EdRobertson:Esperanto's plusses are it's easy to learn, is neutral, is worldwide, is a working, living language, and its international get-togethers are a whole load of fun. Its minusses are that not enough people speak it, and it has undeservedly acquired a reputation that its speakers are a hysterical weirdo sect living in the past and not in touch with reality.

We can do something about those minusses, starting with the perceived one. Once we've done that, the other minus of not having enough speakers might start to remedy itself.

Additionally, the positives are relative really. Neutrality wise, one (perhaps an anti-europeanist) might say that the european words that contribute the most to Esperanto aren't neutral at all due to being european (this is a complicated subject, but there's a reason why european vocabularies are so useful).

Ease is also relative. In my opinion, Interlingua seems almost easier than Esperanto*, because it's pretty much regular, flexible (in pronunciation too), yet still stays very similar to existing, yet very popular, languages.

So, once negatives have been solved, we'd also need to work on a way to make it so even those, who see what we see as positives in a different light, will be able to find the language at least acceptable, even if it helps "competitors".

(e.g. European vocab isn't all that bad and is perhaps more neutral than expected simply because THIS generation ACROSS the world owns it, instead of MANY generations BEFORE where European languages were very much regional, culturally biased languages (they still are in some cases.

Also, we can appeal to those who like to think of intelligence as being more diverse than traditionally though of, so we can say "hey, some might like All-world-super-language, some might like Lidepla, while some might find Esperanto more intuitive".

Perhaps looking at highly competitive industries like technology we can find some inspiration for positioning ourselves better.

The notion that national languages are unsuitable as candidates for an international language is certainly Zamenhofian. You can't get more Esperantist than that, Chainy.

Perhaps someone who knows the Fundamenta Krestomatio would be kind enough to post an an appropriate quote.

Is Zamenhoff the spirt of Esperanto though? Zam did have some pretty funky ideas after all.

ceigered:Is Zamenhoff the spirt of Esperanto though? Zam did have some pretty funky ideas after all.

In my opinio: No. I create my very own spirit of Esperanto language. And for me that means laŭtempa, esperantlingva muziko.

In my opinion, everybody should find its very own spirit of Esperanto.

Samideano (Eterne Rima)

"...multaj homoj miras kaj miras kial mi
Esperanton parolas
la klarigo estas simpla: mi tiel volas
kaj mi ne vivas en histori’
nek venas de l’ futur’
mi ekzistas hodiaŭ, antaŭ mi nenia mur’..."

sudanglo:The notion that national languages are unsuitable as candidates for an international language is certainly Zamenhofian. You can't get more Esperantist than that, Chainy.

Perhaps someone who knows the Fundamenta Krestomatio would be kind enough to post an an appropriate quote.

I'm sorry, but can somebody just explain to me what relevance the opinions of one person who died nearly 100 years ago have got to do with anything?

It's not his property. It belongs to everyone on earth. That's the point.

ceigered:Ease is also relative. In my opinion, Interlingua seems almost easier than Esperanto*, because it's pretty much regular, flexible (in pronunciation too), yet still stays very similar to existing, yet very popular, languages.

Sorry, but Interlingua is NOTHING like Esperanto. Interlingua is a language PROJECT. It's not a real language. Come back in 100 years when it's been in EXTENSIVE use by more than a handful of people.

Esperanto isn't a project. It's a living language.

EdRobertson:Sorry, but Interlingua is NOTHING like Esperanto. Interlingua is a language PROJECT. It's not a real language. Come back in 100 years when it's been in EXTENSIVE use by more than a handful of people.

Esperanto isn't a project. It's a living language.

Esperanto and Interlingua are both projects. They are also both languages.

A definition of project from MW: a specific plan or design : scheme

A definition of language: the words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a community

Interlingua has a community. Do not attempt to deny this.

EdRobertson:We need to start saying that people from different countries communicating is a good thing. It doesn't matter what method they use to do it, whether learning foreign languages, whether learning the languages of immigrant communities, whether learning threatened minority languages, whether using cut-down versions of languages of greater diffusion as linguae francae, or by learning Esperanto, that's up to them. They're all good, and to be encouraged. They all have their plusses and minusses. Esperanto's plusses are it's easy to learn, is neutral, is worldwide, is a working, living language, and its international get-togethers are a whole load of fun. Its minusses are that not enough people speak it, and it has undeservedly acquired a reputation that its speakers are a hysterical weirdo sect living in the past and not in touch with reality.

You make a whole lot of sense. I have to confess that I tend to feel a little uneasy at gatherings where an overwhelming amount of green-star flags are present at all times. If, at any other event, that flag were to be replaced by a national flag, that event could easily be perceived as ultra-nationalistic. In that sense, I too think that the esperantist ultra-orthodox part of the population's attitude is self-defeating and needs to take a Valium or two.

qwertz: In my opinio: No. I create my very own spirit of Esperanto language. And for me that means laŭtempa, esperantlingva muziko.

In my opinion, everybody should find its very own spirit of Esperanto.

Samideano (Eterne Rima)

"...multaj homoj miras kaj miras kial mi
Esperanton parolas
la klarigo estas simpla: mi tiel volas
kaj mi ne vivas en histori’
nek venas de l’ futur’
mi ekzistas hodiaŭ, antaŭ mi nenia mur’..."

I couldn't have said it in better words...and sounds.

I think some posts here are beside the point. The topic is 'how to promote Esperanto', the subtext being 'in order that more people learn it', because a lot of people desire to see it used as a genuine international auxiliary language. One of those people was Zamenhof, the language's creator. Other people think that that goal is naive or not worth striving for; there's not much for them to talk about here.

For me, I would say there is something about the spirit of Esperanto and the motivations of its creator which attract a lot of people to it. Of all the IALs, probably only Volapük rivaled that spirit. The others seemed a little to safe, dull, clinical, defensive, or lacking in passion etc to attain a big following.

The bottom line is that talking with people from another country is not perceived as a matter of life and death, while having a good income is, therefore English is most popular right now as a foreign language. A good advertisement for EO would focus on the idea that it makes people more equal when they talk to each other, as well as being relatively easier and very regular. If you look at the trends of human history, 'people becoming more equal with each other' is one of them, and EO is here to serve that end.