Aportes: 28
Idioma: English
robbkvasnak (Mostrar perfil) 29 de mayo de 2014 21:55:36
Thus it is with language. Heidegger once wrote: Sprache ist das Haus des Seins (language is the house of being/exsistence). As we expand our house, we add on to the language. Esperanto certainly has space for a guest room!
AllenHartwell (Mostrar perfil) 29 de mayo de 2014 22:01:39
robbkvasnak:Since Esperanto is not governed by any one single bodyhttp://www.akademio-de-esperanto.org/
![ridulo.gif](/images/smileys/ridulo.gif)
robbkvasnak (Mostrar perfil) 30 de mayo de 2014 02:40:37
Fenris_kcf (Mostrar perfil) 30 de mayo de 2014 07:52:24
AllenHartwell:I already told you in the other thread:robbkvasnak:Since Esperanto is not governed by any one single bodyhttp://www.akademio-de-esperanto.org/
Ludwik Lejzer Zamenhof:Lingvo internacia, kiel ĉiu nacia, estas propraĵo de ĉiuj; la aŭtoro forlasas por ĉiam ĉiujn personajn rajtojn al ĝi.
bartlett22183 (Mostrar perfil) 30 de mayo de 2014 20:28:40
At one time I was often discomfited by what I considered "conglomerated words," words composed of so many elements that they became puzzles to be decrypted rather than obvious new words. However, I came to realize that those "conglomerated words" did have an internal logic, and as such they were no worse than adopted words which I would have to learn all by themselves -- unless, of course
![malgajo.gif](/images/smileys/malgajo.gif)
![malgajo.gif](/images/smileys/malgajo.gif)
Yes, under one of the rules of the "Sixteen Rules" it might be suitable to adopt or adapt words from Greek or Latin to correspond to the so-called International Scientific Vocabulary ("ISV" ), but for many day to day matters, I suggest that it is suitable to compound words from existing roots when possible, even if at first those compounds might not be immediately apparent to everyone, and even if, yes, on occasion, those compounds might seem idiomatic. Which is worse, to learn a compound from existing roots, with a sort of internal logic, or to learn a whole new word?
(This position is distinguishable from what I held a number of years ago.)
RiotNrrd (Mostrar perfil) 31 de mayo de 2014 02:58:34
A new idea comes along, and the new Esperanto combination is...
1. ... short and to the point. No neologism needed. No one really argues about these.
2... long and hard to say. "This word has seven syllables, two "kv" combinations, an "sc", and one stretch with more consecutive consonants than you'd ever expect. Sure, it's *possible* to pronounce, with practice, but..."
Neologisms spring up here like dandelions. Even so, no one really argues about these, either.
3. ... squarely in the middle, grey area. This is where ALL the fun lies. You can get six, seven, eight pages of no-resolution forum arguments for a single word out of these, sometimes a couple of times if you space it out and let people forget.
![ridulo.gif](/images/smileys/ridulo.gif)
---
I think that generally, the way we've been doing it has worked well. New roots do enter the language (old ones sometimes drop out, too), but not at an alarming pace, and they generally seem to make sense.
It's never any one persons choice, anyway. These things seem to happen in a very organic fashion. People didn't like "komputero", so now we say "komputilo" - who precisely decided that? No one. Everyone. Certainly not the Akademio. That just seems to be how it works.
nornen (Mostrar perfil) 31 de mayo de 2014 07:52:30
jean-luc:I find funny that the example used for saying there is no need of new roots is a word which should have beed a new root: terpomo ne estas pomo.What would you propose? Patato maybe or kartoflo?
AllenHartwell (Mostrar perfil) 31 de mayo de 2014 08:20:23
sudanglo (Mostrar perfil) 31 de mayo de 2014 10:15:37
vindusoDon't you mean Vindozo, Rob? Or does vinduso refer to something else?
according to §15 of the Fundamento Gramatiko an internationalism is automatically part of the Esperanto lexiconThis has become a whole lot easier now that English is the de facto international language. Kuul! Ĉu ne?
Fenris_kcf (Mostrar perfil) 31 de mayo de 2014 18:23:20
sudanglo:C'mon, don't spread such neologisms!vindusoDon't you mean Vindozo, Rob? Or does vinduso refer to something else?
One could follow the etymology of "window" to the old Norse "vindauga", which means nothing but "windeye".
So let's use "Ventokulo"! From the famous company "Malgrandegmola"!