RiotNrrd:"Esperanto, The Springboard Language

How do we translate Springboard neatly into EO?
Saltotabulo?

And how's "Helpulo" for a nickname for EO? "The helping fellow". Helps international communication, helps language learning, but isn't called "Helpanto" because that sounds confusing (La helpanto uzas helpanton sounds silly, but "La helpanto uzas Helpulon" sounds cute and nicknamish).

And Helpulo (Helple?) just sounds more exotic than "Esperanto" if you're able to look past the fact "helpo" is also in English . Sounds like some sister language to Sumerian actually.

I don't think we could change the name of Esperanto though. It will always stick. ALWAYS....

I'm guessing that renaming the language isn't really an option at this point, so we probably have to go with what we've got in that realm.

RiotNrrd:I'm guessing that renaming the language isn't really an option at this point, so we probably have to go with what we've got in that realm.

Mmm, yeah, I think a nickname is the only realistic idea in that general strategy. And I mean, Esperanto, the current name, was a nickname originally anyway, so who knows.

An actual name change would cause brand confusion from a marketing P.O.V..

I'd avoid words like egalitarian and equitable like the plague they are. Both are anathema to many in the Anglosphere, because they're always used in the context of the state robbing Peter of his earnings and turning them over to Paul. Consequently the millions who abhor such social engineering will immediately be turned off by the very mention of these words.

I see where this comes from now. I don't think anyone cares about that in Australia though. I think we just see "equitable" as being "equal rights financially" rather than "COMMUNISM!".

And laŭ mi, anyone who finds the idea of equality repulsive because they're jumping several steps ahead and associating it with COMMUNISM! probably isn't gonna learn EO anyway (green flag? internationalist? promotes equality between speakers? COMMUNISM!)

The point is that to is for Esperanto to be what Zamenhof aspired for it to be, it has to be open to everyone, the alternative is that it will fail. However to millions in the Anglosphere (me included) "egalitarian" and "equity" refer to a notion of equality that in fact is alien to the very basis of our societies. The English-speaking countries are the freest and most stable in the world precisely because of our shared heritage of common law with its' concepts of inalienable rights and government existing for the sole purpose of securing those rights and for no other purpose. An Englishman's home is only his castle if the government cannot rob him of it and hand it over to Paul for some alleged grievance that is not proven objectively. When it instead does the latter it resorts to what Frederic Bastiat called legal plunder, i.e. it becomes an accomplice to a crime. In such a case it necessarily treats Peter and Paul unequally by giving Paul an unearned benefit at Peter's expense.

There are of course many countries that lack this understanding of the role of government, and they are all less free and less prosperous than those of the Anglosphere which are based on common law.

As you can see from the above your suggestion about people finding the idea of equality repulsive is mistaken in two respects. Firstly, those of us who understand the underlying meaning of "egalitarian" and "equity" are not opposed to equality at all; on the contrary we recognize that they are used to undermine the real meaning of equality so as to trick people into believing the contradiction that equality means treating people unequally under the law. Due, ekzistas homoj kiuj komprenas kion mi diris super kiu estas interesitaj en lernanta Esperanton kaj partprenanta informon kun homoj kiuj ne parolas la anglan lingvon; la fakto ke mi estas ĉi tie estas pruvo de tio.

It seems to me that the idea that turns a lot of people off to Esperanto is that it is so often referred to as an "artificial language," a term that I've seen used several times in the posts above. It has the same ring as "artificial flavor" or "artificial color" when referring to food, or to "artificial flowers"- which would never be used on any important occasion. Looking at the definition of the word "artificial," I suppose it is accurate in describing Esperanto, but I wish it's use could be a bit less common.

Epikuro57:When it instead does the latter it resorts to what Frederic Bastiat called legal plunder, i.e. it becomes an accomplice to a crime. In such a case it necessarily treats Peter and Paul unequally by giving Paul an unearned benefit at Peter's expense.

There are of course many countries that lack this understanding of the role of government, and they are all less free and less prosperous than those of the Anglosphere which are based on common law.

