me deciding to use the base-12 number system regardless of whether or not others use it (even though it is better). If you have to use data I've recorded in base 12 I am exactly forcing you to learn it and to use it.

Except the comment about base-12, this hits the nail on the head. Using a degenerate Esperanto itself is an attack on the community of Esperantists in that you really are forcing them to learn it. You're just using a back door method to make people think it's normal and potentially use it themselves. That is what the OP was doing this whole time if you'll read said OP's other threads. I don't understand why you're still defending him/her/it.

kaŝperanto:I completely disagree that the inconsistency can be so easily overcome by merely introducing neutral counterparts to the male roots. It is entirely un-Esperantic to needlessly introduce new synonyms, which will never obviate the need to learn the traditional roots since they are so ingrained into the literature and common use. I don't know how many inherently masculine words exist, but do we really want to add that many new words to gain an artificial symmetry? Unless we completely outlaw inherently masculine words, the "purity" of -icx will be forever stained by this doubling of the required vocabulary associated with it. I just don't think it's possible for -icx to add any real value to the language without causing a break in backwards-compatibility.

I agree that it would make the language a little bit harder regarding the vocabulary, but i think the merit outweighs the detriment. However in no case it mars the "backward-compatibility", as you named it.

I have been in and around the field of constructed international auxiliary languages (conIALs), including Esperanto, Interlingua, Ido, and others, for many years. It never ceases to amaze me (including my recollections of when I myself many years ago was a newcomer) how many newbies think that they know better than the experiences of hundreds or thousands of fluent users generation after generation. Learn it. Become fluent in it. Then, when you are a true expert, maybe others will pay some vague attention to your criticisms and suggestions. Until you have that expertise, hold your tongue and do not bother real users.

bartlett22183:I have been in and around the field of constructed international auxiliary languages (conIALs), including Esperanto, Interlingua, Ido, and others, for many years. It never ceases to amaze me (including my recollections of when I myself many years ago was a newcomer) how many newbies think that they know better than the experiences of hundreds or thousands of fluent users generation after generation. Learn it. Become fluent in it. Then, when you are a true expert, maybe others will pay some vague attention to your criticisms and suggestions. Until you have that expertise, hold your tongue and do not bother real users.

Exactly this. Learning Esperanto is a choice. You can learn the real Esperanto and join the community, or you can get the hell out like the OP did.

kaŝperanto:It's true that he didn't say "here are my reforms; obey", but in a way you are forcing others to use/learn reformed language when you choose to use it to speak to them. This is no different than me deciding to use the base-12 number system regardless of whether or not others use it (even though it is better). If you have to use data I've recorded in base 12 I am exactly forcing you to learn it and to use it.

I see what you’re saying, but it would only be true if we had to use his data. And we really don’t; it’s entirely up to us whose posts we read, and which ones we respond to. He can speak Dothraki in here for all it matters to me; if I can’t read it, I won’t.

Besides, experiments with neologisms are so common among beginners, they’re practically a rite of passage. Expecting that a beginner who questions the logic of this or that will abruptly suspend their disbelief just because some paternalistic spertuloj told them to is not so much a failure on the beginner’s part as lapse of memory on the spertulo’s part of what it was like to be a beginner.

AllenHartwell:...

Oh, Allen. With each new over-the-top, quasi-fascistic post you make, I remember how much I miss the Dwight Shrute character from The Office. Keep ‘em coming!