ceigered:
As a fellow "hater" of mal-words (hate is wrong there, but I just want to demonstrate how it's used for overly dramatic and inaccurate representation of an emotion other than upmost love), I understand why someone might not like them. But their existence and use isn't necessarily a crime as "unhappy" demonstrates, since they can often be quite useful. I personally feel that certain important (all 4 of them or something like that) 'opposite' pairs need true differentiation and as T0dd said they do exist.

In many of the more commonly used pairs, the MAL- word is vague because the root word is itself vague. BONA is semantically a blunt instrument, so MALBONA is no better. But as I said above, sometimes a blunt instrument is all we need.

In any language, including Esperanto, we must eventually move beyond the most generic terms and learn nuances of meaning.

If MALAMI doesn't quite express the loathing that you have in your heart, there's always ABOMENI or, if you want to be more clinical, HAVI ANTIPATION AL. Epikuro's error, beyond the fatuous "Orwellian" complaint, lies in supposing that the MAL- words exhaust the expressive power of Esperanto.

Certainly, VARMA just means "warm", and sometimes that's all you need. And sometimes MALVARMA is also all you need. But if you need more, you can use FROSTA, or GLACIA, and so forth, not to mention FORNA, BRULIGA, etc, on the other side.

I certainly have my own list of Esperanto words that I'm not keen on. I suppose we all do. Although I have no general complaint about the MAL- words, I've always found MALDEKSTRA cumbersome. I'd be pleased if LIVA overtook it in common usage. Obviously, there's no possibility of LIVA being more semantically "accurate" or "nuanced"; it's just less clumsy, in my opinion. But every language has its clumsy words, so no big deal.

For that matter, I've always wished that Z. had chosen something other than SCII for "know". And again, my reason is purely aesthetic. Borrowing VISI from German would have been a better choice, in my view. But my view is worth exactly what you paid for it.

Epikuro57:
What you say may be true of others who propose changes but not of me. My only concern is being able to express any thought in Esperanto that I can in English, that is not to lose in any way as a result of learning it. I've already seen how the unique structure of Esperanto makes it easier to learn than other languages and would only be interested in changes if they improve the language so it can be as expressive as possible.

So please let me as an experienced Esperanto speaker assure you, that your proposals in no way make the language more expressive. You can simply not judge that, because you do not yet speak the language.

Moreover your changes make the langauge more difficult to learn, as the learner needs to memorize more words.

Is it so hard for you to accept that the everyday experience with the language -- something that you don't have but I do -- shows that your "extensions" are not necessary?

There are indeed new words coming up in Esperanto, that do increase the expressiveness. Yours are not among them. Maybe "liva" but that's it.

T0dd:But if you need more, you can use FROSTA, or GLACIA, and so forth, not to mention FORNA, BRULIGA, etc, on the other side.

Even in this kind of topic, interesting things come up sometimes.

It would be annoying if we had to say long compound words such as "malvarmujo", "malmoldisko", etc. In these cases, "fridujo" and "durdisko" are clearly better. In other cases, malvarma and malmola sound appropriate. The fast learning process made possible by the mal-words is an important feature of Esperanto.

The only mal-word I don't like is "malfermi". I don't why, but I'm always confused as to which means close and which means open. I am used to think that "open" is the basic action, and "close" the "mal" one. Having it reversed confuses me.

But my view is worth exactly what you paid for it. (2)

T0dd:supposing that the MAL- words exhaust the expressive power of Esperanto.

Indeed I'd agree that they *add* to the expressive power of EO.

After all, if we go delete all the mal words and say "you can only say the regulation opposite word", then we've gone to the other extreme. A decent choice of words is enough to stave off any theoretical outbreak of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis blues, which EO has so there can't be too bigger problem (after all there aren't actually *that many* mal words in EO come to think of it).

EO propaganda though does often make it sound like EO itself is a shallow language by touting its simplicity and straight frowardness around (ironically the same straight-forwardness that gives the language such powerful and often complicated expressive power )

I think that Epikuro was right when he said...

My only concern is being able to express any thought in Esperanto that I can in English, that is not to lose in any way as a result of learning it.

We all want to be able to express ourselves easily. It's hard to do in a foreign language because you have to learn a new way of thinking.

Unfortunately Epikuro is going about this the wrong way when complaining about the mal- words.

