Live data from Hacker News

Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

npr.org

211–220 of 234 posts

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#211
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "English creole" hypothesis has been discussed a lot and it is true that English is a bit special within Europe in having absorbed a lot of material from other languages such as French and Norse, but I still think that it is very recognisable as a Germanic language (both grammatically as well as from the perspective of "core vocabulary"), so I don't think that the languages "merged" in the same way as this maybe…

> There is still no reason in principle why English couldn't have chosen a more regular system of spelling, especially at a time where literacy was low anyway. I mentioned that farther downthread. The original Webster's dictionary served exactly this purpose - in the early 1800s, his stated goal (IIRC) was to give the new USA a standardized language to help differentiate it from the country they'd split off from. Als…

You ignored the part of my comment where I showed that English spelling is inconsistent even between words that have purely Old English origins. I really don't think your hypothesis holds water. The chaotic spelling of English is a historical coincidence and not some necessary consequence of how the English spoken language developed.

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#212
post #11

> Esperanto creates a kind of "level playing field," because it's a second language for almost everyone who speaks it, says Humphrey Tonkin. It doesn't. It is entirely based on European and Western culture. Language have huge influent on thought process, and it seems that thought process needed for Esperanto is a Western-centric.

> Language have huge influent on thought process, and it seems that thought process needed for Esperanto is a Western-centric I believe that Sapir–Whorf hypothesis has been considered unfounded and a meme for a long time now. It sort of makes sense, but strangely I don't think there is any evidence for such a thing.

So it is just my own experience, but it actually does affect the way you think somehow.

I speak 4 languages (including 3 fluently that I use everyday) and I very often come across ideas or subtleties that just does not exist in one of those languages. When I started learning Japanese, I clearly remember understanding naturally some concepts in it that just cannot be expressed that precisely in English or French.

One example that I come across often is the word "fluent" that just does not exists in French (there are equivalent translations, but no way to convey the very same idea).

Once you speak if fluently, some words in Japanese have a very deep meaning that just cannot be translated while keeping the same exact meaning, like the words yabai or sugoi (to take very easy examples).

You can even tell that Esperanto is very Western-centric just by looking at it structure anyway. It is written from the left to the right, has spaces between words, the same 3 different sets of characters (caps, non-caps and hand-written) with similar rules, same punctuation...

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#213

Recently someone said to me that the EU really needs a common language - just like how English is spoken across most USA states. But none of the current European languages would be acceptable across the EU. It didn’t occur to me at the time, but now I wonder if Esperanto could fill that role?

Now that the UK has left you can assume that the main working language of the institutions is Irish English, with the Irish parts rarely used.

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#214

Regardless of what you think about the idea of an artificial international auxiliary language, Esperanto is very poorly designed as a language. Sure, it's easy to learn, because it has a small vocabulary and is very regular. But it's like a programming language designed by an amateur: full of bells and whistles and useless stuff that the designer thought would be cool, without regard to the actual challenges faced by…

All valid criticisms but especially the accusative critique misses that the language has unique features, such as the possibility to change word order pretty much freely, so you can stress different parts of the sentence.

I am actively learnkgn Esperanto and find it deeply enjoyable - I speak English, German and French (mostly) fluently and have dabbled in Spanish, Portuguese, Hindi, Malayalam, Mandarin and a tiny bit of Lojban. None of them have given me this sense of joy while learning vocabulary or practising as its really just a matter of 'recognising' a word - usually from your own native language and sometimes from others.

I'd dare to say this is the key feature of Esperanto: its incredibly pleasant and beginner friendly.

As to Lojban, I was incredibly motivated but just had to give up after a few weeks. Its like Latin or Sanskrit, a mostly theoretical written language with overly stingent rules. Lojban words can be used as verbs or nouns, but when used as verbs they have a strict fixed order where subject and objects go that you simply have to learn by heart. All words are 'averaged' from the most common languages and follow a common scheme - so pretty much none of them are recognisable to anyone. As such just a horror to learn.

That said I still admire the effort. Learning different languages opens wide horizons and completely new conceptual worlds and anyone who doesn't try at least to learn a second language really misses out even on understanding their own language better.

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#215
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe after a couple of centuries. Languages don't change that fast, especially after the introduction of the printing press and formal language education in schools. You can read 200 year old texts without problems. Shakespeare is close to five hundred years old and you can still understand it with a little effort.

It seems like it would be exactly analogous to the formation of pidgins, which takes one generation, not centuries. Also, if I think back to high school I would challenge the idea that every speaker of modern English has "no problems" reading 200-year-old texts.

But often you're not missing meaning but simply context. Shakespeare is not hard per se due to the language but because its based in a world that is alien to you.

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m going to be pedantic here, but Phillips head screws serve a purpose - they limit torque by allowing the driver to cam out. They’re almost always improperly used, but my point stands :) Torx is far superior to square drive, too...

Cam-out seems like an ex post facto justification to me. Henry Ford would have picked Robertson if not for the licensing trouble. Robertson's lack of a cam-out 'feature' wasn't the reason.

Agreed, and that's what I meant by "almost always improperly used". Phillips is great for use in plastics in many cases, but they were popular long before that became an issue.

Personally my drive of choice is Torx - they're six-sided so they're easier to align the driver, they have excellent torque transfer, they're hard to "wallow out", and the drivers are relatively inexpensive to manufacture. Beyond that, hex ("Allen") head are good for smaller fasteners where the "wings" on a Torx driver are so small they're fragile, Phillips is good for applications where you don't want it to be easy to over-torque, and plain old "flat head" is very well-suited for dirty environments where grease and debris may end up coating the head. I'd certainly not want Torx heads on the bolts under my Jeep, for instance, because they're a pain to clean out. I can clean out a flat head with the corner of the driver and be able to use it effectively, which is practical unique to that design and very important for those applications.

