In a way, what makes Esperanto what it is are a few simple rules.

1. phonetic spelling
2. no irregularities (verbs, nouns, etc)
3. each word is marked as what part of speach it is, eliminating most sentance structure rules)
4. lots of affixes for word building.

Could there be an Esperanto form of any language in this sense? Youl could apply this rules to Spanish for example. Not only that, but Spanish speakers would probably be able to read a lot of it without knowing Esperanto.

If you are asking whether Esperanto roots are important to it's ease, it's a mixed response I think. Some think Esperanto would be better with more international roots (e.g. a sample from the most common languages), but the fact remains that you have two maybe three major vocabulary sources in the word today - Latin (and its children Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and all the Greek words they absorbed, and partially English), Chinese (which donated many words to Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Malay), and you sort of have Arabic and a mix of European languages coming in for equal 3rd place. So if we were to "internationalise" EO's vocabulary, there's the risk of making it look incomprehensible at first sight to everyone just to be fair.

So, the roots sort of matter. They sort of aid learners by giving them something they *might* be able to relate to even if they don't know the grammar, so that they might understand still. So, we could technically "eo-grammarise" Spanish (which I believe some want to do in their conlang projects), and it might work out extremely well, as many romance speakers will understand it easily and English speakers won't have too much trouble. You could do the same for hawaiian, but it wouldn't be the same as Esperanto because it starts to lose the feeling of familiarity, well, except for maybe an odd 30,000 speakers.

But it's like an art piece - one small adjustment and the whole thing feels different .

Majkl:In a way, what makes Esperanto what it is are a few simple rules.

1. phonetic spelling
2. no irregularities (verbs, nouns, etc)
3. each word is marked as what part of speach it is, eliminating most sentance structure rules)
4. lots of affixes for word building.

Could there be an Esperanto form of any language in this sense? Youl could apply this rules to Spanish for example. Not only that, but Spanish speakers would probably be able to read a lot of it without knowing Esperanto.

You could perhaps substitute the roots of Esperanto and use the corresponding spanish words, that would make it easier for spanish speaking people to learn this (new) language.
But this still doesn't mean that you could use every spanish word in an Esperanto way, because the meaning of the affix system is to reduce as many roots as possible. You still would have to learn which spanish word has a corresponding Esperanto root.

Well if you changed other languages to fit the Esperanto rules.. Then you would basically end up with a new language, Example:

Esperante:
Mi amas blankajn katojn, brunajn hundojn, kaj mi ankaŭ ŝatas uzi la interreton.

Angle:
I lovas whitajn catojn, brownajn dogojn, and I alsaŭ likas usi the interneton.

But that’s if your not using set Esperanto phonetics.

A citation from Claude Piron:

When we reach the level of word order, the impression that we are changing the language becomes more acute. If I say, "My father wanted not that her friend use the car brand new", I arouse a sense of strangeness. But nevertheless this change does not render the language completely foreign. It remains English, even though perhaps poetic or archaic. We have reached a more interior plane than that of the sound system or the roots, but we are not yet at the kernel. Syntax is somewhat closer to the center. The phrase "My father he wanted not that her friend she used of the brand new car" sounds more foreign than the other just presented.

And yet we do not have the same impression that the language has been attacked in its very identity as we would encountering such phrases as I's fatherman ha-unwill she's friendman go-use he's new-new earthing or Fatherem no willis friendha usu newan caron. These sentences are no longer English, despite the fact that nearly all the roots have been preserved and that the phonetic system need not be changed to pronounce them. Why? Because this time we have assaulted the intrinsic plane, that of fundamental grammatical conception. The verb system, the possessive adjectives and other traits are quite different from even archaic, poetic, regional or mildly foreign English.

Proof that this plane is more fundamental than that of the forms of words we can take from the following point: the average speaker of English feels that a phrase as My moffy did not sut her shramp to gose the insable flar, although incomprehensible — it means nothing — might nevertheless be some kind of English or of English slang (in other words, it does not attack the identity of the language), whereas the sentence presented above {fatherem no willis friendha...) strikes even those who can decipher it as belonging to another linguistic universe.

Evildela:Well if you changed other languages to fit the Esperanto rules.. Then you would basically end up with a new language, Example:

Esperante:
Mi amas blankajn katojn, brunajn hundojn, kaj mi ankaŭ ŝatas uzi la interreton.

Angle:
I lovas whitajn catojn, brownajn dogojn, and I alsaŭ likas usi the interneton.

But that’s if your not using set Esperanto phonetics.

France: Je adoras les blanchajn chatojn, marronajn chienojn, et je aussi aimas utilisi le interneton.

Au pli bone: Je adoras le blanĉayn ĉatoyn, maronayn ĉienoyn, e je osi emas utilizi le interneton.

jan aleksan:

Evildela:Well if you changed other languages to fit the Esperanto rules.. Then you would basically end up with a new language, Example:

Esperante:
Mi amas blankajn katojn, brunajn hundojn, kaj mi ankaŭ ŝatas uzi la interreton.

Angle:
I lovas whitajn catojn, brownajn dogojn, and I alsaŭ likas usi the interneton.

But that’s if your not using set Esperanto phonetics.

France: Je adoras les blanchajn chatojn, marronajn chienojn, et je aussi aimas utilisi le interneton.

Au pli bone: Je adoras le blanĉayn ĉatoyn, maronayn ĉienoyn, e je osi emas utilizi le interneton.

Une problème: qu'en est-il de l'article masculin singulier ou l'article pluriel (si "le" est déjà choisi).

(One problem - what about the male singular article (if "le" is already chosen)

.

ceigered:

jan aleksan:

Evildela:Well if you changed other languages to fit the Esperanto rules.. Then you would basically end up with a new language, Example:

Esperante:
Mi amas blankajn katojn, brunajn hundojn, kaj mi ankaŭ ŝatas uzi la interreton.

Angle:
I lovas whitajn catojn, brownajn dogojn, and I alsaŭ likas usi the interneton.

But that’s if your not using set Esperanto phonetics.

France: Je adoras les blanchajn chatojn, marronajn chienojn, et je aussi aimas utilisi le interneton.

Au pli bone: Je adoras le blanĉayn ĉatoyn, maronayn ĉienoyn, e je osi emas utilizi le interneton.

Une problème: qu'en est-il de l'article masculin singulier ou l'article pluriel (si "le" est déjà choisi).

(One problem - what about the male singular article (if "le" is already chosen)

.

Oh, well, rule #5 - no gender

jan aleksan:

Evildela:Well if you changed other languages to fit the Esperanto rules.. Then you would basically end up with a new language, Example:

Esperante:
Mi amas blankajn katojn, brunajn hundojn, kaj mi ankaŭ ŝatas uzi la interreton.

Angle:
I lovas whitajn catojn, brownajn dogojn, and I alsaŭ likas usi the interneton.

But that’s if your not using set Esperanto phonetics.

France: Je adoras les blanchajn chatojn, marronajn chienojn, et je aussi aimas utilisi le interneton.

Au pli bone: Je adoras le blanĉayn ĉatoyn, maronayn ĉienoyn, e je osi emas utilizi le interneton.

Here an example of the language we get form Esperanto grammar and Spanish roots.

Hispane:
Yo amas blancajn gatojn, marronajn perrojn, y yo tambien gustas usi la interneton.

Now someone do a Chinese version using those four rules =P a mixed Chinese / Latin alphabet