OK, Vestitor, so let's see. You say that "You're confused" to show self-deprecation. I do not really care that much if you want to mock yourself or not, what is important to me is the question I was aking.

Then you say that you said that as if the error lies in the listener. But actually you thought it was my description of the verb tenses that was flawed, right?

Well, in my following post I explain to you why I think that my description of the use of the past perfect progressive is accurate and I do so by analyzing the sentence you wrote as an example of one which uses that structure.

However, in your next post you don't tell me if you agree with my analysis or not. You just tell me that you never had a confusion to begin with. Which, again, contradicts what you said in the beginning. If the real meaning of that sentence was to imply that I was wrong, using self-deprecation, then tell me: After my analysis, do you still think I am wrong? If so, why?

And I have another question: Am I wrong in my perception that you also show some hostility towards me? Is it actually me that you want to mock? Or why do you try to show that self-deprecation as if you were wrong in order to imply that it was actually me that was wrong? I find it all too complicated, unnecessary and I can only see it as hostile. So please, answer also this question.

MarcDiaz:Duko,

I do not think it is futile to compare Esperanto to English. My original intention was to discuss whether Esperanto verb tenses were too simple to be accurate and practical enough to talk about all areas of life, everywhere, all the time.

I think it is useful to see how other languages use other systems, because then you can see nuances which might not exist in Esperanto and which would enrich the language if they were present. Comparison of two different systems is useful in an analysis, since it enables you to see things you have, things you don't have, how you could improve a system, etc. Comaprisons often give good ideas. Ideas which would be much more difficult to get without such comparisons, just by thinking abstractly.

Then you ask me a supposed rhetorical question, but you answer it yourself. Well, I do not agree with your answer. I think it does matter comparing one language to another for the reasons I gave you in the paragraph above.

Your question was why I do not compare Esperanto to your native language. The truth is I do not know what your native language is. I did not even know of your existence before you posted here. I might be able to speak more or less your native language, depending on which one it is, but my threat was in English. Therefore, I chose the English grammar. Also, since nowadays English could be said to be the actual lingua franca of the world, and the one most people know, I thought most people would understand my point if I used a well-known and widespread language, rather than a smaller one, or a minority one.

However, your post gives me the impression of being quite sour or angry. Am I right in my perception? If I am, why are you angry?

Hehe, Im angry for using a foreign computer with mismatched keyboard and kb layout >( that was a smiley right here.
You know there are other languages besides EN and EO.. And some of them have features that English doesnt have. Is EN too imprecise for not having perfective and imperfective verbal aspects? EN speakers dont really care. Treat EO like its own language, not from the perspective of other languages. Ask yourself, if you were an Esperanto monoglot, would it matter at all to you that #mi iras al la vendejo# doesnt explicitely mark the continuos aspect?
Sorry for seeming angry, Im struggling here with the HW.

Hi Marc,

This is a forum for questions about Esperanto, not a general conlang forum.

Nearly everybody here is happy with Esperanto in its current form, and we are not all that interested in making big changes.

Furthermore, it is not really possible to usefully discuss the fine details of Esperanto tenses with a person who does not know any Esperanto. You can't reasonably expect people here to read thousands of words concerning your opinions on the topic when you have done almost no research yourself. That's bordering on impolite.

My suggestion is that you learn as much Esperanto as you can, and then read a full novel in that language, before considering yourself equipped to discuss supposed deficiencies. Okay?

Hi opalo,

I understand that this is a forum for questions about Esperanto, not a general conlang forum. My original question was only related to Esperanto. I was discussing if its simple system of verb tenses is accurate enough. That has nothing to do with other conlangs. In fact, it was not me who started talking about other conlangs. It was lagtendisto who made a comment on Lidepla. Instead, you seem to warn me instead of him, which I don't find very logical. I only talked about Lidepla as a response to his post. And then I haven't written about it anymore. So I do not think I am the person you should warn, if you want no other conlangs to be discussed here. Having said that, I see no problem in comparing the system of two different languages, if the main aim is to understand Esperanto better.

You also say that nearly everybody is happy with Esperanto in its current form. Well, I do not know how many Esperantists or how many people you know on this forum, but I think it is unlikely that you know so many that you can say such a thing. Furthermore, my experience so far has not been the same. I have seen in the thread about prepositions, for example, that some people seemed to welcome a more definite system for when to use prepositions. So it seems that your and my perception about what Esperanto-learners would want the language to be like is a bit different.

You also say that it is not really possible to usefully discuss the fine details of Esperanto tenses with a person who does not know any Esperanto. I suppose that you refer to me, when you refer to a person who does not know any Esperanto. And I do not know why you would jump to such a conclusion. If I did not know any Esperanto, I could not have been able to understand the example sentences which several members wrote here. Not to mention the in-depth analysis about Esperanto compound verbs. I have not seen such an analysis in any thread. So why would you think that I do not know any Esperanto? Or that I have done almost no research myself? I can't find the logic here.

