Vestitor:sh. Lots of modern languages have diacritics and they are no hindrance.

Of course they are; plus, Esperanto is not just a 'language', it is *international* language, so there is no space for diacritics there.

(all) Germanic languages, and others,

Esperanto is not a Germanic language, it is international language. For Chinese, English, and Spanish people, who represent the most of population, Y is the norm.

Sure it is. Then English can continue being the lingua franca while the derided Esperanto remains in a position of semi-mockery.

I'm not interested in trying to change small-minded people's impressions of Esperanto (if they even have one; much of the younger generation hasn't heard of it). I put in a good word for Esperanto if it comes up in conversation, but I don't go out of my way to promote it or argue for it. If you can do that - power to you! But I have other things I'd rather do with my time.

Also. I'm uncomfortable with this idea that Esperantists should self-censor to appear more "normal", as a group, to outsiders. The attitude is insincere. I resent the notion that the eccentrics and bohemians of society, of which I consider myself a member, have some kind of obligation to conform to someone else's idea of normalcy.

I value the diversity of background, opinion, and taste embedded in Esperantujo - even if some of it is unappealing to me personally. Esperantujo is self-selecting: you have to go out of your way to find it. And only people with a certain kind of character - independent-minded, curious, nonconformist - are going to do that.

So I suppose I'm a raumist. It really doesn't bother me if I personally am mocked for speaking Esperanto, or if my own oddities cause some people to make foolish snap judgments about the Esperanto community as a whole. I can't help what other people - especially small-minded people - think; I just have to live my own life.

Also, Tangi (most likely a reincarnation of the user Elhana2) appears to be participating on this site with the primary purpose of bashing Esperanto and derailing conversations.

I suggest other users not encourage him with responses to his commentary.

Tangi:

Vestitor:This thread typifies the reasons people outside Esperanto think Esperanto is a movement for cultists.

Well, I believe it is the pathological love of the movado to archaisms, such as sexist forms and weird spellings, like letters with diacritics and J instead of Y.
Esperanto needs to look modern, efficient, and professional, and professionalism is not compatible with dogmatism.

Tangi:

Vestitor:sh. Lots of modern languages have diacritics and they are no hindrance.

Of course they are; plus, Esperanto is not just a 'language', it is *international* language, so there is no space for diacritics there.

(all) Germanic languages, and others,

Esperanto is not a Germanic language, it is international language. For Chinese, English, and Spanish people, who represent the most of population, Y is the norm.

So, Y-dogmatism is the norm?

Tangi:

Vestitor:sh. Lots of modern languages have diacritics and they are no hindrance.

Of course they are; plus, Esperanto is not just a 'language', it is *international* language, so there is no space for diacritics there.

(all) Germanic languages, and others,

Esperanto is not a Germanic language, it is international language. For Chinese, English, and Spanish people, who represent the most of population, Y is the norm.

No, they're not a hindrance. Probably for you, but the speakers and learners of those languages are evidence to the contrary.

The very fact of it being international means it will have some elements that won't fit the 'language norms' for various language groups. That's just tough luck. It has to be choices and guess what, the choices worked and paid off. And if the Chinese, English and Spanish make up most of the potential users and still don't struggle with Esperanto, it's of no consequence. If that was the criteria for development Esperanto would probably be a lot more like Chinese.

Perpetual reformers and fiddlers need to be quiet when they have nothing of value to add. The very fact that their bird-brained opinions are giving consideration at all is a testament to the patience and toleration within Esperanto. Anywhere else it would be laughed into obscurity.

Tempodivalse:
I'm not interested in trying to change small-minded people's impressions of Esperanto (if they even have one; much of the younger generation hasn't heard of it). I put in a good word for Esperanto if it comes up in conversation, but I don't go out of my way to promote it or argue for it. If you can do that - power to you! But I have other things I'd rather do with my time.

Also. I'm uncomfortable with this idea that Esperantists should self-censor to appear more "normal", as a group, to outsiders. The attitude is insincere. I resent the notion that the eccentrics and bohemians of society, of which I consider myself a member, have some kind of obligation to conform to someone else's idea of normalcy.
...

It shouldn't have to be argued for from a position of obscurantism. The point I make is that something very often gets judged by its bedfellows. You see a club being frequented by mainly criminals, you conclude the club is a criminal hangout. You probably avoid it, even though it may not be what you think it is.

As much as people might not like it, image and reputation is important in the initial stages at least. I don;t doubt that some people - and people by-the-way who would likely benefit from Esperanto - laughingly dismiss Esperanto because they have the vague idea it is something sci-fi convention types are busy using. In fact, that is roughly how it is and why people like Piron et al have had to write books that are always positive persuasion PR as much as they are cultural or language discussions.

Tempodivalse:primary purpose of bashing Esperanto

Where did I bash Esperanto?

Vestitor:No, they're not a hindrance ... Anywhere else it would be laughed into obscurity.

National language is a goal, as it is an integral part of the national culture.
Esperanto, on contrary, is a tool, a tool for global understanding. If a tool is inefficient or inconvenient, it is replaced.

Suuure... So far it is WE who is laughed upon. If we keep arguing over triffles, it will never change.

What's so hard about /j/ making the [j] sound generally represented by /y/ in certain languages like English? As a native English speaker, it took me all of two seconds the first time I saw an alphabet (International Phonetic Alphabet in my case) where j represented "the Y-sound".

Remembering to decline nouns to the accusative (something I'd already learned a bit from Russian) is my personal problem that I've run into.

But to be more on-topic with the original discussion, perhaps a good conlanger could take a look at Old French, Old English, and some other roots to build an Esperanto designed more toward older languages. Having heard some scholars suggest that Esperanto is very close to being a relexified Yiddish, perhaps if we imagine that many of the roots used today came from exposure to Western European languages, a look at Yiddish might provide some inspiration.

Tangi:

Vestitor:No, they're not a hindrance ... Anywhere else it would be laughed into obscurity.

National language is a goal, as it is an integral part of the national culture.
Esperanto, on contrary, is a tool, a tool for global understanding. If a tool is inefficient or inconvenient, it is replaced.

Suuure... So far it is WE who is laughed upon. If we keep arguing over triffles, it will never change.

Your suggestions are those 'triffles' [sic].