This is from Don Harlow's online Esperanto Book chapter 9:

Don Harlow:
I have not yet mentioned the Word Wars in the context of postwar Esperanto literature. They were held largely in abeyance for about thirty years, perhaps because those who would otherwise have been fighting them were involved in the Great Participial War, which I may describe someday in a work of fantasy; then, in the late l970's, Claude Piron brought them back to life with a short and relatively innocuous article in the magazine Esperanto about "The European Dialect of Esperanto," a complaint about the growing number of West European neologisms that could have been avoided by using conjoined words. Piron, a former translator for the World Health Organization, offered a sample of a paragraph written in a fictitious "Chinese dialect of Esperanto," using neologisms borrowed from Chinese, to give his European readers some idea of what non-European Esperantists have to face when confronted with a flood of new Romance-based neologisms.

I was wondering if this sample paragraph of the "Chinese Dialect" is available online anywhere.

Bruso:This is from Don Harlow's online Esperanto Book chapter 9:

Don Harlow:
I have not yet mentioned the Word Wars in the context of postwar Esperanto literature. They were held largely in abeyance for about thirty years, perhaps because those who would otherwise have been fighting them were involved in the Great Participial War, which I may describe someday in a work of fantasy; then, in the late l970's, Claude Piron brought them back to life with a short and relatively innocuous article in the magazine Esperanto about "The European Dialect of Esperanto," a complaint about the growing number of West European neologisms that could have been avoided by using conjoined words. Piron, a former translator for the World Health Organization, offered a sample of a paragraph written in a fictitious "Chinese dialect of Esperanto," using neologisms borrowed from Chinese, to give his European readers some idea of what non-European Esperantists have to face when confronted with a flood of new Romance-based neologisms.

I was wondering if this sample paragraph of the "Chinese Dialect" is available online anywhere.

I had no luck! I have half a mind to find a sample passage in Esperanto, crack open my Kanji dictionary, and make one. (My Kanji dictionary has both the "on-yomi" which is the Japanese reading of Chinese origin and the modern Mandarin pronunciation.)

I have no idea about the paragraph, but the point about regional neologisms (and localised idiom formations) is a real problem for an international language that seeks clarity of communication. To compare with English you get that term 'Englishes' to differentiate between the separate developments with unique regional variations. Compare English in the UK with English in parts of India where it has been influenced by regional languages and unusual grammatical and syntactic features.

I get the impression (from watching Esperanto videos on You Tube) that almost everyone speaks an Esperanto that is in some way influenced by their native language.

The circumstances of usage which have given rise to regional variations in English are not comparable with the circumstances of the usage of Esperanto.

There are very few Esperantists who use their Esperanto almost exclusively with speakers of their own mother tongue, or are rarely exposed to usage by other speakers with different mother tongues.

There is therefore a constant corrective pressure on Esperanto to conform to some form of international Esperanto. Indeed you can say that consideration of whether any particular usage is likely to be internationally comprehensible is part of the sociolinguistics of Esperanto.

In contrast many users of American/Indian/South African English may use and be exposed to their form of English primarily within their own community.

It seems highly unlikely that any Far-Eastern learner of Esperanto will ignore the prevailing norms (whether these are 'European' or not).

The only way a 'Chinese' dialect of Esperanto could establish itself would be if there were a substantial body of speakers who used Esperanto almost exclusively with speakers of 'Chinese'. But since there many different spoken forms of 'Chinese' within China this dialect would itself be subject to pressure to conform to some interlingual standard.

Vestitor, I would not put much weight on what you might have encountered on You Tube. The acid test is the Esperanto you would hear at an international congress, such as the recent UK in Lille attended by participants from some 80 countries.

You're likely right about the comparison to English (or any national language), now I think about it more.
On regional influences though, would it not be reasonable to assume that the Esperanto of a certain region (China in this case) would internalise some peculiarities drawn from the fact of how certain speakers of a language tend to pronounce certain sounds?

I expect that the Chinese speakers listen to Chinese Esperanto radio and perhaps audio courses produced in China?

Like any language (I think of German for myself) you meet other foreign speakers and it can be harder to understand them, for you and them, than it is to understand natives; even though you both have the (mistaken) idea that you are pronouncing things correctly and using the same vocabulary.

I suspect some of the sense of "different" Esperantos comes from the fact that people make legal stylistic choices from their native tongues. I've noticed forum users with Germanic countries listed are much more aggressive about agglutination where Romance speakers seem to have a preference for prepositions. To my eye, the Slavs reach for more correlatives (and as discussed on other threads, are probably the model users in that respect). English speakers prefer the possessive pronouns where the article is probably more standard. I've also noticed that veterans tend to gravitate towards the more "standard" (Slavic-heavy?) style. And, of course, these observations come with the dual caveats that I am both relatively inexperienced and exceptions abound.

