Christa627:

Vestitor:Anyone who thinks something like 'longajn radikojn' isn't an unnecessary mouthful for the majority of normal usage, and which might well sit next to other similar adjectival elements in a sentence, is just being obtuse for the sake of it.

I don't see any problem with "longajn radikojn", or "miajn novajn longajn belajn ruĝajn radikojn" for that matter. Any more than I see a problem with "mis manzanas rojas pequeñas..." and the like. You can label me "obtuse" if you want, I really don't care.

Maybe 'not very aurally and visually discerning' is a better description.

Vestitor:Maybe 'not very aurally and visually discerning' is a better description.

Well yes, everyone knows that Spanish and Portuguese are hideously ugly languages because of their strict adjectival agreement. And let's face it: the words "loin" and "line" are really hard to say. Anyone who disagrees is just obtuse, or hidebound, or too blinded by their knowledge of other natural languages.



Above: a map of people who aren't very aurally or visually discerning; a tiny slice of the world's population

00100100:That's because your standards are wrong. English continually makes small changes that add up. To ask for English to only change the way that supports your argument is foolish.

You seem to be missing the point. Esperanto also continually makes small changes, through ordinary use, that add up. Old Esperanto writings are frequently written in a noticeably different style than writings today - but all within the fundamento, and fully understandable.

The point here is that just as English and Esperanto both make small gradual changes, English and Esperanto both don't go making massive changes to major grammatical points, just because someone has decided that this bit of grammar isn't to their taste.

The adoption of certain design principles - which are not without merit in a language designed to be used as a lingua franca and learnt largely by adults - has consequences.

If you are going to have explicit marking of grammatical function then you will end up with agreement as you mark the noun and the adjectives.

If you additionally limit the number of vowel sounds in Esperanto then you can never have the same number of short words that exist in English (with its 20 vowels sounds).

Most Continental languages will, at first, appear cumbersome to the native English speaker. At least with the Esperanto you don't have the horror of agreement in case and number and gender.

sudanglo:If you are going to have explicit marking of grammatical function then you will end up with agreement as you mark the noun and the adjectives.

Say what? Ido retains explicit marking of grammatical function (to some extent even more than Esperanto in a few instances) but does not use adjectival agreement.

erinja:

00100100:That's because your standards are wrong. English continually makes small changes that add up. To ask for English to only change the way that supports your argument is foolish.

You seem to be missing the point. Esperanto also continually makes small changes, through ordinary use, that add up. Old Esperanto writings are frequently written in a noticeably different style than writings today - but all within the fundamento, and fully understandable.

The point here is that just as English and Esperanto both make small gradual changes, English and Esperanto both don't go making massive changes to major grammatical points, just because someone has decided that this bit of grammar isn't to their taste.

Ah, but there's the rub. Is it a major grammatical point?

Part of the artificiality of Esperanto is that (statistically speaking) nobody just speaks it by default; anybody involved is here because they want to be involved. By that fact alone, there's more paying attention to the rules. But...if there was a large body of people who lived in a community of Esperanto speakers, would it stick? Or would schoolkids gradually drop agreement in casual conversation, until agreement between adjective and noun is considered as strange as using thee and thou?

00100100:But...if there was a large body of people who lived in a community of Esperanto speakers, would it stick? Or would schoolkids gradually drop agreement in casual conversation, until agreement between adjective and noun is considered as strange as using thee and thou?

I'd say yes.

Vestitor:

00100100:But...if there was a large body of people who lived in a community of Esperanto speakers, would it stick? Or would schoolkids gradually drop agreement in casual conversation, until agreement between adjective and noun is considered as strange as using thee and thou?

I'd say yes.

Well, Spanish is way older than Esperanto, and adjectival agreement lives on. Those whose native language doesn't have it will find it odd, but if one grows up with it, it will be as natural to them as English's rather clunky negation system is to us. Why don't the schoolchildren just drop things like "doesn't" and "don't" in casual conversation? "I not wanna go to school tomorrow"; makes things simpler, no?

Christa627:

Vestitor:

00100100:But...if there was a large body of people who lived in a community of Esperanto speakers, would it stick? Or would schoolkids gradually drop agreement in casual conversation, until agreement between adjective and noun is considered as strange as using thee and thou?

I'd say yes.

Well, Spanish is way older than Esperanto, and adjectival agreement lives on. Those whose native language doesn't have it will find it odd, but if one grows up with it, it will be as natural to them as English's rather clunky negation system is to us. Why don't the schoolchildren just drop things like "doesn't" and "don't" in casual conversation? "I not wanna go to school tomorrow"; makes things simpler, no?

Spanish adjectival agreement even lives on in countries where it is surrounded by 20+ languages without adjectival agreement.

Has anybody studied English diachronic linguistics?
When was it that English lost its agreement?
How did it happen?
Why did it happen? Hand in hand with the reduction of the case system? Due to some adstrate or substrate? Something to do with the gallification of the vocabulary?
Why did this happen to English and not e.g. to German, too?

(Maybe related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_English_creol...)