I fell in love with the concept of Esperanto and was wondering what everyone else thought about it. Does it seem like a good idea? Have you even heard of it? :3
Why empty? Esperanto is a rather rich language. Word formation for example is flexible thanks to its agglutinative nature. And it may sound unintuitive, but the regularity of the language contributes to make it richer. Let me try to illustrate this. In English you can often prefix something with un- to make the opposite of something. But it does not work all the time (English being irregular). In Esperanto, the prefix mal- makes the opposite of something and you can use it for any word for which you want to make the opposite. It's regular. If it's logical, it's correct. So "mi sekvas la sagon" (= I follow the arrow) can logically be transformed into "mi malsekvas la sagon" which could be translated in English using several words (= I follow the arrow in the opposite direction). Regularity allows to build many words and be creative.
A few rules which combine well together can result in a rich system. In that sense, Esperanto is richer in my opinion than a natural language such as English (or French, or German, etc.) Esperanto is a bit like Legos: with just a few simple bricks (the rules, the few root words...), you can build complex and beautiful things.
This kind of comment "Esperanto feels empty" generally comes from people who do not know Esperanto, but yet, they feel that they can give an opinion about it.
It feels empty to me because I do not get a sense of culture from it. The language itself is well-built, but it doesn't have the same feel as a language that has been around for thousands of years, where I can look up almost exactly how it evolved. Then again, I am a lover of history, and a language with little history evokes little interest. And I remind you that one does not need to be an expert to have an opinion; I tried Esperanto, I didn't like it. It does not make my point of few invalid.
'Logical'?saltamonteDecember 26 2009, 10:48:00 UTC
It's regular. If it's logical, it's correct.
I don't often hear someone make that claim about a language, even an artificial one. (Actually, I do, since I know a lot of computer programmers, but that's parenthetical (ha!) to my point.) What do you mean by it? I can get even more "creative" with your example sentence: it also means "I stop following the arrow," "I lead the arrow," and "I am followed by the arrow," since they all use opposites of 'follow.' They're logical; are they all correct?
EDIT: I hope this doesn't look like a troll post. I have zero exposure to Esperanto outside of this webpage; for all I know, these four sentences really are valid translations of "mi malsekvas la sagon." If they're not, however, then the "logical = correct" argument needs some tweaking.
Re: 'Logical'?dominikoDecember 26 2009, 12:36:25 UTC
it also means "I stop following the arrow," No. the mal- prefix creates the opposite of something and not the negation of something. There is another prefix for the negation: ne-.
Example:
bela = beautiful
malbela = ugly
nebela = not beautiful (it may look ordinary or ugly, but it's not beautiful)
There is a subtle difference between the negation and the opposite of something. Anyway, the prefix "mal-" also does not mean to stop doing something. so no esperanto speaker would understand it the way you said it.
"I lead the arrow," I did no grok this.
and "I am followed by the arrow," Again no, it cannot mean that. "sekvi" is a transitive verb. Adding the prefix "mal-" does not change that. There is a suffix (-iĝ) to transform transitive verbs into intransitive verbs. So "malsekvi" is an action verb, "mi" (I) is the subject, "sagon" is the object (since it has the accusative form -n). For an esperanto speaker, understanding "malsekvi" is natural even if the word may not be listed in a dictionary.
I hope this doesn't look like a troll post. I have zero exposure to Esperanto outside of this webpage; Having questions is fine of course. But hearing something like "esperanto feels empty" from people who have have no knowledge about it is another matter. Having no knowledge of Chinese for example, I would not dare giving my opinion about whether Chinese is "empty". But when it comes to Esperanto, people do that. Some people cannot accept the idea that a constructed language can work well and express any kind of concepts or feelings.
If you're willing to learn a bit about Esperanto, this web site is excellent to teach the language: http://www.lernu.net
The distinction between constructed and natural language can also be a bit fuzzy. Italian for example can be seen as a constructed language since standard Italian was formalized by Dante Alighieri. And until the unification of Italy, most people spoke different dialects (they still do, but they also understand standard Italian). Another example: my ancestors spoke Breton. Breton had (and still has) several several dialects (Leoneg, Tregerieg, Gwenedeg, and Kerneveg). A standard Breton was unified in the XX century. Some people pejoratively call it "chemical Breton" but to me, this modern Breton is pleasing and makes learning the language easier too. So you could say that Italian and Breton today is are constructed language to some extent. And the same could be said for many other languages I'm sure.
A few rules which combine well together can result in a rich system. In that sense, Esperanto is richer in my opinion than a natural language such as English (or French, or German, etc.) Esperanto is a bit like Legos: with just a few simple bricks (the rules, the few root words...), you can build complex and beautiful things.
This kind of comment "Esperanto feels empty" generally comes from people who do not know Esperanto, but yet, they feel that they can give an opinion about it.
Reply
And I remind you that one does not need to be an expert to have an opinion; I tried Esperanto, I didn't like it. It does not make my point of few invalid.
Reply
I don't often hear someone make that claim about a language, even an artificial one. (Actually, I do, since I know a lot of computer programmers, but that's parenthetical (ha!) to my point.) What do you mean by it? I can get even more "creative" with your example sentence: it also means "I stop following the arrow," "I lead the arrow," and "I am followed by the arrow," since they all use opposites of 'follow.' They're logical; are they all correct?
EDIT: I hope this doesn't look like a troll post. I have zero exposure to Esperanto outside of this webpage; for all I know, these four sentences really are valid translations of "mi malsekvas la sagon." If they're not, however, then the "logical = correct" argument needs some tweaking.
Reply
No. the mal- prefix creates the opposite of something and not the negation of something. There is another prefix for the negation: ne-.
Example:
- bela = beautiful
- malbela = ugly
- nebela = not beautiful (it may look ordinary or ugly, but it's not beautiful)
There is a subtle difference between the negation and the opposite of something. Anyway, the prefix "mal-" also does not mean to stop doing something. so no esperanto speaker would understand it the way you said it."I lead the arrow,"
I did no grok this.
and "I am followed by the arrow,"
Again no, it cannot mean that. "sekvi" is a transitive verb. Adding the prefix "mal-" does not change that. There is a suffix (-iĝ) to transform transitive verbs into intransitive verbs. So "malsekvi" is an action verb, "mi" (I) is the subject, "sagon" is the object (since it has the accusative form -n). For an esperanto speaker, understanding "malsekvi" is natural even if the word may not be listed in a dictionary.
I hope this doesn't look like a troll post. I have zero exposure to Esperanto outside of this webpage;
Having questions is fine of course. But hearing something like "esperanto feels empty" from people who have have no knowledge about it is another matter. Having no knowledge of Chinese for example, I would not dare giving my opinion about whether Chinese is "empty". But when it comes to Esperanto, people do that. Some people cannot accept the idea that a constructed language can work well and express any kind of concepts or feelings.
If you're willing to learn a bit about Esperanto, this web site is excellent to teach the language: http://www.lernu.net
The distinction between constructed and natural language can also be a bit fuzzy. Italian for example can be seen as a constructed language since standard Italian was formalized by Dante Alighieri. And until the unification of Italy, most people spoke different dialects (they still do, but they also understand standard Italian). Another example: my ancestors spoke Breton. Breton had (and still has) several several dialects (Leoneg, Tregerieg, Gwenedeg, and Kerneveg). A standard Breton was unified in the XX century. Some people pejoratively call it "chemical Breton" but to me, this modern Breton is pleasing and makes learning the language easier too. So you could say that Italian and Breton today is are constructed language to some extent. And the same could be said for many other languages I'm sure.
Reply
Leave a comment