Esperanto can't be like other languages, it has not been used spontaneosly by communities of people enough so it has not many expressions and thinks like that which make English, Spanish, and so on true languages These ones are mure more expresive and convenient to express ideas than Esperanto. Esperanto is an artificial language and like many artificial things it has its limitations . Of course you can make songs in Esperanto, but they will never be comparabe to German folk songs which carry on themselves traditions with centuries of existence and a particular view of feeling and interacting with the world.
Prix Nobel pour l'espéranto ?
Esperanto is great. Much more suitable for international communication than English. Why are idiomatic expressions necessary for international communication? Isn't this the reason for it in the first place, it is a simple language which is easy to use for practical uses? Not for songing.
Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection. Analytic languages are simpler and more suited as international languages.
Maybe Esperanto is better for certain communication needs like diplomacy (if English didn't exist), but not everything which you can express in your native language can be epressed with Esperanto, while on the other hand English probably has expressions which fit better what you want to say but Esperanto lacks. In other words, I think that the nature of Esperanto itself prevent you from modeling you thoughts with it as conveniently as with English, German...
It doesn't matter if you can't express it in Esperanto. You don't write literature in Esperanto. All Esperanto is needed for are things like:
- Please do not feed the ducks
- Restricted Area
- For airport turn left 300 m
- Bus Stop
- Closing time 7 o'clock
- Hotel
Such things can be expressed easily.
- Please do not feed the ducks
- Restricted Area
- For airport turn left 300 m
- Bus Stop
- Closing time 7 o'clock
- Hotel
Such things can be expressed easily.
Dear "Guest Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:25 pm GMT" & all the other "Guest"s on this page,
I am a teacher of Esperanto (with several years of experiences in teaching Esperanto in Europe and Asia), so I can say, I know what I am talking about.
Did you ever started to learn Esperanto or could you explain me why you say "not everything [...] can be epressed with Esperanto"? This language http://www.esperanto.net give you a very rich possibility to express yourself, to have a colorful style while speaking.
Since 120 years, a large community of openminded people use this language worldwide (in over a 100 countries), without any difficulties of mutual understanding.
There are societies very active in promoting the International Language, in the USA http://www.esperanto-usa.org/ and in Britain http://www.jeb.org.uk/ - and all around the world you can find places where you can get a homestay for free http://www.tejo.org/en/ps
Scientific studies about language learning has shown that learning Esperanto first - what is at least 5 times easier to learn http://en.lernu.net/ than any other language - make it easier to learn other languages, for example, English.
http://www.springboard2languages.org/home.htm
:-)
I am a teacher of Esperanto (with several years of experiences in teaching Esperanto in Europe and Asia), so I can say, I know what I am talking about.
Did you ever started to learn Esperanto or could you explain me why you say "not everything [...] can be epressed with Esperanto"? This language http://www.esperanto.net give you a very rich possibility to express yourself, to have a colorful style while speaking.
Since 120 years, a large community of openminded people use this language worldwide (in over a 100 countries), without any difficulties of mutual understanding.
There are societies very active in promoting the International Language, in the USA http://www.esperanto-usa.org/ and in Britain http://www.jeb.org.uk/ - and all around the world you can find places where you can get a homestay for free http://www.tejo.org/en/ps
Scientific studies about language learning has shown that learning Esperanto first - what is at least 5 times easier to learn http://en.lernu.net/ than any other language - make it easier to learn other languages, for example, English.
http://www.springboard2languages.org/home.htm
:-)
To "Guest Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:43 pm GMT"
who says: "It doesn't matter if you can't express it in Esperanto. You don't write literature in Esperanto."
William Auld
"Auld was nominated for the Nobel Prize for Literature from 1999 until his death in 2006."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Auld
some words on Esperanto literature:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto_literature
... we got the web, use it for your information...
who says: "It doesn't matter if you can't express it in Esperanto. You don't write literature in Esperanto."
William Auld
"Auld was nominated for the Nobel Prize for Literature from 1999 until his death in 2006."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Auld
some words on Esperanto literature:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto_literature
... we got the web, use it for your information...
Who decides what is correct and what isn't? Who decides what sounds wrong and what sounds natural?
On December 03, at 11:43, one of the many guests wrote: "You don't write literature in Esperanto". As an Esperanto writer, I take exception to that unfounded judgment. I have published a series of novels in Esperanto, an essay, a book of poetry and a number of songs. I receive letters from readers from the whole world, yesterday, for instance, a message from Mongolia and one from Argentina.
