If Esperanto is meant to be anything, it is to be everyone's second language. Therefore it should be easy to learn but still be able to express anything.

ceigered:Horsto, German is a native language, not a constructed language. I think the rideti-unlikers here wouldn't mind saying 'lächeln' in German. But it doesn't seem right for Esperanto, which is meant to be logical and somewhat capable in all situations. It just seems a little divergent from the spirit of Esperanto.

Sorry, but you are almost completely wrong.
1) The current German (Hochdeutsch) was also to some extent constructed from existing dialects. I think the same is true for some other so called native languages.
2) Esperanto has been constructed, but the period of construction ended more than 100 years ago. Please treat Esperanto like every other language.
3) Esperanto is not mainly meant to be logical, please see the message of RiotNrrd.

tommjames:
I think the point is that as far as rideti goes, it wasn't done "as best as possible". As best as possible would have clearly been to have a different root, enabling the expression of both diminutive/amplified laughs AND smiles, all four of which are entirely valid and useful ideas despite the fact some languages like German may not have corresponding words for them. Why did it have to be grounded in the root for laughing, just because laughing happens to entail the act of smiling?

Sorry, I still don't understand, perhaps because of the German language, why laughing and smiling are completely different things and need to have different roots. It's in the spirit of Esperanto to use similar words for similar things. The advantage not to have to learn two different words is more important than the disadvantage, that you can not express the level of laugh by -et- or -eg-, ĉu ne?

horsto:why laughing and smiling are completely different things

I'm not saying they're completely different. Just not sufficiently similar to warrant expressing one as a diminuation of the other.

horsto:The advantage not to have to learn two different words is more important than the disadvantage, that you can not express the level of laugh by -et- or -eg-, ĉu ne?

Well you still have to learn two different things, 1) that rid' means laugh, and 2) that rid' combined with et means smile. Granted you only needed to learn 1 root, but to actually use these words you still have to learn the same number of things.

The ability of Esperanto to cut down on the number of roots that need to be learned by way of schematic based word construction is something I generally appreciate in Esperanto, but for me the main benefit is that it helps you to comprehend words you've never seen before, but whose constituent parts you already know. I remember when I was a beginner and I saw malsanulejo for the first time I knew immediately what it meant, and at that moment I truly understood the power of the schematic approach. (I think that was also when I fell in love with the language too ) I think we've all been there at some point.. trawling through a tract of never before seen words, yet still managing to syphon out some of the meaning. However for a smile I simply fail to see how rideto is at all useful to this end, unless you're a native speaker of some language where a smile happens to be expressed in the same way (German apparently being an example of that), thus you already have that type of construction in your mind. All I would see is a small or weak laugh, like a chuckle or a halfhearted reaction to a badly told joke (and I've spoken to speakers of numerous other languages besides English and they all felt the same way).

Anyway I've about done this subject to death so I think I'll bail out at this point. Hope I wasn't to obnoxious

Well, imagine you have just learned ridi, and someone tells you 'li ridetas'. Then you have quite an idea what that person is doing, you may not have the exact meaning but know what it's about. While if it's a new root this would not help you at all.

jchthys:I feel that (despite certain language’s use of a form of ‘laugh’ for ‘smile’) it would improve the richness of a language to have a separate word.

So what you're saying is any language that doesn't conform to your particular idea is linguistically impoverished in some way?

Wow, that is one of the more culturally imperialistic things I've heard today.

By the way, could anybody tell me the right way to say these things correctly in Esperanto:
[LISTO]
a little smile (eta rideto? malgranda rideto?)
a smile
a big smile (ega rideto? ridetego? granda rideto?)
a little laugh or a chuckle (eta rido?)
a laugh
a big laugh (ridego?)[/list]

I once wrote something similar about et, but a little lower on the body: mametoj.

Momomomomo:EDIT: just spotted my poll says I though I was odd... yeah that's supposed to be it was odd

Actually, that typo is thoughtprovoking. Sometimes when I run into things like rideti, I consider whether my personal experience (native language, for example... Sapir-Whorf, anybody?) may be misleading me. This forces me to think about definitions of the related words, and ask myself why this different arrangement disturbs me. Maybe I am odd. Sometimes I can then change my way of categorizing things in a way that harmonizes the new way with mine. Sometimes I can't.

TetsuoTW:Wow, that is one of the more culturally imperialistic things I've heard today.

Please keep in mind everything that this is in relation to Esperanto as a world language and promoting it's use as one that's logical, flexible and easy for everyone - someone is just giving their opinion on how they think having a new word root for 'smile' could be helpful. Otherwise, Esperanto isn't much of a world language if people from around the world can't have their say about it can they?

And a language might not be 'linguistically impoverished' if they don't have a word for smile. Esperanto might not be living up to its fullest potential though without one.

Calling it culturally imperialistic is going a bit far and undeserved IMHO.

(Sorry for butting in there!)

Rogir:Well, imagine you have just learned ridi, and someone tells you 'li ridetas'. Then you have quite an idea what that person is doing, you may not have the exact meaning but know what it's about. While if it's a new root this would not help you at all.

Great point!

Horsto:Sorry, but you are almost completely wrong.
1) The current German (Hochdeutsch) was also to some extent constructed from existing dialects. I think the same is true for some other so called native languages.
2) Esperanto has been constructed, but the period of construction ended more than 100 years ago. Please treat Esperanto like every other language.
3) Esperanto is not mainly meant to be logical, please see the message of RiotNrrd.

1) Hochdeutsch point - well yes, but also no. It's still a natlang that went through a VERY different process of development than Esperanto which was more or less created from scratch. The purpose of Hochdeutsch and the purpose of Esperanto also differ.
2) While I see what you say about the age of Esperanto, there is a danger in treating it like any other language, especially since it's not just any language that has the burden and honour of being intended to be a global language.
And the period of construction never ends . However I would completely agree with you if we were debating a major structural change to the language, but one word is no big deal especially since new words are brought into languages daily - yesterday I found out 'hektik' apparently means 'cool' in colloquial Australian English.
3) But logic isn't that bad to have hey? But you're right, we don't want EO to be like Lojban... otherwise everyone might as well learn lojban (which mathematically challenged members of the community like me might not take to very willingly).

How bout me being only a debatable 50%-60% wrong?

Back @ general discussion:
Why hasn't anyone mentioned the benefits of having a separate word for smiling in technical writing? I mean, who rights technical writing about smiling? But still a point that might add to interesting discussion.

I have to agree that laughing and smiling are two completely different things.
Smile=expresses happiness
Laughter=expresses that you find something humorous
So I've always thought rideti was odd, but never really thought seriously on it.

Finding something humorous usually makes you happy, which makes you smile.
So I can see where people might think that a smile could be called a little laugh but...

Catching a cold makes you sick which makes you sneeze...So by the same logic, a sneeze should be called a "little cold"?
Or it being summer which causes heat, which makes you sweat... So sweating should be a "little summer"?

I may be wrong, but that seems like the logic rideti is using, if I were to try and make sense of it.

What about the reverse? A big smile meaning laughter... Does anyone here actually laugh out of pure happiness? Not an adrenaline rush giddyness, but just happiness?