Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!ix.netcom.com!elna
From: elna@netcom.com (Esperanto League N America)
Subject: language vs project 
Message-ID: <elnaE652uI.G6z@netcom.com>
Organization: Esperanto League for North America, Inc.
References: <853605030.2652@dejanews.com> <AF2E91AE9668230FD2@max1-39.hk.super.net> <5ei797$psc@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <AF34DDF19668100DA0@max1-39.hk.super.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 03:25:30 GMT
Lines: 57
Sender: elna@netcom5.netcom.com

dcmsin@hk.super.net (Desmond Sin) writes in a recent posting (reference <AF34DDF19668100DA0@max1-39.hk.super.net>):
>
>My gripe is, for an artificial language whose proclaimed aim is to be easy
>and simple to learn, why can't we do away with this sort of things? 

Esperanto is not a project which can be changed at will before its
release date. It is not subject to tinkering: it is a living language, 
as little swayed by intervention as would be English, Malay, or any
other language. Who is the "we" who would enforce these proposed
"improvements"? 

>     As I
>read my Esperanto primer again last night, I learnt that the word for which
>"Kiu" also has a plural form "kiuj". Is there a *compelling* reason for
>this? 
>
Consistency. Plurals are universally allowed, as long as they make sense.

>I didn't make the comments from the position of being a Chinese speaker but
>as someone who is interested in languages. 

I disagree. You seem to be arguing from an assumption that isolating
strategies of grammar are superior to agglutinative. Or that a planned
language is worthy to the extent that it resembles your native tongue.

>     Of course, one can continue to
>brush aside comments such as those as being silly, irrelevant, stupid,
>senseless, etc. The result, I am afraid, is that any artificial language
>which doesn't take such silly and irrelevant comments into account will
>remain only a lingua franca only for the intelligent elite.

As I said above, Esperanto is an already-formed language which *by its
very nature* will not take into account any criticism based on a thesis
of the type "what would Esperanto be like if it were not as it is?" It
may well be that you could invent a fine planned language based on
isolating grammar and non-European word-stock: in fact, I heartily
encourage you to do so! But do not be surprised when Esperantists
lightly dismiss your suggestions to "improve" Esperanto-- we have heard
such suggestions for years!  Work on "improving" English and see what
kind of positive response you get....

Also any planned language which constantly adapted to this-or-that 
suggestion of improvement would hardly be a language at all-- it 
would be a formless, ruleless, inconsistent collection of projects
which would serve no purpose whatsoever.

>
>
>
>


-- 
Miko SLOPER              elna@netcom.com              USA  (510) 653 0998
Direktoro de la          ftp.netcom.com:/pub/el/elna   fax (510) 653 1468 
Centra Oficejo de la     Learn Esperanto! Free lessons: e-mail/snail-mail
Esperanto-Ligo de N.A.   Write to above address or call:  1-800-ESPERANTO
