본문으로
댓글 쓰기

Why Esperanto won’t diverge into dialects

글쓴이: rapn21, 2019년 5월 6일

글: 32

언어: English

walfino (프로필 보기) 2019년 6월 14일 오후 2:55:07

I think ri-ismo is a dialect. I have friends (a married couple) who speak it and sometimes when they use words like "ivi" or "edziĉo" instead of edzo for example it feels weird and I take a while to understand.

Zam_franca (프로필 보기) 2019년 6월 22일 오후 4:35:34

MiMalamasLaAnglan:English might not have split into different languages, but when it changed from Old English to Middle English, it basically turned into a different language.
Vi nomiĝas "MiMalamasLaAnglan", vi diras "ne krokodilu" kaj vi skribas en angle ? Estas tre amuza. Mi ne koleras,nur mi ridas

Zam_franca (프로필 보기) 2019년 6월 22일 오후 4:36:33

Mi pensas ke vi pravas, neniu devas krokodili en la angla ĉi tie
(korektita 5 monatoj post)

Droody (프로필 보기) 2019년 6월 24일 오후 7:57:59

In my opinion, Esperanto is a somewhat flexible, dynamic language.
You do get a few instances where several wordings and such could be used.

Take that with a grain of salt though, I'm a newcomer who knows barely a lick of Esperanto!

Metsis (프로필 보기) 2019년 6월 25일 오전 7:48:04

Droody:In my opinion, Esperanto is a somewhat flexible, dynamic language.
You do get a few instances where several wordings and such could be used.
This is a double-edged sword. It is true, that you can relatively easily come up words in case you don't know the exact ones. This helps to get your message through in everyday situations. Perhaps this easiness among other things has caused certain vagueness in scientific texts, I don't know. I have found it hard to find good, new writings in E-o, when it comes to computer science (yes, I'm familiar with STEB).

I see a certain parallelism in, that e.g. articles in Monato are quite often written in a style, where the need to excessively play with words, tweaking and twisting them has superseded any reasonable requirements of clarity.

Miono (프로필 보기) 2019년 7월 6일 오전 12:24:13

Maybe I'm wrong, but I sometimes think Ido could be a sort of dialect, depending on how one defines dialect.

Can a language be a dialect of another, even if the diverge was caused artificially? I'm not sure.
That's rather a philosophical idea, perhaps.

BillyShears (프로필 보기) 2019년 7월 7일 오후 12:35:16

Miono:Maybe I'm wrong, but I sometimes think Ido could be a sort of dialect, depending on how one defines dialect.

Can a language be a dialect of another, even if the diverge was caused artificially? I'm not sure.
That's rather a philosophical idea, perhaps.
As long as Esperanto is considered a language, you would be correct. A dialect can be a dialect even if it is caused artificially.

BillyShears (프로필 보기) 2019년 7월 7일 오후 12:36:10

Should we then permit the creation of dialects in Esperanto, and hold a standard, international Esperanto as English already does?

Zam_franca (프로필 보기) 2019년 7월 7일 오후 1:44:05

BillyShears:Should we then permit the creation of dialects in Esperanto, and hold a standard, international Esperanto as English already does?
Why we sould do this ? I am sorry but this is nonsense !

Kial ni devus fari tion ? Mi bedaŭras sed estas sensencaĵo !

walfino (프로필 보기) 2019년 7월 10일 오후 1:59:55

BillyShears:Should we then permit the creation of dialects in Esperanto, and hold a standard, international Esperanto as English already does?
But there are already some dialects. Ri-ismo, Esperant' etc. come to mind (even if Esperant' seems somewhat artificial). And we already have a standard international Esperanto defined by the fundamento.

However to me beginner standard Esperanto sometimes feels like a different dialect from experienced standard Esperanto (which usually has a much higher proportion of adverbs, and adjectives used as verbs, for example).

다시 위로