As you can see from the above your suggestion about people finding the idea of equality repulsive is mistaken in two respects. Firstly, those of us who understand the underlying meaning of "egalitarian" and "equity" are not opposed to equality at all; on the contrary we recognize that they are used to undermine the real meaning of equality so as to trick people into believing the contradiction that equality means treating people unequally under the law.

Equitable:
1) Having justice, impartiality or fairness
2) Fair, just, or impartial.

Thus, the underlying meaning of equitable can be seen as what western nations are (e.g. not interfering with ones wealth because someone is poor, on the basis that the person who has the wealth has put in the equivalent hard work or done the right things to earn that much, whereas the poor person hasn't, but the system is EQUITABLE to the poor person, allowing them to put in the same work and earn the same amount if they wish).

Ergo, there's nothing at all to do with what you've said, which to me sounds like politically charged doublespeak. Which has its place, but with people who actually get that. In international communication, it's just another layer of misunderstanding to get over (like how "liberal" in America is used to describe overly liberal people, where as in Australia, "Liberals" is our conservative party. In international contexts, we generally focus on "liberal" meaning "free in views, behaviour", and not the rest of it)

Epikuro57:Due, ekzistas homoj kiuj komprenas kion mi diris super kiu estas interesitaj en lernanta Esperanton kaj partprenanta informon kun homoj kiuj ne parolas la anglan lingvon; la fakto ke mi estas ĉi tie estas pruvo de tio.

Vi facile povus uzi pli bonajn, pli klarajn vortojn anstataŭe. Kaj, eĉ se vi ne volus fari tion, homoj kiuj ne parolas angle ne povas kompreni "equitable" eĉ en ĝia originala senco

(You could easily use better, clearer words instead. And, even if you didn't want to do that, people who don't speak English can't understand "equitable" even in its original sense )

Mustelvulpo:It seems to me that the idea that turns a lot of people off to Esperanto is that it is so often referred to as an "artificial language,"

That's true. I think also what's important is that "artificial" easily leads to "made up" which leads to "figments of the imagination" which leads to "mental health patients", thus the whole stigma of Esperanto speaking parents and their children's doomed future.

ceigered:

RiotNrrd:"Esperanto, The Springboard Language

How do we translate Springboard neatly into EO?
Saltotabulo?

We here in the UK had a five-year project of teaching Esperanto in primary schools under the name "Springboard2Languages". The Esperanto version of the name was "Lingvolanĉilo", which I think is a very catchy translation.

ceigered:Equitable:
1) Having justice, impartiality or fairness
2) Fair, just, or impartial.

Thus, the underlying meaning of equitable can be seen as what western nations are (e.g. not interfering with ones wealth because someone is poor, on the basis that the person who has the wealth has put in the equivalent hard work or done the right things to earn that much, whereas the poor person hasn't, but the system is EQUITABLE to the poor person, allowing them to put in the same work and earn the same amount if they wish).

Ergo, there's nothing at all to do with what you've said, which to me sounds like politically charged doublespeak. Which has its place, but with people who actually get that. In international communication, it's just another layer of misunderstanding to get over (like how "liberal" in America is used to describe overly liberal people, where as in Australia, "Liberals" is our conservative party. In international contexts, we generally focus on "liberal" meaning "free in views, behaviour", and not the rest of it)

That's what I was getting at, I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. Equitable and liberal are both words that now connote things not included in their actual meaning. When people hear them they interpret them according to those connotations rather than their actual meaning, that's why equitable should be avoided.

Epikuro57:That's what I was getting at, I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. Equitable and liberal are both words that now connote things not included in their actual meaning. When people hear them they interpret them according to those connotations rather than their actual meaning, that's why equitable should be avoided.

I wanna disagree but I see how even then that's not gonna help, since you're right, there's gonna be a few that will disagree and stir up trouble.

However, I don't think there's many words left that don't have a connotation someone's gone and tampered with, so no matter how we sell Esperanto, we're gonna be juggling double meanings... Is there another way to say equitable without the rest? Egalitarian?

Timtim:Lingvolanĉilo

Cheers for that! I wonder if we could then say as a nickname "Ĉu vi volas la volanĉilon? ", provided that through some act of culture-expansion we managed to actually propagate this nickname for EO .