Here in the Ohio Valley, US, it has been hot and sunny all week... Then as soon as the weekend comes, now the thunderstorms start! Certainly not helpful changes for me, I daresay!

Eh, on the document... (I know the attitude of my fellow posters seems to indicate no one wants to see it discussed much, but... )

I despise complex phrases for simple correlatives: “Chi tie” should formally just become the shorter & truncated “chite,” which is how faster speakers say it anyway - much like we have "nun" for "now." For that matter, I'd also suggest “chi tiu” becoming “chitju” but I won't push my luck.

I found it weird at first, so I somewhat agree, but I've gotten used to it though. It does concern me how everyone else seems to use 'ĉi tie/tiu' while I've fallen into the habit of using 'tie/tiu ĉi', I'll have to switch that around I guess.

Dropping the accusative case is also a somewhat agree. It's still a mild irritant to me. Still, I've started to get the hang of it without any issues, so I don't see it as much of a 'ZOMG we must be rid of it' issue anymore.

Anyway, doesn't Ido address most of the suggestions in the document, from my readings about it? Besides, my open source metaphor was given for a reason, not just for lulz. You're gonna have an easier time just creating an Esperanto offshoot and hoping people adopt it, than getting the changes adopted among a majority of Esperantists. And when you look at how other reform projects turned out when compared to Esperanto... I'm just saying, can't more constructive things be done? Like just supporting Ido, at least?

BlackOtaku:
Dropping the accusative case is also a somewhat agree. It's still a mild irritant to me. Still, I've started to get the hang of it without any issues, so I don't see it as much of a 'ZOMG we must be rid of it' issue anymore.

Drop the "n" at the end of adjectives, as it is redundant and not necessary.

No the -n at the end of adjectives is not redundant. I can only repeat: Esperanto reformists should know Esperanto before making suggestions of reforming. Appearently the author of the document posted here does not know it sufficiently well.

I despise complex phrases for simple correlatives: “Chi tie” should formally just become the shorter & truncated “chite,” which is how faster speakers say it anyway - much like we have "nun" for "now." For that matter, I'd also suggest “chi tiu” becoming “chitju” but I won't push my luck.

This almost made me laugh... I assume the author only heard speakers of some part of the world and not speakers of different lands.

I have never heard a fast speaker say ĉite/ĉitju instead of ĉi tie/ĉi tiu

in the first one (ĉite) I am really shocked about the fact that that change eliminates the more stressed vowel! How do you go from ĉi TIe to ĈIte??

In the second one, at least the stressed i stays, but as a semivowel j and in a non-stressed silable .

For me, it's like saying that in Spanish, when you speak fast, María would become Mara or Maria (with the first a stressed). I cannot think of an example using English right now, but I'm sure most of you can.

By the way, going back on topic... Today is sunny and nice again, some days were really cold, just to remind us that winter is coming...

Amike,

Daniel.

Well that was predictable, ladies and gentlemen. It appears the predictions of my former instructor were right on target if these sentiments reflect the wider universe of Esperantists.

Thank you, BlackOtaku, for at least thinking reflectively before posting. I agree w/ your comments.

Just for the record, neither my instructor (who, yes, I've since also found some flaws in his understanding of Eo in his email - perhaps he was writing quickly off the top of his head, don't know) NOR I are saying that any of these changes indicate a "new" offshoot of the language. Just (as one put it) "patches" to improve the existing one and make it more acceptable and easier to understand.

The confusion over correlatives I've since proven for myself in real life. On a ski trip, one of my friends met a French Canadian woman who was familiar with Eo, and we got to teaching everyone some phrases at the table. Yes, new students, but the tie, tio tiel, etc thing bordered on disastrous, and actually eventually killed everyone's interest. It was esp frustrating for my friends that already knew Italian or Spanish, who were convinced that we must be wrong -- there was no way these words would be so much alike.

chicago1:Well that was predictable, ladies and gentlemen.

Yes, that was predictable. It happens anywhere exactly this way. Go to people and say: "Hi, I have not the slightest clue of what you are doing, but I tell you, you are doing it wrong and I know how to do it better. If you do not accept that, it shows you are simply too closed minded."

Go to any other community with this attitude and you'll get the same reactions. You can observe that anywhere on the net in discussion forums on any topic. Completly boring.

This kind of action even has a name: trolling.

And now excuse me. My bag of troll food is finished.

You trolls are so lame and you do not even realize that.

The confusion over correlatives I've since proven for myself in real life. On a ski trip, one of my friends met a French Canadian woman who was familiar with Eo, and we got to teaching everyone some phrases at the table. Yes, new students, but the tie, tio tiel, etc thing bordered on disastrous, and actually eventually killed everyone's interest. It was esp frustrating for my friends that already knew Italian or Spanish, who were convinced that we must be wrong -- there was no way these words would be so much alike.

This is what I felt was probably most compelling in the document. I didn't want to comment on it however, because I've never had the luxury of having had a spoken conversation in Esperanto; so I can't say whether it is a big problem or not.

