↑ ↓
 

Esperanto - yay or nay?

Started by Tom S. Fox, February 18, 2009, 03:20:57 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions
February 19, 2009, 01:21:37 PM #30
If you want to find out how much the English language is going to change in the near future, I would suggest reading a comments page on YouTube!

But at least the written word is standardized to a point. Which is why, aside from minor spelling differences, it is no trouble to understand the various forms on English around the world.

On the subject of artificially injected rules, I remember being taught a couple of those in high school. Must of been a good teacher because I still habitually conform to some of them today.
February 19, 2009, 01:36:41 PM #31
Quote from: Andy120290 on February 19, 2009, 01:21:37 PM
If you want to find out how much the English language is going to change in the near future, I would suggest reading a comments page on YouTube!

omg u r rite lolz!

QuoteBut at least the written word is standardized to a point. Which is why, aside from minor spelling differences, it is no trouble to understand the various forms on English around the world.

Writing, yes, but keep in mind that Chinese has one uniform character set, and yet Mandarin and Cantonese speakers cannot understand one another unless they know the other language.
February 20, 2009, 09:53:57 AM #32 Last Edit: February 20, 2009, 05:42:55 PM by Tom S. Fox
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 19, 2009, 01:01:27 PM
I wasn't talking about language change. I was talking about the inappropriateness of trying to control a bottom-up system from the top down. That's all I've EVER been talking about in this thread.

No, wait, you said that Esperanto would split off into different languages!

Besides, I remember a case where what you call "controlling from the top down" worked: Grammarians recommended to use the double accusative with the German verb "kosten" and it worked just fine!

I still don't get how that is related to Esperanto, though.

Anyway, before we lead this discussion ad infinitum, do you think Esperanto is useless, then?
February 21, 2009, 07:13:52 AM #33
nay. It's not worth the hassle. But it is an interesting concept

February 21, 2009, 07:30:54 AM #34
What hassle?
February 21, 2009, 01:41:41 PM #35
Quote from: Tom S. Fox on February 21, 2009, 07:30:54 AM
What hassle?

I guess he is referring to the hassle of engineering a language and popularizing it enough to become commplace when there are plenty of other languages out there that work just fine.
February 21, 2009, 02:36:02 PM #36
But it is already engineered.
February 21, 2009, 03:53:12 PM #37
Not socially it isn't.

People have come up with all sorts of languages: Klingon, the Newcomer language from Alien Nation, etc. That's the easy part. The hard part is getting people to use it.

The Dvorak keyboard layout is much more efficient that QWERTY, and is perfect now that we have electronic keyboards and don't have to worry about keys jamming. When I tried it out, it took me just a couple of days to get used to it, and my typing speed went from 75wpm to over 100.

But people just don't want to change, no matter how easy or advantageous it is. Not if they don't have a real incentive to, at any rate.
February 21, 2009, 04:33:56 PM #38
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 21, 2009, 03:53:12 PM
Not socially it isn't.
What makes you say that (especially with a double negative)?

Quote from: MrBogosity on February 21, 2009, 03:53:12 PM
People have come up with all sorts of languages: Klingon, the Newcomer language from Alien Nation, etc.
See, that's exactly the point, those are ad hoc languages invented for movies. They are not suitable for real life.

Quote from: MrBogosity on February 21, 2009, 03:53:12 PM
That's the easy part.
If you think inventing a language is easy, try it yourself!
February 21, 2009, 05:06:28 PM #39
A few years back I tried inventing my own language. I like things with languages alot (hence the 'lingual' in my name) but it was really hard and it was almost impossible not basing it on something else, which esperanto is.

And shane's right. As they say, 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. The english language needs a spelling reformation. But no one's going to change it. It won't be changed for a long long while I reckon

February 21, 2009, 05:10:01 PM #40
Quote from: Sinlingual on February 21, 2009, 05:06:28 PM
And shane's right. As they say, 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. The english language needs a spelling reformation. But no one's going to change it. It won't be changed for a long long while I reckon

What's your point?
February 21, 2009, 05:11:09 PM #41
Quote from: Tom S. Fox on February 21, 2009, 04:33:56 PM
What makes you say that (especially with a double negative)?

That wasn't a double-negative; that was a modified negative.

QuoteSee, that's exactly the point, those are ad hoc languages invented for movies. They are not suitable for real life.

Tell that to the Trek fans who speak fluent Klingon!
February 21, 2009, 05:22:31 PM #42
Quote from: MrBogosity on February 21, 2009, 05:11:09 PM
That wasn't a double-negative; that was a modified negative.
Modified negative? What is that supposed to be?
And more importantly: Why do you keep evading my questions?

Quote from: MrBogosity on February 21, 2009, 05:11:09 PM
Tell that to the Trek fans who speak fluent Klingon!
How is this in any way related to what I just said?
February 21, 2009, 06:45:28 PM #43
In other words, it wasn't, "No, it wasn't engineered," it was, "No, it wasn't socially engineered."

I'm not evading. I'm answering as well as I can.

And you said that you couldn't learn the languages fluently and use them. I pointed out that many people do just that with Klingon.
February 21, 2009, 06:49:12 PM #44
I think Shane is just getting insecure because he is the only one here who is fluent in Klingon.  ;D
User actions
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4