Interlingua vs Esperanto

Breiniak   Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:02 pm GMT
Simplified Chinese isn't communist and Esperanto isn't a communist plot. So, I shoudn't mention communism here. They remain ugly in my viewpoint regardless. Communism isn't that bad if it weren't for some people who hate culture anyway. ^^
Guest   Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:21 pm GMT
<<Anyway, the results were that pupils got better grasp of what nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, present tense, past tense, future tense, conditional mode etc are all about, as they are clearly recognizable in Esperanto because of different endings.>>

This is most likely because of Finnish is, like Esperanto, an agglutinating language.

If there's a good teacher, and pupils are eager to learn the subject, they will learn it, regardless of the alleged degree of difficulty. But the real difficulty of learning languages is not in these issues, really. It's in learning the idiomatic expressions, it's in understanding the spoken language, it's in having the opportunity to actually use your newly aquired language skills.

Every language you learn helps you to learn another language, so the claim <<Experiments of teaching Esperanto to children have shown that it is easier for children to adapt a new language if they have first learnt Esperanto.>> isn't fair play, but just biased.

In German, we have noun capitalisation, which also shows what class a word belongs to. English has marking of adverbs by -ly, etc.

Do Esperantists consider children as stupid not to understand about nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc?

But that's not the point why I -- and many others -- don't like Esperanto. It's about things like article la, things like knabo and knabino
(If you ever learned a Romance language, things like ''la knabo'' can drive you crazy.), it's about the mal- thingy (which makes the language somewhat skew). Even in my mother tounge, the word Knabe (boy) sounds very old-fashioned. That's why I stopped learning Esperanto barely after starting it.
Breiniak   Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:25 pm GMT
Yeah, it also sounds ugly and monotonous. I agree. I have tried to learn it, but I gave up because it drove me nuts.
Fidel Castro   Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:00 pm GMT
Esperanto is easier but it sounds and looks like shit.

Interlingua has more irregularities but looks and sounds better. (like another Romance language)
Guest   Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:32 pm GMT
Why does Esperanto have words like "knabo"? Such a word is difficult to pronounce for speakers of many European languages.
Guest   Fri Aug 22, 2008 3:54 am GMT
Because the creators of it tried to spicy it up by adding snazzy words but they failed miserably. I can't wait for the days when Esperanto is long dead and buried. It's awfully pathetic isn't it! If you're gonna learn some half-ass language, learn Klingon or lojban.
Guest   Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:18 am GMT
Why the hell did they use 'k'? 'K' is a letter which does not suit Romance languages.
suomalainen   Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:09 am GMT
They use 'k' in Esperanto because every sound is always presented by the same letter. The Romance languages are inconsistent as 'c' is sometimes hard, sometimes soft (depending on whether it is followed by a front or back vowel). Thus, spelling of Esperanto is more simple. As far as I know, Hell didn´t determine directly Zamenhof´s choice of letters.
Guest   Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:15 am GMT
They should always use 'q'.

knabo - qnabo, qunabo, quenabo, q'nabo
Guest   Fri Aug 22, 2008 1:50 pm GMT
Interlingua is much better.

It doesn't use Slavic words and you can understand it if you know a Romance language.
Breiniak   Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:39 pm GMT
Why are people putting Slavic words down actually? Are they that bad? Are Romance languages that superiour? Yes, I agree, Neo-Latin is a cooler language than these conlangs, but Slavic languages are cool; bashing on them is so Cold War.
Guest   Fri Aug 22, 2008 6:27 pm GMT
We're not basing them, it's just the reality, Romance words look softer and sound cooler and Slavic word not quite (they don't sound that bad though) unfortunately the creator of Esperanto was Polish (right?) so he threw in a lot of Slavic words that's why Esperanto ended up sounding like a mix of Latin and Russian (no very nice if you ask me).

As for Interlingua it is purely Romanized, so it sounds absolutely beautiful but unfortunate it has a small number of inconsistencies but in general is pretty good, just look at this text:

"Interlingua se ha distachate ab le movimento pro le disveloppamento e le introduction de un lingua universal pro tote le humanitate. Si o non on crede que un lingua pro tote le humanitate es possibile, si o non on crede que interlingua va devenir un tal lingua es totalmente indifferente ab le puncto de vista de interlingua mesme. Le sol facto que importa (ab le puncto de vista de interlingua mesme) es que interlingua, gratias a su ambition de reflecter le homogeneitate cultural e ergo linguistic del occidente, es capace de render servicios tangibile a iste precise momento del historia del mundo. Il es per su contributiones actual e non per le promissas de su adherentes que interlingua vole esser judicate"
Guest   Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:44 pm GMT
Romance words look softer and sound cooler and Slavic word not quite


Wrong!
Guest   Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:14 am GMT
-Even in my mother tounge, the word Knabe (boy) sounds very old-fashioned. -

I don't think so. I find it cute/quaint.
Guest   Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:16 am GMT
-Romance words look softer and sound cooler and Slavic word not quite -

For a Maori or Hawaiian speaker Romance words look harsh and full of consonants LOL