I realize that your suggestions are small changes, but I also agree with you that Esperantists are not typically open to changing the language much, which is why I suggested an offshoot. You would likely find least resistance that way, but you'd still have to convince people to adopt it. In such a case, Ido incorporates many of these reforms anyway; that's why I say it's just best to support it instead.

And finally; I don't quite get why some in this thread have been so rude about their opposition to it (yes, I find ignoring the OP and intentionally derailing the thread, though humorous, extremely rude). I hope though, that no matter how many of these threads/discussions that I come to see in the future, and no matter how tired I get of them, I will at least listen to and civilly debate what points I disagree with. And of course, kudos should also be given to the others who actually commented on the topic instead of ignoring it, like Johmue who pointed out the accusative case issue (though, doesn't Ido strip out the accusative case? How do they do it while keeping the language understandable?) and Daniel (henma).

chicago1:The confusion over correlatives I've since proven for myself in real life. On a ski trip, one of my friends met a French Canadian woman who was familiar with Eo, and we got to teaching everyone some phrases at the table. Yes, new students, but the tie, tio tiel, etc thing bordered on disastrous, and actually eventually killed everyone's interest. It was esp frustrating for my friends that already knew Italian or Spanish, who were convinced that we must be wrong -- there was no way these words would be so much alike.

May I suggest it was the fault of the teacher? The role of a teacher is not just to impart knowledge but (mostly, perhaps) is to inspire students and build their self-motivation to learn. If that had been me, and I had a bunch of beginners and I could sense they were losing their interest and motivation, I'd have switched to something else.

In terms of motivation, I think beginners might be a bit dazzled and impressed by the elegance of the table of correlatives, but learning it is another matter. I.e. show it to inspire them, but don't teach all of it right away. I'd start off with, say, the '-o's, and not do the whole table at once. Curious students are going to try using the other words on the table on their own, which is perfectly natural and desirable.

As for words seeming similar at first glance, it's not a situation unique to Esperanto. When did Japanese I got annoyed when words seemed alike either in appearance or in sound. Take these as an example: 聞 and 開. ('listen' and 'open') It can take a bit of effort to distinguish such words fluently, but you get there eventually. The teacher also should have said something like that.

BlackOtaku:This is what I felt was probably most compelling in the document. I didn't want to comment on it however, because I've never had the luxury of having had a spoken conversation in Esperanto; so I can't say whether it is a big problem or not.

So go and make the experience of spoken conversations in Esperanto and see, that the problem does not exist.

I realize that your suggestions are small changes, but I also agree with you that Esperantists are not typically open to changing the language much, which is why I suggested an offshoot.

As I have already written here: I love to discuss weaknesses of Esperanto. But only with people who know Esperanto. Not with people who got frustrated by the beginners course and then want apply some "helpful changes".

And finally; I don't quite get why some in this thread have been so rude about their opposition to it (yes, I find ignoring the OP and intentionally derailing the thread, though humorous, extremely rude). I hope though, that no matter how many of these threads/discussions that I come to see in the future, and no matter how tired I get of them, I will at least listen to and civilly debate what points I disagree with.

No problem but again: Only with people who know the topic.

It is simply not worth it discussing with trolls.

johmue:

BlackOtaku:This is what I felt was probably most compelling in the document. I didn't want to comment on it however, because I've never had the luxury of having had a spoken conversation in Esperanto; so I can't say whether it is a big problem or not.

So go and make the experience of spoken conversations in Esperanto and see, that the problem does not exist.

I realize that your suggestions are small changes, but I also agree with you that Esperantists are not typically open to changing the language much, which is why I suggested an offshoot.

As I have already written here: I love to discuss weaknesses of Esperanto. But only with people who know Esperanto. Not with people who got frustrated by the beginners course and then want apply some "helpful changes".

And finally; I don't quite get why some in this thread have been so rude about their opposition to it (yes, I find ignoring the OP and intentionally derailing the thread, though humorous, extremely rude). I hope though, that no matter how many of these threads/discussions that I come to see in the future, and no matter how tired I get of them, I will at least listen to and civilly debate what points I disagree with.

No problem but again: Only with people who know the topic.

It is simply not worth it discussing with trolls.

I agree with what you are saying; I'm just a bit reluctant to call him a troll before giving him the chance to prove himself one (through stubbornness, refusal to compromise or admit he is wrong on something that he is clearly wrong about).

I've had the experience of having to deal with a troll in a similar vein of 'why, all you have to do is this thing which has been discussed to death and been proven impractical/needless beyond any doubt' on another subject, on another site. So I understand the desire to simply ignore or dismiss the topic and save everyone the frustration, but if the person might genuinely want a discussion, I think it's unfair to immediately assume that they are trolling (unless they try to start the discussion in an obviously trollish manner).

BlackOtaku:I think it's unfair to immediately assume that they are trolling (unless they try to start the discussion in an obviously trollish manner).

Here he's proven himself a troll:

chicago:Well that was predictable, ...

And regarding the typical troll who claims to "reform" Esperanto. If he was not a troll he'd either be asking for example "Why do we need the -n after adjectives? Is it not redundant?" or he would know why we need it.