Well, according to the Antaŭparolo of the Fundamento
http://akademio-de-esperanto.org/fundamento/antaup...
Zamenhof recommends that new words should be used in literature and that personal correspondence should avoid words that are not in the Fundamento.

While the oddities in Ŝi Estas Mia Amiko are not limited to new words, I'm kind of fine with that. It's a little bit better better to try out some new words and phrasings in a well contructed literature publication than pollute Esperanto forums with "Hey guys, you should totally start using my reform proposals now because they are like really cool".

marcuscf:Well, according to the Antaŭparolo of the Fundamento
http://akademio-de-esperanto.org/fundamento/antaup...
Zamenhof recommends that new words should be used in literature and that personal correspondence should avoid words that are not in the Fundamento.

While the oddities in Ŝi Estas Mia Amiko are not limited to new words, I'm kind of fine with that. It's a little bit better better to try out some new words and phrasings in a well contructed literature publication than pollute Esperanto forums with "Hey guys, you should totally start using my reform proposals now because they are like really cool".

My issue with this book, especially in regard to iĉ-ism, is that it is presented as a learning tool for newbies. People who don't have a lot of experience with Esperanto are confused by non-standard usages in a work so presented. I remember when I read it, I was very new to Esperanto (I think it was just after doing Ana Pana). I had some difficulty reading it, as my vocabulary was very small, and thus my memory of it is not very clear. But one thing I distinctly remember was the part where the kids were looking at the kittens, and one of the kittens was referred to as the "iĉo", and I was like, what is that, and looked at the definition in the book. Which told me that "-iĉ" is like "-in", but for guys. And I thought to myself, I don't remember seeing that in the list of affixes, why have I not heard of it before? And I checked the list again, and sure enough, it wasn't there. I was baffled by this observation for quite a while after that (I wasn't an active user of the forum then). Quite some time later, I learned that the affix is a neologism, that isn't part of normal Esperanto. Which clarifies the issue to some extent, but I am still wondering, why does lernu! promote a book for beginners that contains these kinds of confusing usages?

I just want to learn Esperanto as it is normally used, not as a few reformuloj think that it should be used. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way.

Christa627:
My issue with this book, especially in regard to iĉ-ism, is that it is presented as a learning tool for newbies. People who don't have a lot of experience with Esperanto are confused by non-standard usages in a work so presented.

Yeah, that was my thought, too. Aimed at newbies and children. They should keep things as standard as possible.

Instead of "-icx", why not be creative within the established boundaries and use unambiguous adjectives? For example: La besto estas ne ina. Gxi estas vira besto! It seems that most times you won't need to state that something is male or manly. However, when you do, you could do the above and leave words like "virlupo" for our werewolf friends. Thoughts?

1) iĉismo
The only problem I see in "lack of gender neutrality" is in nicknames ("ĉjo, njo... how do I nickname a neuter?" ). i have nothing at all against someone writing "in my book, patro means parent, and virpatro means father" because it makes sense, but in general i doubt i would ever even bother writing "virkato" or "katino" even if i was describing the cat as pregnant. just because it's so unnecessary (even if it is pregnant, you can use your common sense to know it's a female).

so if anything, i would come up with a gender-neutral nickname (ĝjo?? lol) but more likely, i would write "in this book, ĉjo/njo is used as the suffix for any gender" instead of introducing a new word.

for the virlupo thing - why can't the writer just use "vira lupo" if "virlupo" is so bad for some reason? then just write "ina lupo" if it's a female wolf. problem totally solved.

2) Use of ĉi by itself instead of tiu ĉi.
Makes total sense if combined with another word. "This dog" "This hat" "This idea"; we don't say "this thing idea" for example. "Ĉi" totally on its own though, i dunno how it could make sense since it's supposed to make something "here" and if there is no something...?

3) Use of je a lot.
I also wonder about this. For example in Swedish they say "I listen on the radio" and "I talk on Swedish". Another language says "using the radio, using Swedish" or "to the radio, in Swedish"... so I find it natural that some people start using je way more. But I try not to use it so much.

4) Postpositioning of possessive pronouns, e.g., onklino mia.
What? I never read anything saying they had to go in front... D : In Icelandic they're post-positioned so maybe I'm more used to it.

Christa627:
My issue with this book, especially in regard to iĉ-ism, is that it is presented as a learning tool for newbies.

That's true. Learning tools should stick to standard Esperanto.

Now I must admit that I've never read more than the first few pages of that book just because I couldn't stand «ĉi» on its own without «tiu» next to it...

novatago:

Bruso:iĉismo

Those, who use that suffix are not esperanto speakers, and they don't understand why esperanto was created. They are childish and misunderstand the whole thing.

Wow, just when i thought you can't be that much of zealot.

Fenris_kcf:

novatago:

Bruso:iĉismo

Those, who use that suffix are not esperanto speakers, and they don't understand why esperanto was created. They are childish and misunderstand the whole thing.

Wow, just when i thought you can't be that much of zealot.

While I agree that this is quite harsh, AFAIK it is impossible to observe the foundational rules of Esperanto while supporting this suffix. Its use in educational material is quite upsetting, andI have a hard time with that in general (people using their position as educators to spread some personal ideology). This would be like teaching a C programming class using your own personal "standard library" and a modified compiler; it's almost the same language underneath but you aren't really teaching it right (and thus doing a disservice to your students).

kaŝperanto:This would be like teaching a C programming class using your own personal "standard library" and a modified compiler; it's almost the same language underneath but you aren't really teaching it right (and thus doing a disservice to your students).

Interestring comparison. I agree that one should refrain from using disputed stuff in writings addressed to beginners. But for more adept readers it would be even quite helpful to do so. In order to keep with your comparison: After teaching C to a decent level, a teacher should introduce common frameworks or similar languages like C++, that solve certain problems that arise in plain-C (while not concealing that these might have other/new problems).

Fenris_kcf:

kaŝperanto:This would be like teaching a C programming class using your own personal "standard library" and a modified compiler; it's almost the same language underneath but you aren't really teaching it right (and thus doing a disservice to your students).

Interestring comparison. I agree that one should refrain from using disputed stuff in writings addressed to beginners. But for more adept readers it would be even quite helpful to do so. In order to keep with your comparison: After teaching C to a decent level, a teacher should introduce common frameworks or similar languages like C++, that solve certain problems that arise in plain-C (while not concealing that these might have other/new problems).

+1.

[Especially since according to my personal experience, once you are out of academia, you b]only [/b]work with your (company's) own stdlib and always with non-std compilers. No matter the language.]