Esperanto in China （世界語在中國裡, Esperanto en Ĉinujo）

[abcdefg]

#20 -- That's a classic!

[Lu]

Wow, why the hostility? What's this talk about sects and secret handshakes? If you don't like Esperanto or find it uninteresting, by all means avoid both it and this thread. That shouldn't be too hard.

Yes, Esperanto hasn't become the world language it was invented to be. But the idea was good, and there are (and have been) quite a number of speakers and at least some children that have been raised with Esperanto as their first language. I'll leave it to others to answer any questions about neologisms, I really hardly know anything about the language.

When the standard for Mandarin was first set, nobody spoke that as their first language. It was based on the Beijing dialect, but not identical to it and records had to be made of how everything was supposed to be pronounced. Now Mandarin is closed to Beijinghua than Esperanto to Roman languages, but still. I don't know much about Hebrew, but if I'm not mistaken nobody spoke that as a first language when it was made the official language of Israel and there must have been quite some inventing there to make a dead language fit for an age of refrigerators and trains.

[liuzhou]

With the exception of English

Très amusant, but that isn't how English developed.

Sure, English has borrowed a lot of vocab, but only after the language was already in existence, not before. No one sat down and compiled a list as was done with Esperanto.

It reads:

The claim of Esperantists that their language is easier to learn than natural languages has seldom been subjected to an empirical test, and the few tests that have been carried out are not widely known outside the Esperanto community. After an introduction to the Esperanto movement and other experiments based on the teaching of Esperanto, the two “Five-country Experiments” carried out in the 1970s are described and evaluated here. The findings of these tests support the claim of Esperantists but could be challenged mainly because of the wide range of variable factors involved in language learning. These experiments are nevertheless valuable as an attempt to measure some of these variables in a very precise way.

Have you actually read this paper or just this abstract / advertising blurb you have linked to?

[Ruben von Zwack]

I'm German and I can't even begin to go into detail about how many flaws I see in Esperanto. My one fundamental point of criticism however is, it's not a world language, it's a blend of Western European languages, and as they are deeply interwoven anyway, there was no need to invent just another one.

Generally speaking, I have the impression that those language "improvements" that have been conjured up by ideologically motivated scholars in the 20th century are a catastrophe. "Verschlimmbesserung" as we humorously put it in German ("worsening something by improving it"). The German spelling reform of the 80s and 90s was one of these fallacies, and to make a leap across the globe, unfortunately, a lot of the simplified Hanzi, as far as I can see, are not much of a help, too. The simplified Hanzi that make sense seem the natural ones that people had been using anyway.

For Hebrew - I was reading Gershom Scholem's autobiography "From Berlin to Jerusalem", he was a linguist and an important campaigner in early Israel to adapt Hebrew and not Jiddish. It is interesting to note that not only language-wise Scholem was a cold-hearted purist, and it seems telling to me that he cringed when people actually began to speak Hebrew on the streets, because what they made of it was so "impure" and "degenerate" in his eyes.

So I have the impression, all those language architects of the 20th century are mainly interested in ideology, not in actually helping people to speak to each other.

[Lu]

For Hebrew - I was reading Gershom Scholem's autobiography "From Berlin to Jerusalem", he was a linguist and an important campaigner in early Israel to adapt Hebrew and not Jiddish. It is interesting to note that not only language-wise Scholem was a cold-hearted purist, and it seems telling to me that he cringed when people actually began to speak Hebrew on the streets, because what they made of it was so "impure" and "degenerate" in his eyes.

It's like Frankenstein and his monster then... you make something beautiful and pure and perfect and then it goes out into the world and dares to have its own life and by living it develops in ways you didn't foresee or intend at all. Such cringing is very purist and I do disagree, but I can sympathise. Does the autobiography say more about the adaptation of Hebrew? Am I correct that there was some amount of engineering and creating on it before it was put to use (and then became a living language again)?

[Ruben von Zwack]

Frankenstein is a nice comparison ;)

It talks about the adaptation of Hebrew a lot, who did what in 40s and 50s Israel, which library and which scientist contributed, but I'd have to be lying to say I remember all the detail. There must have been an incredible amount of engineering, because Hebrew was solely (and only by men/boys) used for ritual purpose reciting the Thorah in the Synagogue. Apparently in Israel in the 40s and 50s, people spoke their respective native countries' languages and Jiddish, and there was equal consideration to make Jiddish the language of Israel. It would have been much easier. But of course, Jiddish is a variant of German, so after what Germany did to the Jews, it's understandable that they wanted to severe ties.

[abcdefg]

#22 --

Wow, why the hostility?

I thought this thread would die a quick natural death, but it hasn’t. Guess at this point I do owe you an answer. I am not really hostile towards Esperanto; I just view it as a piece of utopian silliness, more worthy of ridicule than of praise.

“Oh, if only we could all speak one single language, our global troubles would vanish and we could march forward with stars in our eyes towards a blissful, harmonious future; we could ride tall waves of mutual understanding and limitless co-operation. We could stuff daisies in the gun barrels of the evil military-industrial complex; we could cure global warming and save the whales while we were at it. After an eco-friendly vegan supper around the campfire, we could join hands and sing a soulful Esperanto version of Kumbaya.”

That being said, I will admit that I don’t perceive Esperanto as dangerous. I will also admit to having gone through a phase, many decades ago, when I though such things were cool and progressive.

[Demian]

Have you actually read this paper or just this abstract / advertising blurb you have linked to?

That paper costs more than what I will earn in three days. There is no way I can buy it. In case you can, please go ahead and read it and share with us what you found there. But the abstract makes it clear - Esperanto is easier to learn than natural languages. At the same time it points out some variables could have affected the results either way.

