EoMy:Wonder this petition helps ?

100,000 petition of esperanto as the international la...

Shouldn't they be stressing the word auxillary and secondary. Just ''international language'' sounds empirical, to me.

Shanemk:

EoMy:Wonder this petition helps ?

100,000 petition of esperanto as the international la...

Shouldn't they be stressing the word auxillary and secondary. Just ''international language'' sounds empirical, to me.

I sorta concur.

Perhaps they didn't want to bombard those new to the idea with big words like "auxiliary", since "international language" sounds more common these days. Of course, for many of those people, the idea of an international language being anything but an enforced first language for all humans probably is just as foreign a concept as the word auxiliary, so it probably should have been "auxiliary language" from the beginning.

Luckily, "Secondary Auxiliary language" is a bit redundant, unless you're planning on a "First auxiliary language" (e.g. interlingua). "Auxiliary" implies that it is not the primary language already, just how an auxiliary motor is not the main motor. That saves us the need of bombarding newbies to something imposingly big like:

"I propose Esperanto be the Secondary International Auxiliary language"

Publicity (when we've done something to deserve it) is one thing, hysterical old-style overblown propaganda and petitions with exaggerated claims and breathless misplaced fanatical enthusiasm is quite another.

The latter self-indulgent nonsense won't deliver the Esperanto movement with lots of new people. If anything it will bore existing users of the language and make them more likely to drift off. Let's concentrate on making Esperanto useful and enjoyable for those of us who do use the language, and then other ordinary normal people will come of their own accord, because we've got something to offer them.

As for other candidates, bugger their "improvements". I suggest they come back when people are able to go on holiday for a week, meet a load of people from all sorts of places and linguistic backgrounds, and get drunk (or not) and have a laugh with them, and hear what their lives are like, and start friendships with them (or not) without having to learn half a dozen or more languages than they already know.

That's what I can do with Esperanto at the moment. Any advance on that? No petitions needed, still less "recognition" by governments, or discussion about the "language problem", or "translation costs", or "language rights" and similar shit. Just get on with it.

EdRobertson:Publicity (when we've done something to deserve it) is one thing, hysterical old-style overblown propaganda and petitions with exaggerated claims and breathless misplaced fanatical enthusiasm is quite another.

The latter self-indulgent nonsense won't deliver the Esperanto movement with lots of new people. If anything it will bore existing users of the language and make them more likely to drift off. Let's concentrate on making Esperanto useful and enjoyable for those of us who do use the language, and then other ordinary normal people will come of their own accord, because we've got something to offer them.

As for other candidates, bugger their "improvements". I suggest they come back when people are able to go on holiday for a week, meet a load of people from all sorts of places and linguistic backgrounds, and get drunk (or not) and have a laugh with them, and hear what their lives are like, and start friendships with them (or not) without having to learn half a dozen or more languages than they already know.

That's what I can do with Esperanto at the moment. Any advance on that? No petitions needed, still less "recognition" by governments, or discussion about the "language problem", or "translation costs", or "language rights" and similar shit. Just get on with it.

Most people haven't even heard of Esperanto though. Not only that, using Esperanto as a global-friendship link should only profit from a larger speaking-group, up to a point at least.

I think Esperantists are a bit defensive when reforms are proposed. At least to me, this is a turn off.

Sometimes Esperantists give me the feeling that I'm sitting in front of very critical teachers. Maybe that is because many of the people who learn Esperanto are language buffs and knowledgeable about languages.

What is going to happen though once Esperanto becomes a universal second language? It will be adjusted. Perhaps, it has been awhile since most of you have been around children (particularly middle school children). They love change. They will change Esperanto, adding new twists to the way words are written and pronounced just for the fun of it. Some of those things will catch on.

This will not be the death of the language but instead proof that the language is alive...that it caught on not only with the language lovers but also with the guy that just wants to order a hot dog & coke.

I think what we forget sometimes is that languages have different levels. Language often morphs in song or on the street, only to morph back in a different setting. The language of the country farmer, factory worker, and doctor all differ. However, they are not mutually exclusive.

Esperantists have to let go a bit to allow their language to live. The world will not end. There is still a standard, "correct" way of speaking and writing. As people are exploring different ways to "improve" the language, they end up learning standard Esperanto pretty well.

What some learners of Esperanto don't seem to understand is that Esperanto changes naturally, as all languages change naturally. You can't make arbitrary reforms to it, just as we don't make arbitrary reforms to any other language. I think that some learners of Esperanto consider Esperanto to be a "project" rather than a living language. Maybe they don't consciously think this, but subconsciously they treat it differently than other world languages.

--

If you are studying French, I bet you can think of a lot of things that could be improved. It's easy to think of many aspects of French that could be made much easier and simpler. Certain confusing words could be replaced with other words. Certain grammatical forms might seem redundant; you could do away with those too. French would regain its position as the world's international language, if only we reformed it to make it easier. That's why reforming French is a great idea.

Do you think that if you explain your reforms of French to a bunch of French speakers, that you'll get a positive reception? "Great idea, let's make a bunch of changes to our language; it's clear that your suggestions are great improvements on the way we've been doing things!"

Of course not. My example with French seems ridiculous. French has evolved over time, naturally. A learner who proposes a lot of reforms of French will probably get laughed at by all of the existing French speakers; either laughed at, or yelled at, because I can imagine many French speakers being insulted that a beginning French student would have the audacity to propose all kinds of reforms, before even learning the language properly.

