tschneider@watarts.UUCP (07/09/83)
This may be ld news to some, but indulge a recent convert... I'm curious to know if anyone is 'into' Esperanto, and if so, if they'd like to drop some talk off into this newsgroup. You can either mail me direct, or address the system. I'd prefer the latter -- we need all the converts we can get.
rcj@burl.UUCP (07/11/83)
Excuse me for my ignorance, but for the benefit of anyone else out there who doesn't know I will now post the definition of Esperanto to the net for the edification of all (@ == upside-down 'e'; capital letter indicates long, otherwise short): Es-pe-ran-to (es'p@-ran'tO) n. An artificial international language invented in 1887, characterized by a vocabulary based on word roots common to many European languages, a single, unvarying ending for each principal part of speech, and a regularized system of conjugation and inflection. [Invented by Dr. L.L. Zamenhof (died 1917), Polish philologist, who wrote under the name of *Dr. Esperanto*, "one who hopes."] Sounds like a good system for international communication. Also sounds boring and unromantic as hell. I vote no on Esperanto. So convert me already, -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3814 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ floyd sb1 mhuxv ]!burl!rcj
larry@grkermit.UUCP (Larry Kolodney) (07/12/83)
From Curtis Jackson: @ == upside-down 'e' An upside-down 'e' is called a schwa. -- Larry Kolodney #13 (I try harder) (USENET) decvax!genrad!grkermit!larry allegra!linus!genrad!grkermit!larry harpo!eagle!mit-vax!grkermit!larry (ARPA) rms.g.lkk@mit-ai
ellis@flairvax.UUCP (Michael Ellis) (07/13/83)
One of the major failings of esperanto is its extremely strong
bias towards the romance (and, to a lesser extent, classical
greek) vocabulary, syntax and phonetic structure. 100 years ago
this was very reasonable for a purportedly international tongue.
But as what is now called "third world' gradually becomes, well,
just the "world", more non-european elements are required for a
truly international language to receive widespread support.
I've read the interesting loglan articles that came my way, and,
as an aside noticed (imagined?) more balance towards teutonic
sounds and vocabulary than esperanto has.
Still, if I were chinese, arabic or african, I bet even loglan
would seem euro-chauvinist. Nonetheless, fun linguistic toys like
these could provide exposure to the fascinating and bizarre
sounds/stems/syntax of strange lands -- if carefully designed by
someone with absolutely no linguistic bias.
Micahel Ellis - Fairchild AI Lab - Palo Alto CA - (415) 858-4270wombat@uicsl.UUCP (07/13/83)
#R:burl:-23200:uicsl:8600009:000:1333
uicsl!wombat Jul 12 23:18:00 1983
I've always thought Esperanto was a neat language. You can
get a book called "Teach Yourself Esperanto" and learn the grammar
in spare time in less than a week. (And that's *all* of the grammar.)
>From then on, all you have to do is build up some vocabulary.
There are people all over the world who can speak "esperante."
They have magazines written in it, as well as original literature.
International pen pals abound; they meet through the magazines or through
Esperanto conventions. Some families share only Esperanto as a common
language; this has been going on long enough for children to be
brought up with Esperanto as a first language. A physics professor
here teaches a course called "Non-Western Linguistic Structure" which
consists of a history of constructed languages and a quick course in
speaking/reading Esperanto. Is interesting subject.
Esperantists would like to see the language become a sort
of lingua franca. They consider it a "neutral" language (though
Asians don't see it that way). It also has an easily learned grammar.
Words are built up from lots of smaller roots -- it's acceptable
to make up a word from roots you know if you don't happen to know
another word for something. And it's perfectly regular. None of
English's "i before e except ..." nonsense.
Wombat
pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!wombatrh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Randy Haskins) (07/13/83)
About a non-euro-chauvanistic language: I don't know if it's possible to make a language that won't seem biased toward one major language group. From what I know of the Oriental family, for example, it is radically different in philosophy and structure. Oriental languages evolved to suit entirely different needs from ours. I think that if you tried a mix-in of Oriental and Indo-European, you would have a chaotic mess. -- Randwulf (Randy Haskins) genrad!mit-eddie!rh or... rh@mit-ee (via mit-mc)
paul@uofm-cv.UUCP (07/14/83)
Is it a strongly typed language?
rcj@burl.UUCP (07/14/83)
Thanks for the info, but I was perfectly aware that an upside-down e was called a schwa -- I just didn't know how to spell it and my dictionary was at least *three* feet away!!! No way was I going to reach all the way over there to get it!! :-) -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3814 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ floyd sb1 mhuxv ]!burl!rcj