I have also published books in my mother tongue, French, but I prefer Esperanto because with it I reach people in the most faraway places, where I'd had no chance with French. I couldn't write in English, because when you write literature, the language is your material, and, for that, you need a mastery that you can attain only in your mother tongue (and Esperanto). Esperanto is an extremely pleasant material for expressing feelings, emotions, describing reality and being funny (or is it 'being fun'? It's so easy to err in English, a language, by the way, which I admire a lot, but which is quite inferior to Esperanto among non-English-speaking people and a formidable challenge to all non native speakers).
Another of the numerous guests said, also yesterday, at 11:24, that "Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection".
First, Esperanto is not an idea, but a reality: a language in daily use in a diaspora-like segment of the world population.
Second, Esperanto has no inflection. It seems to have, but has not. It consists, like Chinese, of invariable elements that combine without restriction. What is often interpreted as inflections are actually additions: In *Li resanigis min", 'He cured me', 'he healed me', the *-n* in *min* is not an inflexion, it's an added "word" (to use Zamenhof's terminology), as shown by the reverse sentence 'I cured him' *Mi resanigis lin*. *Re-san-igi-is* is made up of 4 "words" ("morphemes"): 'again' (re)', 'healthy' (san), 'make' (ig), past tense (is) : literally "he made me healthy again".
What is extremely pleasant for a writer (and for a student of the language) is that this kind of formation is valid for the whole language. So you can apply the same pattern to any concept: *rejunigis* 'rejuvenated', *revirigis* 'restored virility', 'made male again', *releonigis*, 'made back into a lion', *reakvigis* 'transformed back into water', etc.
Because of this possibility, Esperanto has an infinite number of words, many of which are extremely expressive and have no equivalent in Englsih or French.
I find it sad to see so many criticisms of Esperanto about things that are simply not true, although it's so easily to check the facts at our Internet age.
I have also published books in my mother tongue, French, but I prefer Esperanto because with it I reach people in the most faraway places, where I'd had no chance with French. I couldn't write in English, because when you write literature, the language is your material, and, for that, you need a mastery that you can attain only in your mother tongue (and Esperanto). Esperanto is an extremely pleasant material for expressing feelings, emotions, describing reality and being funny (or is it 'being fun'? It's so easy to err in English, a language, by the way, which I admire a lot, but which is quite inferior to Esperanto among non-English-speaking people and a formidable challenge to all non native speakers).
Another of the numerous guests said, also yesterday, at 11:24, that "Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection".
First, Esperanto is not an idea, but a reality: a language in daily use in a diaspora-like segment of the world population.
Second, Esperanto has no inflection. It seems to have, but has not. It consists, like Chinese, of invariable elements that combine without restriction. What is often interpreted as inflections are actually additions: In *Li resanigis min", 'He cured me', 'he healed me', the *-n* in *min* is not an inflexion, it's an added "word" (to use Zamenhof's terminology), as shown by the reverse sentence 'I cured him' *Mi resanigis lin*. *Re-san-igi-is* is made up of 4 "words" ("morphemes"): 'again' (re)', 'healthy' (san), 'make' (ig), past tense (is) : literally "he made me healthy again".
What is extremely pleasant for a writer (and for a student of the language) is that this kind of formation is valid for the whole language. So you can apply the same pattern to any concept: *rejunigis* 'rejuvenated', *revirigis* 'restored virility', 'made male again', *releonigis*, 'made back into a lion', *reakvigis* 'transformed back into water', etc.
Because of this possibility, Esperanto has an infinite number of words, many of which are extremely expressive and have no equivalent in Englsih or French.
I find it sad to see so many criticisms of Esperanto about things that are simply not true, although it's so easily to check the facts at our Internet age.
On December 03, at 11:43, one of the many guests wrote: "You don't write literature in Esperanto". As an Esperanto writer, I take exception to that unfounded judgment. I have published a series of novels in Esperanto, an essay, a book of poetry and a number of songs. I receive letters from readers from the whole world, yesterday, for instance, a message from Mongolia and one from Argentina.
I have also published books in my mother tongue, French, but I prefer Esperanto because with it I reach people in the most faraway places, where I'd had no chance with French. I couldn't write in English, because when you write literature, the language is your material, and, for that, you need a mastery that you can attain only in your mother tongue (and Esperanto). Esperanto is an extremely pleasant material for expressing feelings, emotions, describing reality and being funny (or is it 'being fun'? It's so easy to err in English, a language, by the way, which I admire a lot, but which is quite inferior to Esperanto among non-English-speaking people and a formidable challenge to all non native speakers).
Another of the numerous guests said, also yesterday, at 11:24, that "Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection".
First, Esperanto is not an idea, but a reality: a language in daily use in a diaspora-like segment of the world population.
