ZLVT wrote:Also, the sparse verb inflection really gets to me. Comming from a langauge where verbs are inflected not only with reagrds to their subjects but also their objects, and where we do have 1st and 3rd person imperatives which are also the dependant upon their objects, the requirement of Esperanto that I use up to 2 pronouns in a sentence shocks me. It makes it seem very ... English, and while English has many charms to it, and certain liberties not found elsewhere, I don't like it.
GB: I love you (w:3 s:3 ch:10)
Eo: mi volas vin (w:3 s:4 ch:12)
Hu: szeretlek (w:1 s:3 ch:9)
I gotta disagree. For me the difference between "I love" and "you love" belongs with the pronoun, not the verb. Of course it seems like this when I say it in English, but still. Esperanto's verb conjugation is one of my favorite things! Also, I don't think counting syllables is fair, because Esperanto is very euphonic compared to English (except for words that start with sc!).
I think that all of the above sound rather nice, I prefer my own tongue of course but that is up to the speaker in question. Also the pronounin English doesn't completely cover the inflection "I go" "he goes"; "I am" "you are" "he is" etc. I prefer it when the minimum number of words are used.
Cosmologicon wrote:There are a couple things I don't like though, chief of which is the lack of a gender-neutral third-person singular. If I were making the language, there'd be more general pronouns, one for first person, one for second, and one for third. Then you could tack on a modifier for gender or number only if you needed to resolve ambiguity. I'd also give the numbers regular endings, maybe "o" or "a" depending on if they're nouns or adjectives.
my idea is to tack togther pronouns. Genders would be as follows: Masculine, feminine, neuter, unspecified (generic), mixed (for plurals only). (feel free to cut that down to the basic 3), there would be a stem for 1st person telling us that you are invilved m(i)- maybe, a stem for 2nd person -vi perhaps where the vowel marks singular/plurality and in between these two stems could be placed the 3rd person pronoun stem, marking off the gener(s) and number of the 3rd party(ies). In this way "we" would no longer mean:
"he and I"
"she and I"
"my friends and I"
"he and you and I"
"she and you and I"
"my friends and you and I"
"you and I"
But rather for each incidence (bear in mind that 'you' can be both sigular and plural in english amounting to 10 permutations, more if we count 'it') there would be a specifically constructed pronoun to cover that particular assortment of people.
Of course you may prefer magyar where the ONLY 3rd person singular pronoun is 'ő' denoting both masculine and feminine, however, like in Dutch when we wish to refer to the table, we might use 'az' meaning either 'that' or 'the', similar to the Dutch 'het' and 'dit' when the article 'het' is used as a contracted form of 'de tafel' ('het', is the article form neuter singular nouns, all others are 'de', alas tafel is masculine so the congruence is a bit difficulat to point out)
Supergrunch wrote:I've always felt that artificial languages, while an interesting academic diversions, will never achieve the same status as natural langauges because they're created rather than spontaneously coming into existence. This means that you have no people who speak it as their first language, and no attached history.
Well, this is true but in China, they made it compulsory at universities (I dont know the official line here) and many European nations are pushing it, Hungary I think is one of the biggest pushers of all, and we offer it at univiersities (And when I'm Prime Minister, and we all know that is the only option, I will make it a compulsory language from year 4 up)
In fact many people have learnt Esperanto from Esperantist parents from birth, there are
native speakers. Furthermore, Esperanto, since it is neutral, does not threaten other nations' language integrity. Note how, while in Wales many speak Welsh and in Irelrand and Scotland they speak Gaelic and Scots respectively (rather close I hear) They all speak English, because English is the official language of the sovereign nation, this means that the prexisting languages have become mere secondary, local dialects and soon may not even exist. Esperanto, belongs to no one and is purely for auxiliary communication so no nation's language would be under threat.
I was in Wien for a few days and I was personally affronted at the high level of English among locals. It made getting lost and generating amusing anecdotes rather difficult (and I so found that pub before midnight too) I enjoy the challenge of cross language communication and think it has rather taken the fun out of travelling to be able to speak English. Koudos to the French for supressing English.
Also, because Esperanto is new to all ethnicities and nations, it means hat communication in Esperanto is far more even handed. While cnferences held in English usually mean that the English speakers get the floor while less comfortable speakers don't voice their veiws as much, at least so says Claude Piron.
Here's a youtube vid about his experiences with Esperanto, I happen to like it very much, it is 8:26 and here's the comment:
"A former UN and WHO translator, who is also a psychologist -- Claude Piron taught for 20 years at the Psychology Department of the University of Geneva - shares his experience of international communication and discusses the international language Esperanto.
Subtitled in others languages:http://dotsub.com/films/thelanguage/