ABCEFG: “Oh, if only we could all speak one single language, our global troubles would vanish and we could march forward with stars in our eyes towards a blissful, harmonious future; we could ride tall waves of mutual understanding and limitless co-operation. We could stuff daisies in the gun barrels of the evil military-industrial complex; we could cure global warming and save the whales while we were at it. After an eco-friendly vegan supper around the campfire, we could join hands and sing a soulful Esperanto version of Kumbaya.”

Only a small percentage of Esperanto speakers believe in what you say. In fact, some Esperanto speakers are raŭmistoj (people who consider themselves a diasporic community) and most are normal people who don't care about fina venko (final victory). Even I don't care if the whole world speaks Esperanto or not. I just want to enjoy good literature (from small European countries and Far East) which would otherwise be inaccessible to me. There are some wonderful novels originally written in Esperanto - I particularly like the one about a wise donkey and his travels in the Sahara.

Esperanto speakers are not stupid. Some are avowed believers, while others are atheists; some are nationalists while others are sennacianoj (anationalists); some are homosexuals while others are not.. The Esperanto speakers are not a single behemoth like a group of zombies with a single brain. They are like any other language group - albeit a small one.

You only have to follow any of these discussions on recent Brazilian protests (just started), or the Syrian uprising, or the existence of god, or gays to see how varied the views are. These are normal discussions where participants can lose their temper.

===

Finally, someone asked about slang and neologisms in Esperanto. "Mojosa" (cool), "krokodili" (to talk in a language other than Esperanto in an Esperanto meeting), "kaco" (slang for "penis") are some common examples of Esperanto slang which the old guard does not like. There are erotica novels, I remember one of them has been written by Claude Piron.

Of course Esperanto is not as rich in literature as English, French, Chinese, Japanese, German, and some other large languages are. But there does exist something for everyone in this language, and even non-technical topics of the most arcane kind - Linux, astronomy.... Interested in astronomy, read "Kosmo kaj Ni" (Cosmos and Us), or listen to Serĉado de ekstertera vivo (Search for extraterrestrial life). Interested in Linux, there is some (not much) documentation available in Esperanto.

I get I better shut up before this posts gets too long! ;)

[liuzhou]

But the abstract makes it clear - Esperanto is easier to learn than natural languages. At the same time it points out some variables could have affected the results either way.

Ha. Ha. Unbelievable. The only citation you can give to support your claim is something you haven't read?

It makes nothing clear. You say it states that Esperanto is easier (whatever easier means) but at the same time the "variables" mean it might not be easier. Clear as mud.

You don't know anything about the writer, his background or his methodology, but instead are just latching onto a phrase that you want to be true.

You have come up with three slang words or neologisms. I asked how many in the last year. Most real languages have hundreds , if not thousands.

Esperanto is a failure by any measure.

[roddy]

Y'know, if someone says something you don't agree with, it's actually possible to ignore it. I try and do this sometimes. For the sake of my blood pressure and so on. And so I don't come across as a grumpy old fart

[Lu]

Wow, why the hostility?

Not naming names here but this was not just directed at abcdefg. If you don't like Esperanto and/or this thread, please, just ignore it. There are thousands of other languages and threads to enjoy.

[liuzhou]

I completely disagree with the above two posts.

If everyone only posts on threads they agree with, it is going to get very boring, very quickly, round here.

There is nothing wrong with debate, provided it remains polite. Assertions which are wrong, debatable and / or not backed up should be challenged.

Labelling people as "grumpy old farts" is not polite.

[abcdefg]

I apologize @Demian. You are trying to foster a thoughtful discussion and I have just played the roles of a clown and a sniper. I confess to having an "Esperanto Stereotype" in mind that is not particularly flattering and is almost surely inaccurate. I will read the thread silently from this point on in hopes of learning more of what Esperanto is really about.

And I admit to being a grumpy old fart sometimes. Am not proud of that.

[Ruben von Zwack]

Upon reading again I notice that above I made some sweeping generalisations - "all scholars", everyone, all the time - which is of course nonsense and unfair.

[陳德聰]

A friend of mine recently mentioned to me that at some point there was talk about making Esperanto the official language of China... I didn't believe her because it seemed kind of ridiculous, but I imagine if there are people in China who speak it as a first language it maybe is not as farfetched as I thought.

She cited some trivia game, I can't remember the name, but google is not being particularly helpful on the subject.

[liuzhou]

A friend of mine recently mentioned to me that at some point there was talk about making Esperanto the official language of China...

No chance. Not in a million years.

.

[Lu]

I'd heard about this, Wikipedia said it was an idea of Qian Xuantong. Pinyin Info says:

'It seemed to [Qian Xuantong] that the ideographic script could not be adapted to the needs of modern China. He also saw no solution in the attempts which had thus far been made to apply a phonetic system of writing to Chinese. Indeed, it appeared to him that it would be impossible to apply a phonetic system of writing to Chinese at all. These views also led him to the conclusion, reached earlier by Wu Chih-hui and others, that Chinese writing itself would have to be abandoned and replaced by Esperanto. As an intermediary step he suggested using Chinese for ordinary purposes and resorting to English or French for complicated ideas. He also advanced as an alternative solution the recommendation of Wu Chih-hui to use the paihua or vernacular style of ideographic writing as the basis of the written language while effecting a gradual transition through the piecemeal introduction of Esperanto terms to express special ideas which were not susceptible of translation into Chinese.'

One of the radical ideas in that era, probably a bit less feasible than the plan to replace characters with pinyin.

[roddy]

That was back during the May 4th movement, I think. Never got very far. (Lu beat me)

"If everyone only posts on threads they agree with, it is going to get very boring, very quickly, round here."

And if we insist on repeatedly popping into threads to find something to disagree with, they'll get even more boring equally quickly.