Second, Esperanto has no inflection. It seems to have, but has not. It consists, like Chinese, of invariable elements that combine without restriction. What is often interpreted as inflections are actually additions: In *Li resanigis min", 'He cured me', 'he healed me', the *-n* in *min* is not an inflexion, it's an added "word" (to use Zamenhof's terminology), as shown by the reverse sentence 'I cured him' *Mi resanigis lin*. *Re-san-igi-is* is made up of 4 "words" ("morphemes"): 'again' (re)', 'healthy' (san), 'make' (ig), past tense (is) : literally "he made me healthy again".
What is extremely pleasant for a writer (and for a student of the language) is that this kind of formation is valid for the whole language. So you can apply the same pattern to any concept: *rejunigis* 'rejuvenated', *revirigis* 'restored virility', 'made male again', *releonigis*, 'made back into a lion', *reakvigis* 'transformed back into water', etc.
Because of this possibility, Esperanto has an infinite number of words, many of which are extremely expressive and have no equivalent in Englsih or French.
I find it sad to see so many criticisms of Esperanto about things that are simply not true, although it's so easily to check the facts at our Internet age.
I have also published books in my mother tongue, French, but I prefer Esperanto because with it I reach people in the most faraway places, where I'd had no chance with French. I couldn't write in English, because when you write literature, the language is your material, and, for that, you need a mastery that you can attain only in your mother tongue (and Esperanto). Esperanto is an extremely pleasant material for expressing feelings, emotions, describing reality and being funny (or is it 'being fun'? It's so easy to err in English, a language, by the way, which I admire a lot, but which is quite inferior to Esperanto among non-English-speaking people and a formidable challenge to all non native speakers).
Another of the numerous guests said, also yesterday, at 11:24, that "Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection".
First, Esperanto is not an idea, but a reality: a language in daily use in a diaspora-like segment of the world population.
Second, Esperanto has no inflection. It seems to have, but has not. It consists, like Chinese, of invariable elements that combine without restriction. What is often interpreted as inflections are actually additions: In *Li resanigis min", 'He cured me', 'he healed me', the *-n* in *min* is not an inflexion, it's an added "word" (to use Zamenhof's terminology), as shown by the reverse sentence 'I cured him' *Mi resanigis lin*. *Re-san-igi-is* is made up of 4 "words" ("morphemes"): 'again' (re)', 'healthy' (san), 'make' (ig), past tense (is) : literally "he made me healthy again".
What is extremely pleasant for a writer (and for a student of the language) is that this kind of formation is valid for the whole language. So you can apply the same pattern to any concept: *rejunigis* 'rejuvenated', *revirigis* 'restored virility', 'made male again', *releonigis*, 'made back into a lion', *reakvigis* 'transformed back into water', etc.
Because of this possibility, Esperanto has an infinite number of words, many of which are extremely expressive and have no equivalent in Englsih or French.
I find it sad to see so many criticisms of Esperanto about things that are simply not true, although it's so easily to check the facts at our Internet age.
On December 03, at 11:43, one of the many guests wrote: "You don't write literature in Esperanto". As an Esperanto writer, I take exception to that unfounded judgment. I have published a series of novels in Esperanto, an essay, a book of poetry and a number of songs. I receive letters from readers from the whole world, yesterday, for instance, a message from Mongolia and one from Argentina.
I have also published books in my mother tongue, French, but I prefer Esperanto because with it I reach people in the most faraway places, where I'd had no chance with French. I couldn't write in English, because when you write literature, the language is your material, and, for that, you need a mastery that you can attain only in your mother tongue (and Esperanto). Esperanto is an extremely pleasant material for expressing feelings, emotions, describing reality and being funny (or is it 'being fun'? It's so easy to err in English, a language, by the way, which I admire a lot, but which is quite inferior to Esperanto among non-English-speaking people, and poses a formidable challenge to all non native speakers).
Another of the numerous guests said, also yesterday, at 11:24, that "Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection".
First, Esperanto is not an idea, but a reality: a language in daily use in a diaspora-like segment of the world population.
Second, Esperanto has no inflection. It seems to have, but has not. It consists, like Chinese, of invariable elements that combine without restriction. What is often interpreted as inflections are actually additions: In *Li resanigis min", 'He cured me', 'he healed me', the *-n* in *min* is not an inflexion, it's an added "word" (to use Zamenhof's terminology), as shown by the reverse sentence 'I cured him' *Mi resanigis lin*. *Re-san-igi-is* is made up of 4 "words" ("morphemes"): 'again' (re)', 'healthy' (san), 'make' (ig), past tense (is) : literally "he made me healthy again".
