robbkvasnak:In American English [and I suspect in other variants as well] a drone is a male bee - virabelo...

That's very true, but the etymology of the word still goes back to middle-ages germanic languages referring to it's sound. A drone as a bee is therefore just as much a derivative as what we are discussing here.

Sphynx:I think my thinking here is that takes a few letters from different words, without really taking roots, prefixes etc. Just because we can create a word like this (as I do all the time for application names, seeing as how I am software developer by trade), does not necessarily mean that we should do it for a new core language word.

I think that we do this far too much in English, and should not get into bad habits in Esperanto.

This is actually done all the time in Esperanto. It's done when there is a root that is relatively international, but it conflicts with an existing Esperanto root or with a common root/suffix combination. In those cases, a letter is frequently changed to a similar letter or a letter is added to a root.

You may not like it in this case but it's been around since the beginning of the language. This is why our word for buffet is not bufeto (a small buffalo) but bufedo, why bouquet is bukedo and not buketo, likely why leek is poreo and not the more obvious poro (poro = pore). There are countless examples of this in Esperanto.

erinja:...This is actually done all the time in Esperanto...

Agree, but not sure that it is the same thing here. Taking a sentence like ABxxxx CDxxxx EFxxxx and creating the word ABCDEF is far more of an abbreviation than using something that starts logical then gets tweaked.

erinja:
You may not like it in this case but it's been around since the beginning of the language. This is why our word for buffet is not bufeto (a small buffalo) but bufedo, why bouquet is bukedo and not buketo, likely why leek is poreo and not the more obvious poro (poro = pore). There are countless examples of this in Esperanto.

I believe that bufeto would be a small toad.

Scratch:

erinja:
You may not like it in this case but it's been around since the beginning of the language. This is why our word for buffet is not bufeto (a small buffalo) but bufedo, why bouquet is bukedo and not buketo, likely why leek is poreo and not the more obvious poro (poro = pore). There are countless examples of this in Esperanto.

I believe that bufeto would be a small toad.

Right! Forgot the word.

Sphynx:

erinja:...This is actually done all the time in Esperanto...

Agree, but not sure that it is the same thing here. Taking a sentence like ABxxxx CDxxxx EFxxxx and creating the word ABCDEF is far more of an abbreviation than using something that starts logical then gets tweaked.

Ah, I thought you were referring to "droneo" as being something that should be avoided. That is the construction that is well founded in Esperanto history, very analogous to "poreo".

Sphynx:Spavo is reasonable, if somewhat artificial, but wouldn't droneo still translate as 'to drown' or drowned?

I dunno. It might rankle the anti-mojosa crowd seeing as how the construction of both words is rather similar.

Sphynx:

Kirilo81:

Sphynx:Spavo is reasonable, if somewhat artificial

Not really an argument in Esperanto, don't you think?

I think my thinking here is that takes a few letters from different words, without really taking roots, prefixes etc. Just because we can create a word like this (as I do all the time for application names, seeing as how I am software developer by trade), does not necessarily mean that we should do it for a new core language word.

I think that we do this far too much in English, and should not get into bad habits in Esperanto.

Just for the record, it's done way more in Russian.

Just for the record, it's done way more in Russian.

Upravdom = upravljajuschij domom

Specnaz = special'noje naznachenie

Gazprom = gazovaja promyshelennost'

Kolhoz = kollektivnoje hozjajstvo

Purist Slavophiles will cringe at these sorts of amaglamations, but they are a well-established part of the language. I don't object to them, considering that the un-condensed forms normally sound even uglier.

Sphynx:

robbkvasnak:In American English [and I suspect in other variants as well] a drone is a male bee - virabelo...

That's very true, but the etymology of the word still goes back to middle-ages germanic languages referring to it's sound. A drone as a bee is therefore just as much a derivative as what we are discussing here.

sort of like 'zumilo' - once again, though, Esperanto is not anglido. This forum subject should be in Esperanto - I am just observing the rules writing in English.