Also, I do not believe it is necessary to learn as much Esperanto as I can and then read a full novel in that language before considering myself equipped to discuss supposed deficiencies. I think the only criterion that should apply before discussing supposed deficiencies is understanding them. You do not need to know everything about Esperanto to discuss the possible lack of accuracy of Esperanto verb tenses. You do not need to know the word for "screwdriver" to discuss the possible lack of accuracy of Esperanto verb tenses. What you need to know in order to discuss the possible lack of accuracy of Esperanto verb tenses is how Esperanto verb tenses work. And even if you did not know 100 % the way they work, asking such a question could teach you what you do not know, and therefore you would have learnt, and the question would have been a success. Is this not one of the intentions of this forum? To learn and teach others, so that we can all learn this language better?

So why would you think that I do not any Esperanto? Or that I ahve done almost no research myself.

Because you had no idea that participles existed before I told you. That's conclusive.

Also, I do not believe it is necessary to learn as much Esperanto as I can and then read a full novel in that language before considering myself equipped to discuss supposed deficiencies.

I do. Problem?

In fact, just a few short stories of reasonable length will be a good place to start.

There is a big difference between not knowing any Esperanto, like you said before, and knowing a lot except for one area which does not appear on many courses and which seems not to be encouraged to use very often when an alternative is possible. I think my case, and probably that of many people on the forum, was the last one. I have made some online courses in which there was no description at all of the participles. Only the past, present and future tenses, plus the conditional and imperative were described. Therefore, it is quite understandable to think no more tenses exist.

But even so, saying that I do not know any Esperanto or that I have done no research is an exaggeration. You had no proof of how much research I had done and I can only see that statement as an intention to mock me and being hostile. You did have evidence, though, that I know some Esperanto, due to my understanding of the example sentences the members wrote and my in-depth analysis. Yet, you choose to ignore this evidence and exaggerate by saying that I know nothing about Esperanto, which is just not true.

So, apparently you seem to think one has to be absolutly sure that one knows everything about Esperanto before asking a question on a forum. I do not agree. People can learn by asking, like I said before. That is one of the intentions of forums, and therefore I consider my question a success if it has taught as many Esperantists as possible about the existence and use of participles. Which are not so evident, because they seem to lack in many language courses.

You might think that it is necessary to read as much Esperanto as you can and reading a novel or a few short stories of reasonable length before posting here to discuss fine details. I do not. I would not have a problem with it, if you gave me some arguments of why you think the way you do. I have written my opinions before, my arguments. You have not. The only thing you have done is asking if I have a problem with that, which to me sounds like looking for problems. I only just want to know why you think that such a level of knowledge is necessary before asking a simple question on a forum.

Besides, I see you ignored the first two paragraphs I wrote in my previous post. I would like to know your opinions about those topics too, and not just comment on what you like.

To be honest, calling it research is a bit grandiose. Type "esperanto tenses" into Google and click "I'm feeling lucky!" What happens?

If you have the time to type all these gigantic walls of text, you have the time to read a short story. This is simply a matter of cutting to the chase and respecting the time of the other forum members.

Here's a short fable from 1902: La Rozo Supernatura. See if you can spot the participles. How does it handle relative time frames?

MarcDiaz:

[snipped for brevity, and because it was trivial]

And I have another question: Am I wrong in my perception that you also show some hostility towards me? Is it actually me that you want to mock? Or why do you try to show that self-deprecation as if you were wrong to imply that it was actually me that was wrong? I find it all too complicated, unnecessary and I can only see it as hostile. So please, answer also this question.

Let me think...er, no.

MarcDiaz:

Also, I do not believe it is necessary to learn as much Esperanto as I can and then read a full novel in that language before considering myself equipped to discuss supposed deficiencies. I think the only criterion that should apply before discussing supposed deficiencies is understanding them. You do not need to know everything about Esperanto to discuss the possible lack of accuracy of Esperanto verb tenses.

You must be out of your mind. Having a solid grounding in something as basic as using the tenses must be a requirement in such a discussion! You describe yourself as B1-B2, so I assumed you must have been familiar enough with Esperanto to know that the language as it is used has been employed to translate, among other books, War and Peace. I read the Communist Manifesto in Esperanto and, would you believe it, it puts forth the very same ideas as the English version I read all those years ago! Amazing.
That's the litmus test; if it is working, communicating nuanced ideas, it must be working and not as deficient as you seem to be claiming.

I still register myself as 'Basic A1-A2', I don't want to get carried away with any claims of proficiency.

I am not and do not claim to be an expert in Esperanto. However, I have a fair reading knowledge. In recent years I have read several serious, even scholarly, articles in Esperanto which use the supposedly "simple" Esperanto verb system, and they were fully intelligible and precise. No problem or difficulty in understanding the nuances. Yes, with real nuances. It simply is not necessary that E-o mirror the supposed "national" or "ethnic" languages in their verb systems. In fact, I consider this actually harmful, considering that those verb systems vary all over the map, so to speak. Esperanto is what it is, end before criticizing it beginners should master and use it. "I know better" is an infection which afflicts so many beginners.