What is extremely pleasant for a writer (and for a student of the language) is that this kind of formation is valid for the whole language. So you can apply the same pattern to any concept: *rejunigis* 'rejuvenated', *revirigis* 'restored virility', 'made male again', *releonigis*, 'made back into a lion', *reakvigis* 'transformed back into water', etc.
Because of this possibility, Esperanto has an infinite number of words, many of which are extremely expressive and have no equivalent in Englsih or French.
I find it sad to see so many criticisms of Esperanto about things that are simply not true, although it's so easily to check the facts at our Internet age.
I have also published books in my mother tongue, French, but I prefer Esperanto because with it I reach people in the most faraway places, where I'd had no chance with French. I couldn't write in English, because when you write literature, the language is your material, and, for that, you need a mastery that you can attain only in your mother tongue (and Esperanto). Esperanto is an extremely pleasant material for expressing feelings, emotions, describing reality and being funny (or is it 'being fun'? It's so easy to err in English, a language, by the way, which I admire a lot, but which is quite inferior to Esperanto among non-English-speaking people, and poses a formidable challenge to all non native speakers).
Another of the numerous guests said, also yesterday, at 11:24, that "Esperanto is a dumb idea because it has inflection".
First, Esperanto is not an idea, but a reality: a language in daily use in a diaspora-like segment of the world population.
Second, Esperanto has no inflection. It seems to have, but has not. It consists, like Chinese, of invariable elements that combine without restriction. What is often interpreted as inflections are actually additions: In *Li resanigis min", 'He cured me', 'he healed me', the *-n* in *min* is not an inflexion, it's an added "word" (to use Zamenhof's terminology), as shown by the reverse sentence 'I cured him' *Mi resanigis lin*. *Re-san-igi-is* is made up of 4 "words" ("morphemes"): 'again' (re)', 'healthy' (san), 'make' (ig), past tense (is) : literally "he made me healthy again".
What is extremely pleasant for a writer (and for a student of the language) is that this kind of formation is valid for the whole language. So you can apply the same pattern to any concept: *rejunigis* 'rejuvenated', *revirigis* 'restored virility', 'made male again', *releonigis*, 'made back into a lion', *reakvigis* 'transformed back into water', etc.
Because of this possibility, Esperanto has an infinite number of words, many of which are extremely expressive and have no equivalent in Englsih or French.
I find it sad to see so many criticisms of Esperanto about things that are simply not true, although it's so easily to check the facts at our Internet age.
It is interesting what you wrote, Valano, but this question remains:
Who decides what is correct and what isn't? Who decides what sounds wrong and what sounds natural?
Who decides what is correct and what isn't? Who decides what sounds wrong and what sounds natural?
Why would we need stupid words like those? I think that a language that uses logical combinations of simple words is much easier than one that has many complex words instead. Of course, we make up words like those in English if we wanted to. For example, you could say "I relionified him." and you would probably be understood under the right context, but most people would just say "I turned him back into a lion."
Hello,
In response to the question :
Who decides what is correct and what isn't? Who decides what sounds wrong and what sounds natural?
I would ask who decides what is correct in English, French or German?
Languages evolve, the community of speakers decides what is "normal". The same goes for Esperanto. It has 120 years of intensive use in just about every field so it now serves as a modern, living language.
It is not the only project that, through use by a community, has turned over the years into a living language. Others include Norwegian, Indonesian and modern Hebrew.
The term "artificial" is misleading. One imagines something similar to Frankenstein. Think instead of a test-tube baby. Children conceived using "artificial" means are born every day. You have almost certainly met several. Did they strike you as not human?
The same goes for a language. If a community of people uses it for long enough in virtually all settings, family, work, politics, science, music, literature, etc., the "project" will take on a life of its own. Like a child.
Check it out, you will be surprised.
Ciao,
F. Bartsch
In response to the question :
Who decides what is correct and what isn't? Who decides what sounds wrong and what sounds natural?
I would ask who decides what is correct in English, French or German?
Languages evolve, the community of speakers decides what is "normal". The same goes for Esperanto. It has 120 years of intensive use in just about every field so it now serves as a modern, living language.
It is not the only project that, through use by a community, has turned over the years into a living language. Others include Norwegian, Indonesian and modern Hebrew.
The term "artificial" is misleading. One imagines something similar to Frankenstein. Think instead of a test-tube baby. Children conceived using "artificial" means are born every day. You have almost certainly met several. Did they strike you as not human?
The same goes for a language. If a community of people uses it for long enough in virtually all settings, family, work, politics, science, music, literature, etc., the "project" will take on a life of its own. Like a child.
Check it out, you will be surprised.
Ciao,
F. Bartsch