Bruso:I thought I read this before, but apparently I started it in the past without finishing.

Rather simple, but I've noticed a few oddities in language usage.

1) iĉismo

2) Use of ĉi by itself instead of tiu ĉi.

3) Use of je a a lot.

...

4) Postpositioning of possessive pronouns, e.g., onklino mia.

1)I do consider myself a male feminist, but do at times see myself more understanding of historically gender-biased language grammars that no longer have those overtones when learning other national languages than other more sensitive feminist. This language was invented in 1887 when world peace was a larger concern. To me, requiring others to say patricxo would be like claiming that those who say "outdoors" are bad environmentalist because they treat it like something outside of ourselves. I say use it if you want, but I don't feel the need to. May the most votes win, as that's how language evolution works any way.

2)Still new, no comment.

3)In response to:

kaŝperanto:But "je" is perhaps used by komencantoj who don't know or are unsure of the correct preposition to use in a certain case. All of these are technically "intentional", though. I would say more newbies are going to use the wrong specific preposition before they will use the indefinite when a definite is available.

That's absolutely right in my case. In fact, the other day I sent kasxperanto a message in which I was unsure which pronoun to use. I said, "Li ĝin aĉetis je mi," or "He bought it for me." I was almost certain it would be an error, so I intentionally used je in order to declare "I know this is wrong, but I hope you can get my meaning anyway," though maybe al would have sufficed. Now, I know there are good times to use je, like with time, etc...

4)I thought the word endings was what gave us flexibility, especially for difference as vast as between the way a native English and a native Chinese speaker would think about sentence construction. Then again, maybe I'm being overly defensive and you are merely remarking how interesting this new form is.

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).

I am consistently surprised by how many programming analogies there are for Esperanto problems. As for that approach, this is exactly how the good sources for learning Esperanto treat unofficial things. They sure-as-hell don't teach them in the beginner sections, and they are marked as unofficial when mentioned for the benefit of the reader, and only taught so that one might understand unconventional usage. Also, things like icx are more in line with compatibility-breaking modifications as opposed to common frameworks/etc., whereas speech like "Mi auxdintas..." is unconventional but does not break the language.

kaŝperanto:

1) I can't recall the last time I saw someone use -iĉ when it wasn't in a thread to specifically discuss iĉismo. So I suppose it is an "oddity" in that there is little reason behind its use, yet many newbies continue to press for its acceptance out of some perceived sense of injustice.

it is true, the tendency is to neutralise the gender. -in and -icx become heavy and conflictive. so -icx is present in the dark.

the extreme result is:
"edzo kisis sian edzon, sxikiu/kiinu placxkriis spontane."

> can't recall the last time I saw someone use -iĉ when it
> wasn't in a thread to specifically discuss iĉismo. So I suppose it is an "oddity"

Nobody uses "vir-" either. Especially not those who teach the language like this.

Same neniu uzas na "vir-". Precipe ne tiuj, kiuj instruas la lingvon tiel ('' ne uzu "-icx", uzu "vir-" '' ).

Clarence666:> can't recall the last time I saw someone use -iĉ when it
> wasn't in a thread to specifically discuss iĉismo. So I suppose it is an "oddity"

Nobody uses "vir-" either. Especially not those who teach the language like this.

Same neniu uzas na "vir-". Precipe ne tiuj, kiuj instruas la lingvon tiel ('' ne uzu "-icx", uzu "vir-" '' ).

Umm, I use vir- quite often, both for male animals and humans. I also use ĝi for people of unkown/unimportant sex, this solves nearly all problems of asymmetry of the designation of sexes (viro - virino rests).

Clarence666:> can't recall the last time I saw someone use -iĉ when it
> wasn't in a thread to specifically discuss iĉismo. So I suppose it is an "oddity"

Nobody uses "vir-" either. Especially not those who teach the language like this.

Same neniu uzas na "vir-". Precipe ne tiuj, kiuj instruas la lingvon tiel ('' ne uzu "-icx", uzu "vir-" '' ).

Not correct. Every source I've studied at least mentions the use of "vir-" as a prefix for animals, as in "virbovo=bull" and "bovino=cow".

Vi malpravas. Cxiu fonto, kiun mi studis almenaux mencias la uzon de "vir-" kiel prefikso por bestoj, kiel ekzemple "virbovo=bull" kaj "bovino=cow".