?

Log in

Thoughts about artificial language

Some person recently told me that Esperanto is a real and effective international language. However I guess that it was incorrect. In most cases the langs like Esperanto or Occidental are all based on the Latin lexicon and structures – or European if more widely.

This means that Esperanto is interesting if we need something common for French, English and Swdish persons. But it doesn’t work for Chinese or Aztec persons.

It doesn’t work!

Tags:

Comments

Ignorance holds Esperanto back

If Esperanto doesn't work, why have eight British MP's nominated Esperanto for the Nobel Peace Prize 2008
Personally I am convinced that ignorance is holding Esperanto back.
Detail available at http://esperantolobby.org

Re: Ignorance holds Esperanto back

well - British MP can do whatever they want, they are not members of Chinese Communist Party! :)
You're right that Esperanto is based on European languages, and is therefore easier for Europeans than non-Europeans to learn. However, you are wrong that it doesn't work as an international language. Visit an Esperanto forum or chatroom such as those found at lernu.net and you'll see. Users from China and other non-European countries are easy to find.
Hmmm, of course Esperanto has a lot of resources and in some cases is more easier to be learnt than any natural European lang. If our Chinese person is able to learn English - there won't be problem with learning Esperanto. What I speak about is the basis of this language - the basis isn't international, it's just European.

(Anonymous)

Esperanto doesn't work for X's or Y's, nor for those who did not study it

"But it doesn’t work for Chinese or Aztec persons. "

BTW, did you find a language suited for Azterc and Chinese that you could learn as easily as Esperanto?
You would of course assert that English works well enough for them, but Esperanto is too ... or not enough ... without knowing what you are speaking about.
There is no doubt English can be use very well in UK. However there is over one billion Chinese who don't understand a word of it.
In fact there are many more Chinese than English who learned Esperanto.
Remuŝ

Re: Esperanto doesn't work for X's or Y's, nor for those who did not study it

sounds great!

in case of English - what about Pidgin English?

(Anonymous)

Esperanto works

There is no doubt at all thast Esperanto is a fully functioning international language. Earlier this month I was in Southport in the north-west of England, talking in Esperanto witha young Slovak and a young Japanese. I regularly receive letters and emails in the language from Africa.

Although the basic vocabulary of Esperanto is indeed European, it is possible to build up new words using a series of prefixes and suffixes, something closer to Turkish.

Bill Chapman

Re: Esperanto works

what about postfixes as in Finnish? :)

European or Asiatic language?

Esperanto actually has quite a bit in common with Asian languages, and in some ways it is very different from inflected languages descended from Latin. Claude Piron was a translator of Chinese at the UN, for example, who argued that in some way, Esperanto is more similar to Chinese than it is to French, Spanish, or English:

http://claudepiron.free.fr/articlesenanglais/europeanorasiatic.htm

Re: European or Asiatic language?

what do you think about Elvish languages?

Re: European or Asiatic language?

Umm... they're good for Elves? :-) Honestly, I don't have anything meaningful to say about Elvish languages. Sorry!

Re: European or Asiatic language?

I speak about them as a beautiful artifical language (in fact - a number of langs) - they are based on carefully studied European and some other langs and their sounds are nice. I speak about Tolkien's work.
You must be getting tired of all the reactions your post is getting, but here's my part. I won't say a word except for a link from an English teacher in China...

http://geoffinwuhu.blogspot.com/2008/05/weekend-work.html
in fact I am pleased with such attention and I am glad to know opinions of people:)

Somewhere I have a copy of Mao Zedong's little red book in Esperanto. Back in the 1960s I used to get material quite regularly from the Chinese Esperanto League.

what happened then?

I left home, shifted 600 miles away, and didn't bother notifying change of address.

I once got an email back from a guy I found online who was a G.K. Chesterton buff—might even have been Dale Ahlquist—telling me he was translating Chesterton into Esperanto.

He was cool.
Also I like Old English version of Wikipedia. Geek's work there shows very well that original English had all necessary structures for creating new words for new things and situations. And though modern English is much easier - I like the energy of Old English.
However - for us it's not English - it's Saxon!

āēīōūĀĒĪŌŪ

The Māori language in recent years has been moving away from borrowings from English and developing terms for modern concepts from native Māori word roots. It has often annoyed me that German does this, as it makes much of their technical literature harder to read than French, Spanish or Italian. In Māori, however, there are only five vowels and ten consonants, and borrowings are often barely recognisable. "Oxygen", for example would probably transpose as something like okihene. Anyone knowing both languages who struck such a word for the first time would say, "What the heck is that?" So it might as well be hauora.

Names of the month from the old Māori lunar calendar are being substituted for the borrowed ones, but with the English meanings. Days of the week have now been given names from the old Māori gods—Rā hina, Rā tū, Rā apa, etc, instead of Mānei, Tūrei, Wenerei... I have sometimes heard people call these the old Māori names, but in fact they are the new ones.

Re: āēīōūĀĒĪŌŪ

Whoops. Sorry, I pasted vowels with macrons in the subject line of the previous comment, in case I needed to use them, and forgot to remove them before posting. I can't see the usual erase button to allow me to cut the entry, paste it, edit out the title and re-post.

Re: āēīōūĀĒĪŌŪ

No, it's ok and it was very interesting! I am glad to see any of your remarks!