There's a reason why most beginners with a zeal for reform lose that zeal when they have learned the language more thoroughly. In their studies, they learn that what they believed to be a barrier to expressing themselves may not actually be a barrier at all. Or else, perhaps they still don't like a certain feature, but they discover that this feature doesn't inhibit their ability to communicate their feelings.

Every language does things a little differently. For example, English has only one word for love, whereas Italian has two, with different meanings (romantic/physical love = amare; emotional/familial/friendship love = volere bene). But we English speakers are able to get on alright in spite of this inability to distinguish between the forms of love.

Esperanto doesn't have a huge vocabulary like English does, but the huge vocabulary in English is a blessing and a curse. It's so difficult for non-native speakers to learn all of those words and the fine shades of meaning. Truthfully, though Esperanto's word building system is unable to produce some of the fine shades that English produces, Esperanto's word building can sometimes distinguish much more finely than English. Frequently when translating from Esperanto to English, I have great difficulty in deciding how best to express something that is totally clear in the original Esperanto. Sometimes English's famously large vocabulary just doesn't have a word for something constructed in Esperanto (or else, maybe English has a word, but it is so technical, archaic, or rare that hardly anyone will understand you if you use it).

Any foreign language takes time and effort. Expressing yourself easily doesn't come overnight. But many learners of Esperanto, even ones who speak another foreign language proficiently, consider Esperanto to be their "second best" language after their native language, in terms of being able to express their thoughts and feelings.

Epikuro doesn't know much about Esperanto, so why argue with him?

Chainy:Epikuro doesn't know much about Esperanto, so why argue with him?

For the benefit of other beginners who may read the thread.

T0dd:

Chainy:Epikuro doesn't know much about Esperanto, so why argue with him?

For the benefit of other beginners who may read the thread.

Somehow I don't think beginners will find it useful wading through this thread. Especially as a load of it is written by Epikuro.

Every time someone tries to explain why the things Epikuro says are often rather silly, it just encourages him to come out with more silliness. And so it continues, on and on. Far from helpful!

RiotNrrd:I'm not actually addressing this note to Epikuro57, since he's behaving like a troll. I'm aiming these comments at the people manufacturing the troll food.

I absolutely agree with you. Why are people providing troll food?!

RiotNrrd:
If Epikuro57 wants to speak some hybrid of Esperanto and his own made-up language, I say let him.

Me, too.

RiotNrrd:He'll call it Esperanto. We'll call it occasionally unintelligible. Eventually he'll figure out that just making up words does not lead to enhanced communication, and that the world actually won't adopt his "improvements" any more than they have the last uncountable number of other proposals.

I don't understand why so many people get so upset about 'reformers' - like as if they fear the collapse of Esperanto tomorrow, just because some random guy turns up with a few 'proposals' of his own. Let's not be so touchy.

We should see the ideas of reformers for what they are - entirely theoretical. Meanwhile, all the other Esperantists happily get on with using the well-established form of the language.

RiotNrrd:
He'll either eventually drift away muttering epithets about the rigidity of Esperantists, or he'll learn to speak properly. Either way, these arguments are neither new nor interesting, nor are they worth wasting any time on.

I would say that a few messages in response to Epikuro were worthwhile, but then after he started to keep coming back with more and more criticisms about this and that, one thing after the next - it quickly became blatantly obvious, that any discussion was going to lead absolutely nowhere.

Chainy:We should see the ideas of reformers for what they are - entirely theoretical. Meanwhile, all the other Esperantists happily get on with using the well-established form of the language.

I do see reformers' ideas in this way. However let's assume hypothetically for a minute that your moan bin never gets created, and reformers continue to post there ideas here to the English forum. In your opinion, what's the best response? Do we (a)completely ignore them (a hard action to coordinate among all of our readers), (b)nicely and succinctly explain that Esperanto isn't open to reforms, and then ignore their follow-on messages, or (c) other? I am assuming that (ĉ) listen to their ideas and then engage in a debate isn't an option.

The thing is, a lot of beginners have ideas for reforms. Mostly they aren't really that serious and they grow out of it. Often if I feel someone is reasonable, I tell them that Esperanto isn't open to reforms, but that they should learn the language thoroughly first and then re-evaluate whether it really needs these reforms. If they aren't reasonable, then nothing you say really works, but you can't always tell from the first message if someone is reasonable.

Someone starting a thread with a message like "Can't I just leave off the -n endings?" could be a genuinely confused beginner who says "Oh, ok", when you explain the reason why, or they could be a rabid reformist.