These flavors are less dialects and more personal preference within the flexibility of Esperanto. I think the language is richer for having these textures while still being very understandable.

sudanglo:It seems highly unlikely that any Far-Eastern learner of Esperanto will ignore the prevailing norms (whether these are 'European' or not).

The only way a 'Chinese' dialect of Esperanto could establish itself would be if there were a substantial body of speakers who used Esperanto almost exclusively with speakers of 'Chinese'. But since there many different spoken forms of 'Chinese' within China this dialect would itself be subject to pressure to conform to some interlingual standard.

I think this is a fair point, but not what Piron was getting at. His point was that adopting new roots of European origin creates a barrier to entry to speakers of non-European languages. I see "saluton!" and see "salutations!" If Zammenhoff had chose "Nihauxon", I'd have no such advantage from being an English speaker. His point wasn't that Chinese speakers might ignore prevailing norms, but that prevailing norms do Chinese speakers no favors. His proposed solution was to agglutinate more to minimize root burden.

rikforto: His point wasn't that Chinese speakers might ignore prevailing norms, but that prevailing norms do Chinese speakers no favors. His proposed solution was to agglutinate more to minimize root burden.

And on this point, I'd certainly agree with him. I often times run into neologisms that are completely unnecessary because an Esperanto-accepted way to express the concept already exists in common usage. Sometimes agglutination creates words that still must be deciphered the first time they are encountered, but when such a word is presented, after it is recognized, it makes sense and can be well-tolerated by speakers of other languages.

For example, the word eltondaĵo is used for "a clipping" from an article or a magazine. The first time you see it out of context, it might not immediately make intuitive sense--but it DOES make sense after you think it through (a clip-out of-thing)--no need to create "klipitaĵo" or (worse yet) "klipingado" to approximate what has already been worked through. I think that is what Piron was referring to.

In Esperanto, the word for "violence" is perforto. Okay, I can see possible room for improvement--it wouldn't have been my first choice; however, it is recognized far and wide, has been for years, and we all know what we mean when we use it. Well, I recently had a conversation with an Esperantist who used "violenta" (or some other part of speech--I don't recall). Sure, I understood him--but we already have a word for violent--why reinvent the wheel? Excessive coinage of new roots clutters the language and does a disservice to up-and-coming Esperantists, particularly those whose mother tongue does not capitalize on Western word roots.

Polaris:"klipitaĵo" or (worse yet) "klipingado" to approximate what has already been worked through.

"Clip" is an international word, so it has a right to be used.

Esperantist who used "violenta"

English adjective "violent" is not a synonym of "perforta". Plus, "violent" is an international word.
The rule #15 was designed specifically to prevent Esperanto from becoming a ridiculous mess of new coinages not evident to persons not speaking it.

Armand6:

Polaris:"klipitaĵo" or (worse yet) "klipingado" to approximate what has already been worked through.

"Clip" is an international word, so it has a right to be used.

Esperantist who used "violenta"

English adjective "violent" is not a synonym of "perforta". Plus, "violent" is an international word.
The rule #15 was designed specifically to prevent Esperanto from becoming a ridiculous mess of new coinages not evident to persons not speaking it.

Why do I see you argumenting nonsense and trolling on all threads? And how in heaven's name is "violent" an international word? Following that line of thought we could just as well speak relexified English.

vikungen:

Armand6:

Polaris:"klipitaĵo" or (worse yet) "klipingado" to approximate what has already been worked through.

"Clip" is an international word, so it has a right to be used.

Esperantist who used "violenta"

English adjective "violent" is not a synonym of "perforta". Plus, "violent" is an international word.
The rule #15 was designed specifically to prevent Esperanto from becoming a ridiculous mess of new coinages not evident to persons not speaking it.

Why do I see you argumenting nonsense and trolling on all threads? And how in heaven's name is "violent" an international word? Following that line of thought we could just as well speak relexified English.

I don't believe that the word "clip" is in any way an international word--it is an English word that has been borrowed by speakers of other Western languages (perhaps), but that does not make it accessible to speakers of oriental, semitic, or native languages, does it? And the point is, we already have a viable, recognized Esperanto alternative based upon existing roots---there is no need to Esperantize "clip".

And yes, Armand6, the English word "violent" and the Esperanto word "perforta" are synonymous. We all understand "perforta"---we don't need to adopt "violent-" as a new root to cover a base that is already covered.