qwertz, I wasn't even really talking about you. It's true that I see no link at all between identity, and the translation of a particular Esperanto word. But I think that lavagulo does see a link, even though I think that there is no link.

From his postings, it seems like he is personally offended to discover that the same Esperanto word is used to describe both his yard and the yard of a European person. It seems like he thinks Esperanto is somehow taking away his culture. He is wrong if he thinks so. But he is taking it too personally if he is becoming offended about the Esperanto name for his backyard, and making baseless accusations about Esperanto somehow trying to make everything homogenous and featureless.

I have no special wish to argue with anyone here. But if someone is so insistent that a certain thing can't possibly be called X in Esperanto, then I will certainly set the record straight. I've been involved with Esperanto for more than 10 years now and I think I can say a few things about common Esperanto usage, with some authority. And I'm an American who lives in the US (and has spent a lot of time in Europe, well enough to know what a European yard/garden is like), so I can't be dismissed as a European who doesn't know what a US backyard is like.

It's a shame to post a language question to a forum and then out and out reject the advice you receive. Why bother posting if you don't believe any of the people who give you the answer to your question on grammar or usage?

lavagulo, I've no idea if you're still reading this thread and there's not much I can add to Erinja's painstaking and comprehensive explanation of why ĝardeno is fine for your beloved yard, but I will add my own two bits and say your resistance to that word is in my view really quite baseless. All languages share cognates which do not necessarily convey the same nuance or meaning, and indeed whose meanings can vary quite fundamentally in many cases. As far as I can see there is no reason to consider ĝardeno any more vague than the many other words you will encounter in Esperanto that have some kind of culturally or regionally unique significance. If this supposed problem is what you use to support your assertion that Esperanto is "stagnant", then I think you'll have to try again, and try harder.

I can think of worse words then ĝardeno to worry about, such as:

Pen = Plumo
Feather = Plumo

However to me that just means I have to learn less roots /success

tommjames, I still read the threads that interest me, although I wasn't going to spend any more time on this issue. However, I will take a moment to respond to you.

In my next to last post, I told erinja that I understood what she was driving at. I also said that I agreed with Alciona's post on the same subject. I accepted what they were saying and if I have an occasion to use the word "ĝardeno" in a post or email, I will most assuredly do so. If you and erinja had read what I said a little more carefully, you wouldn't be so annoyed with me. OK, I argued about this more than I should have because I don't particularly like the word "ĝardeno". I think it sounds artificial. I repeat, I think it sounds artificial. I think Esperanto should be flexible enough to recognize that different countries have different customs, different views. So there are things about Esperanto that I don't like. So what!?! Aren't there things about it that you don't like? Sure there are.

On this subject of yards and gardens, there are two verbs you can use for tending the grass:
"tondi la herbon" and "falĉi la herbon". Now just why can't Esperanto come up with more than one way to talk about grassy plots of ground that a house sits on?

erinja has added two posts to this thread after I suggested that she is as bull-headed as I am. She said in one that she thinks that I am personally offended about all this, and in another, that I am making baseless accusations about Esperanto and in another that I am intensely resistant to change. I didn't respond to those posts because I said that I was not going to keep talking about this any more and because her attacks didn't bother me. I just didn't feel the need to defend myself against her ranting. But it has gone on long enough. If I were as offended or angry or immature as she seems to think I am, I would have blistered her good before now for her behavior.

Remember this quote from Alciona? "To me, the garden/yard issue seems to sum up what's best and worst about Esperanto, and what's best and worst about English. English has 170,000 words and many of those words have nuances that make them unique. The fact that Esperanto has far, far fewer words makes it easier to learn, but you're going to lose a lot of subtleties in translation."

I said that I agreed with that statement. It makes a lot of sense. Can you deny that that statement applies to words like "gardeno"? Everybody needs to simmer down. I never, never, never intended to start a war when I asked in my first post how to translate the word "yard". I never anticipated offending anyone. But all of you who are acting so offended need to understand that you are beginning to offend me.

Remember this quote from Alciona? "To me, the garden/yard issue seems to sum up what's best and worst about Esperanto, and what's best and worst about English. English has 170,000 words and many of those words have nuances that make them unique. The fact that Esperanto has far, far fewer words makes it easier to learn, but you're going to lose a lot of subtleties in translation."

I couldn't disagree with this more. Having less words/roots doesn't make a language less expressive and no matter what the languages are something is always lost in translation.
...just my opinion, could be wrong...

lavagulo:If you and erinja had read what I said a little more carefully, you wouldn't be so annoyed with me.

I'm not annoyed with you, I just think your arguments against ĝardeno don't stack up. If you want to continue thinking this word is somehow deficient and use it only begrudgingly then fine, no skin off my nose. I just think it's wrong to think that way, for all the reasons Erinja pointed out as well as what I chimed in with.

lavagulo:So there are things about Esperanto that I don't like. So what!?!