I have nothing against Robertson. They're as good as anything for 90%+ of applications, it's just that they're uncommon enough where I am that it doesn't make sense to use them.

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#217
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not wrong, but if you're designing a universal language I think Latin script is the only feasible option. You're not helping anyone if you invent an entirely new script that everyone has to learn from scratch, and that doesn't even have extant keyboards. Latin script is the only choice that makes sense -- most people worldwide already have at least some familiarity with it, and it has excellent universal hardw…

𐑢𐑦𐑔 ·𐑿𐑯𐑦𐑒𐑴𐑛, 𐑞 𐑦𐑯𐑑𐑤𐑴𐑛𐑳𐑒𐑖𐑩𐑯 𐑝 𐑯𐑵 𐑨𐑤𐑓𐑩𐑚𐑧𐑑𐑦𐑒 𐑕𐑦𐑕𐑑𐑩𐑥 𐑐𐑮𐑩𐑟𐑧𐑯𐑑𐑕 𐑯𐑴 𐑕𐑦𐑜𐑯𐑦𐑓𐑦𐑒𐑩𐑯𐑑 𐑑𐑧𐑒𐑯𐑩𐑤𐑪𐑡𐑦𐑒𐑩𐑤 𐑐𐑮𐑪𐑚𐑤𐑩𐑥𐑟, 𐑨𐑟 𐑿 𐑒𐑩𐑯 𐑕𐑰. (With Unicode, the introduction of new alphabetic writing systems presents no significant technological problems, as you can see.)

Now make that as easy to type on computers and phones as Latin script.

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#218

For me, what I love most about Esperanto is its unabashed affirmative optimism. The name itself means “one who hopes.” For me it’s a microcosm of competing epistemologies in society. I’ll be a little casual with definitions here, but if we adopt a rationalist / positivist view of the world, Esperanto is a straightforward solution to a problem. Zamenhof despaired at his multi-ethnic neighbors killing each other. He hy…

Zamenhof’s optimism isn’t as universally admired as you suggest. First of all, the Yugoslav wars stand as bloody proof that even if neighbors can understand each other and speak more or less the same language, they can just find something else to fight over. Secondly, Zamenhof was still writing from an Enlightenment-era framework that saw language diversity as a problem, something to systematize away. In our modern e…

What is so great about having many different languages?

It is sad when cultural heritage is lost because it was written in a language no one speaks anymore. But this problem is caused by having many different languages. In a parallel reality, where the culture spoke the same language as other countries, the cultural heritage would not be lost.

It is sad when a group of people is discriminated or has fewer oportunities, because they cannot use their language. But again, in a parallel reality, where these people didn't grow up speaking a different language, the problem doesn't exist.

If you could magically change the world so that it would have 10× more languages, 10× more scripts, and 10× more USB connector types, would it make the world a better place? If not, then why changing it in the opposite direction wouldn't make it better?

When a language disappears today, it is bad because we lose information, and because the last users of the language have a problem communicating. But if you could magically change the past to replace that language by English centuries ago, there would be no lost information and no suffering users. And if we could agree on a common language today, we would be magically changing the future just like that. (Esperanto gives the additional advantage of being more regular.)

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#219
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothings stops you from learning whatever second language you want. I think having English as a native language actually gives us a huge advantage: we can travel to a large chunk of the world and have a pretty good chance of being understood. We can work in globally relevant jobs with no language barrier. And so on.

> Nothings stops you from learning whatever second language you want. A lack of incentive is what stops most. > we can travel to a large chunk of the world and have a pretty good chance of being understood. We can work in globally relevant jobs with no language barrier. And so on. You described the benefit of knowing English, not being a native English speaker.

The advantage of being a native English speaker is that you do not have to waste years of your life learning English as a second language. You could spend the same amount of time learning a different language... but you probably can find a better use for that time.

In the time I spent learning English -- which is still far from perfect, especially in spoken form -- I probably could have learned quantum physics instead. Except, I realistically couldn't have, because good textbooks on this topic do not exist in my language, I wouldn't be able to learn more online, etc.

Now imagine removing an equivalent amount of knowledge from your life -- that is the price you would have to pay for not being a native English speaker.

(The idea of Esperanto as everyone's second language is that instead of some people spending 10+ years learning the common language, and some lucky people spending 0, everyone would spend 2 years instead. Until people would hopefully realize that private languages are useless, and then it would be 0 for everyone.)

Re: Can Esperanto Make a Comeback? (2015)

#220
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not particularly familiar with Esperanto, but I imagine the idea is that it's much easier to learn than English. English is stupidly complicated—not necessarily more-so than other languages, but well above what an intentionally-designed language could achieve.

Esperanto (and all the other intentionally designed languages) are simple and logical only because nobody actually speaks them as a native language. They're consistent because everyone learned them from the same miniscule corpus of available books and the occasional film. If any of the intentionally designed languages were to actually come into common use, it would immediately be subject to the same kind of regional…

> If any of the intentionally designed languages were to actually come into common use, it would immediately be subject to the same kind of regional pronunciation differences, usage drift over time, coining of neologisms and idiomatic phrases, etc. that make real languages so complicated.

The drift would probably be much smaller than historically, because now we have the internet and global culture. And the common language would make the world even more connected.

If Esperanto would come into common use tomorrow, Hollywood would start producing movies in Esperanto, and people around the world would be watching them. That would already be a force acting against local drift. If people around you decide to replace X by Y, but 9 out of 10 movies keep using X, the change is less likely to stick.

Neologisms and idioms, I agree, but there is a chance they would spread to other countries.

Post reply on HN