Some beginners seem to think that Esperanto should be different than French (or Chinese, Swahili, etc). They think that it should be open to reforms in a way that "natural" languages are not. This is why Esperanto speakers are not receptive to proposed reforms. Esperanto is a living language and we can't just go changing it around because we don't like something about it - just as we don't go changing around French, Chinese, or Swahili. It deserves the same respect as any living language. It is no longer a project under development, and it hasn't been for more than 100 years. It's time to let go of the reform proposals and let Esperanto evolve naturally, just as you let every other language evolve naturally.

---

Incidentally I think that most Esperanto speakers are relatively polite with turning down reform suggestions, considering how sick to death we are with hearing them. It's awfully rich to suppose that a beginning language student could see the problems in a language so astutely that they could propose reforms before even being able to speak the language. You can't possibly understand the utility of some of the grammatical features before gaining a reasonable fluency in the language. This is part of the reason why many beginners have reform ideas, and few advanced speakers. Some of those advanced speakers who are against language reforms are the same people as the former pro-reform beginners. As they learned more of the language, they lost the desire to reform it, since they better understood the reasons why things work the way they do. Zamenhof did extensive testing on the language before releasing it, and I think he did an amazingly good job.

I'm sure that as individuals learned the language they grew to appreciate it's more complicated aspects. At the same time, individuals who do not like the language's features can simply leave the movement. I don't think asking those people to leave is the best option.

My perspective is that of a special education teacher. The easiness and consistency of Esperanto is what attracted me to the language. Particularly, the springboard to languages website inspired me. At the same time, some students will never get the accusative. I'm not saying not to teach it. What I am saying is, if Esperanto hopes to be international, it has to be ready to include everyone.

In English, there are different levels. English in graduate school is more precise and complex than English in high school. English in high school is different from the English in a rap video or in a country music song.

People "propose" changes to "natural" languages all the time. Music drastically changes languages. We might not think those are improvements but to the writer of the song it is (example: word A now rhymes with word B).

I take the view of when in Rome, do as the Romans. There is standard Esperanto. At the same time, I also enjoy Ido. I've learned a lot from EsF too.

Sorry, I do not mean to be combative.

SDG:... if Esperanto hopes to be international, it has to be ready to include everyone.

I don't think Esperanto hopes for anything. Esperanto isn't sentient. It's a language, not a person.

SOME people have universal goals for the language. Other people do not. SOME people think that the language should be this way or that way. Other people accept it for what it is.

The people who have universal goals for the language are free to pursue those goals. But they are not setting the agenda for everyone. They are setting the agenda for themselves. Don't confuse their goals with the "language's" goals. The language doesn't have any goals. The people who speak the language have (or don't have) goals, on an individual basis.

The people who think that the language should be some way or other that it isn't will quickly find that the majority of existing speakers won't agree with them. That's too bad for the reformers, but that's just how it is. Complaining about it won't change that fact. Proving that everyone else is wrong will not change that fact. It is simply a fact, and one that is best just accepted, because it IS a fact, and I see no evidence that it will ever change.

You are right in that asking people to leave "the movement" (whatever your definition of "the movement" happens to be) is inappropriate. People should be free to determine whether they want to stick with it or leave it, all on their own. That is entirely their choice, and no one has the right to tell anyone else to exit stage left. Whether someone wants to accept the language as it is or move on to something else is always their own personal choice.

Pointing out that the language is what it is and needs to be accepted or rejected on its own existing merits is NOT the same as asking anyone to leave "the movement". It's simply cluing them into the reality of things.

People who decide to take matters into their own hands, and change the rules, vocabulary, sounds, alphabet, etc., are free to do so, with the understanding that whatever they end up with will no longer be Esperanto. Even if they call it Esperanto, it won't be, and they'll likely be speaking their new language by themselves.

A "take it or leave it" approach is too inflexible. It is all but an invitation for many people to give up the language. Furthermore, it is a bit of false advertising. It seems akin to religious fundamentalism, which is surprising to find.

What is the purpose of Esperanto? Does it want to be like any other natural language?

Natural languages do not have a "line in the sand." If anything, they have a multitude of lines. Crossing a few of them gets one further away from the standard language. However, that does not mean the person is not speaking the language. If I write:

The red car which was fast zoomed by the green car.

I am still speaking English even though I should have used "that."

If I go to the streets and hear "ax" instead of "ask," that is still English. It is a broken English that is moving away from the standard, but it is English nonetheless.

Esperanto is a beautiful language. It has the potential to provide many people with a chance to be bilingual and communicate outside of their culture. I'm not saying abandon the standard.

However, when people are recruited into a wonderfully consistent language that is easy to learn, it shouldn't be surprising that some of them dabble in reforms. If they are not driven away by the rigidity of the community, many of them will be back. It's not like they forget Esperanto when working on a reform project.

When it comes to "improving" Esperanto, while it probably can be done,I think we stand to lose more by the unrest and inevitable factions that would develop. Anyone wanting a window on that world only has to look at the fragmentation of the Cornish language revival.

If I remember correctly, didn't Zamenhof bind Esperanto's followers to the present state of the language until some state should adopt it officially (or something like that)?

117 years after Day One and still thriving is a good reason for maintaining the status quo.