Nicholas:I think most linguists focus on a specific issue or specific language or set of languages. I think planned languages would not be of interest to most linguists.

I'm actually focusing my linguistic work towards planned/constructed languages- notably the theory and sociolinguistic effects of fictional constructed languages (Klingon, Navi) as well as auxiliary languages (Esperanto, Interlingua, Angos).

I was never a fan of Chomsky to begin with; I'm not surprised that his theories are losing ground in the linguistic mainstream.

Nicholas:Chomsky's ... political ideas are certainly bizarre ...

I couldn't agree less. In fact, I almost invariably support what Chomsky says politically, and I think he should stick to doing that. And then linguists could stop drawing trees and get back to doing PROPER linguistics, i.e. comparative and historical linguistics.

If I may ask, EdRobertson, what is your occupation?

erinja:What I will say was that this committee was told, and accepted, that the Ana Renkontas course is more colloquial in tone. Although things that are actually grammatically *wrong* would not have been accepted, if something is colloquial ... but not actually wrong, that would have been allowed to pass through.

... it looks like the shady grammar was in the sample answers). So the pri -i construction was never checked by the Academy. If it were me, I wouldn't have put it into the sample answers.

Yesterday it was a mistake.
Today it's colloquial.
By tomorrow, it might well be compulsory.

That's how all languages work.

razlem:If I may ask, EdRobertson, what is your occupation?

I've been a programmer for the past 30 years. Before that I was a foreign languages teacher.

EdRobertson:Yesterday it was a mistake.
Today it's colloquial.
By tomorrow, it might well be compulsory.

That's how all languages work.

+1

EdRobertson:And then linguists could stop drawing trees and get back to doing PROPER linguistics, i.e. comparative and historical linguistics

Are you being sarcastic here? ._.

razlem:

EdRobertson:And then linguists could stop drawing trees and get back to doing PROPER linguistics, i.e. comparative and historical linguistics

Are you being sarcastic here? ._.

No, not entirely. There is a case for trying to get to grips with non-trivial grammar, of course, but I'd say that an emphasis on cross-linguistic and diachronic aspects of this can only help their analysis.

EdRobertson:Yesterday it was a mistake.
Today it's colloquial.
By tomorrow, it might well be compulsory.

That's how all languages work.

"Revolution is the process by which heresy becomes dogma." I heard this quoted in a public lecture many years ago. I wonder who said or wrote it first.

However I wouldn't expect the phenomenon in Esperanto as much as in other languages, because of the role of the Fundamento and the Akademio in stabilising usage.

EdRobertson:

razlem:

EdRobertson:And then linguists could stop drawing trees and get back to doing PROPER linguistics, i.e. comparative and historical linguistics

Are you being sarcastic here? ._.

No, not entirely. There is a case for trying to get to grips with non-trivial grammar, of course, but I'd say that an emphasis on cross-linguistic and diachronic aspects of this can only help their analysis.

But those trees are pretty!

Miland:However I wouldn't expect the phenomenon in Esperanto as much as in other languages, because of the role of the Fundamento and the Akademio in stabilising usage.

I guess we could look at what causes revolutions, and look at what Esperanto's community is like at the moment - since there's no problem, and everything is working well, all is good as far as the community is concerned, so no change is needed.

Or more correctly, the community does recognise some potential problems, but there's no suitable solution nor a solution everyone can agree on, so there's no point in changing anything as it'd create a plethora of problems.

This is how you might rewrite your examples Altebrilas. I think it is petty clear that all the original sentences came from a beginner.

(1) Ne plaĉas al mi, vidi min kiel elitanon. Jen unu usonano kiu ne interesiĝas esti mondreganto.

(2)Mi aldonas ke ni devas agnoski ke ni estas ĉiuj malsamaj kaj opinias ke ni devus klopodi vivi kune en amikeco.

(3) Mi brile sukcesis en la federala rem-ekzameno por kvalifikiĝi kiel iniciatanto. (No idea what he is talking about so can't offer perfect translation

(4)li ricevas insultojn de instruistoj kaj minacojn pri mortigo de aliaj lernantoj ktp. ...

(5)Dekstraj militantoj akuzis Jangon, ke li estas komunisto,..