Zamenhof wrote the Fundamento as the single, totally canonical basis for his language. The Declaration of Boulogne ratified it as unchangeable and unamendable to prevent dialects from forming and another potential Ido crisis. That made the document the standard of what is and isn't Esperanto. That's quite simply all there is to it. That which conforms to the Fundamento is Esperanto. That which doesn't conform to its specifications for what Esperanto is isn't Esperanto. That's just all there is to it. I didn't make the decision. I just recognize that Esperanto is pointless unless everyone follows it. I'm not being a dick. I'm just stating the facts. Esperanto is unchangeable because it, by definition, is so. There may be suboptimal features. There may be things I personally prefer were different about it. But it's over a century too late to change anything now. If someone still has a problem accepting that - which is the will of the overall community mind you - then they really should go join the other two hundred or so traitors in the tiny Ido corner of the net and let the multitude of Esperantists esperant in peace.

Could we kind of ease off on the "traitor" talk? The word is both loaded and divisive. It is literally impossible to "betray" Esperanto, therefore there is no such thing as a traitor to Esperanto. There are simply people who speak it and there are people who don't, and that's how things divvy up.

If you really need to blame somebody for something, feel free to lay it on the original founders of Ido, who did, in fact, play some dirty pool with Zamenhof. But only them. The word simply does not apply to anyone else, and hasn't since that time period.

You will find people here at Lernu who speak Ido. They are not traitors. They are people who are interested in Ido. It is not a crime, it isn't even to be discouraged. People are free to learn any languages they like. So, I would strike the word "traitor" from your vocabulary, on this site, if you plan on sticking around. Eventually it will become a problem.

On the immutability of the Fundamento, however, you are correct. The chances of it ever changing are practically zero, and therefore any reform proposals that attempt to change it have a practically zero chance of ever going anywhere. And when I say "practically" I really mean "exactly".

AllenHartwell:they really should go join the other two hundred or so traitors in the tiny Ido corner of the net.

Wow. Traitors? Even the modern day ones who had nothing to do with the original treachery of liking someone else’s made-up language more? Is it like Original Sin?

A lot of the early Esperanto movement was made up of former Volapükists. Should we dismiss the Esperanto movement, therefore, as the machinations of a fickle, treacherous people?

For that matter, I’m not sure I understand why anyone should listen to you, an American and traitor to the British crown, on who we should banish to the tiny corners of cyberspace for treachery.

Someone goes to a site about gardening and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be welcomed as a person with an interest in gardening.

Someone goes to a site about fishing and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be welcomed as a person with an interest in fishing.

Someone goes to a site about a constructed language that hardly anyone has heard of and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be accused of disliking that language, treachery, nazism, and homosexuality.

With a "welcome" like this, who could blame them for leaving, never coming back, and telling everyone they know to stay away.

It would seem that the biggest barrier to Esperanto gaining more widespread acceptance is not the questions of the curious newcomer, but the way that newcomer is treated by the existing speaker base

Bemused:Someone goes to a site about fishing and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be welcomed as a person with an interest in fishing.

Not if they repeatedly insist that lobbing fragmentation grenades into a trout stream is a legitimate form of fishing. Or that fish include persons kayaking in the stream and are thus a legitimate catch.

Bruso:

Bemused:Someone goes to a site about fishing and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be welcomed as a person with an interest in fishing.

Not if they repeatedly insist that lobbing fragmentation grenades into a trout stream is a legitimate form of fishing. Or that fish include persons kayaking in the stream and are thus a legitimate catch.

lol, nice image.

Bruso:

Bemused:Someone goes to a site about fishing and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be welcomed as a person with an interest in fishing.

Not if they repeatedly insist that lobbing fragmentation grenades into a trout stream is a legitimate form of fishing. Or that fish include persons kayaking in the stream and are thus a legitimate catch.

Is throwing frag grenades at kayaking people really comparable to introducing a new morpheme?

nornen:

Bruso:

Bemused:Someone goes to a site about fishing and asks questions or engages in discussion, they will be welcomed as a person with an interest in fishing.

Not if they repeatedly insist that lobbing fragmentation grenades into a trout stream is a legitimate form of fishing. Or that fish include persons kayaking in the stream and are thus a legitimate catch.

Is throwing frag grenades at kayaking people really comparable to introducing a new morpheme?

I used the word "or", not "and".

And, yes, it was a deliberately extreme example. My point was that a newbie who wanted to rewrite the formal or informal rules of fishing would not get a welcome reception. Maybe a real fisherman can come up with some more realistic examples of what that might constitute.

AllenHartwell: I just recognize that Esperanto is pointless unless everyone follows it

There are many reasons to learn Esperanto - practical benefits like the fact it is easier to learn your next language if you learn Esperanto first, communicating with people around the world you could not communicate with otherwise, and learning about other countries and cultures. If you choose to not learn that is your right as an individual but basing that decision upon the choices of others does you no good.

For an example that is closer to home, does anyone seriously think that you could show up as a beginner at a forum for learners of French, and before even learning the language, give your list of proposed improvements to French, and expect to receive a friendly reception?

Certain things are just going to draw a negative reaction online. If a person goes to a Star Trek forum and says something like "I think Star Trek is so great, but wouldn't it be better if the next Star Trek movie incorporated some aspects of Star Wars?" The person might be totally innocent but it sounds like trolling because this is a common topic to troll on, and the reaction would almost certainly be strongly negative. If anything, since language reforms ARE such a common topic to troll on, I think Esperanto forums are even nicer to some of these pro-reform beginners, than such a beginner could realistically expect if they showed up in a Microsoft forum and started asking for Microsoft to be more like Apple.