I have nothing at all against you disliking a particular aspect of Esperanto or even the language as a whole. I would however be concerned if your dislike was based on misconceptions about the language, which I believe are present in this case. Hence my responses.

To my mind Erinja completely nailed it when she said:

erinja:The Esperanto word "ĝardeno" is much more limited in meaning than the English word "yard". So maybe you should come up with some special word to describe your property in English, so that no one thinks that deer eat your plants in the exercise area of your prison (a yard).

What you are arguing against with respect to ĝardeno in fact applies more strongly to the very English word you are trying to translate! If this is not sufficient to demonstrate to you that ĝardeno should not be considered an overly nebulous translation then I really do not know what will.

Ditto what tommjames said, and erinja seems to be incredibly accurate, rather than bull-headed. The ultimate goal is being understood as clearly as possible by someone whose only common ground is Esperanto; ĝardeno or ĝardenego suits.

This situation reminds me of when I was learning German and I found out the word for secondary school in German is 'Gymnasium'. At first it was hard for me not to picture all German high school kids spending their days leaping off pommel horses and unparallel bars while wearing tights. However if I'd said 'Hochschule' (highschool) I would have been incorrect, as that refers to tertiary education. Eventually your brain will just accept that a word can look the same but mean something else in a foreign tongue, and it won't seem artificial anymore.

If the noun doesn't express what you mean adequately why not just add an adjective, a prefix or a suffix to expand upon the basic meaning? That way you're not adding neologisms into the language and you can express the subtleties that are lacking in the root of the word.

If it's a big garden, why not a ĝardenego as 3rdblade suggested? If it's a garden comprising of wilderness area why not a sovaĝa ĝardeno or natura ĝardeno? A yard comprising mostly lawn could be a herba ĝardeno.

I'm a newbie with a poor vocabulary so I can't think of a good adjective to describe the type of yard you have, I'm afraid. I'm sure others will have some better suggestions!

Everyone take a deap breath of the good stuff and remain calm!

Basically, the misunderstanding I see is that "ĝardeno" is being perceived as having a particular nuance, the same one as Garden, and not having a particular nuance, e.g. yard, field, backyard, paddock, etc. However, remember this - Esperanto is an international language and does not have the same stigma and associations to words that English does.

Everyone's gardens are "ĝardenoj", so no one has to worry about giving the wrong impression. If you have a yard (whatever that is in US English), and don't want to give the nuance that you have a lovely little garden looked after by a dedicated old rose-planting nanny, then fret not, as no one will get that impression. They'll know automatically that you're talking about a lot of property around your house, whether it's paved, grassed, or a whole field full of unicorns and stuff like that[/quote](biblical translation joke).

If you need to specify, use "ĝardenego" (a big garden/yard, could be a grassy unkempt field or a mansion's garden), "ĝardeneto" (a petite garden/yard, probably gonna be a courtyard or a small flowery garden), "malgranda/eta gardeno" (a small garden, but as it is unsuffixed it's probably more ambiguous), "belĝardeno" (a beauty-garden, so probably definitely not a yard or field at all!), "belĝardenego", ktp (etc).
(Just like 3rdblade and Alciona said).

So in conclusion, there is nothing to be worried about, nothing to be angry about, nothing to be felt as missing. Esperanto has the capabilities to specify this at least as much as Australian English does. And given that we Australians probably have more gardens that people in the US do (all you city people and your apartments - joking!) (proportionately speaking), I assume that it should work just as well as US English too.
And nothing's really being lost in translation either - "gxardeno" refers to EVERY type of dirt around your house, no one will go "Oh, this person has anything BUT a yard around their house".

3rdblade:
The ultimate goal is being understood as clearly as possible by someone whose only common ground is Esperanto; ĝardeno or ĝardenego suits.

Hhm, sounds like a really big e-o language experiment because I assume there will show up a lot of similar culture caused "yard/ĝardeno" disscussions in the future.

3rdblade:
Eventually your brain will just accept that a word can look the same but mean something else in a foreign tongue, and it won't seem artificial anymore.

Yes, in my opinion someones brain has to accept, that a bunch of experiences, which relates right now to a former saved (experienced) and daily confirmed concept (yard, garden) could got another or enhanced place inside someone's beliefs. In my opinion, that's a matter due to the brains economical function someone has to explain/ to get accepted its brain that something still working perfectly could need some enhancement. The reasons for that change or better enhancement process could be "multkarakteriĝas". And this process will take some time, too. Excluding someone can satisfy that this enhancement has very high value right here, right now.

Oh, darned. That sounds like a description how to use correct some "e-o stubborn softener pills".

Poooo! That was really difficult to explain in English. Hopefully I got the right non-offending words in English.