Future of Esperanto

[Gary]

My research into the Esperanto Language suggests that its use is in
somewhat of a decline. Efforts to upgrade the language have resulted
in the creation of alternative languages such as IDO and MondLango.
Both had the goal of eliminating or at least improving the perceived
shortcomings of Esperanto. While each believes they have succeeded to
a large extent, neither has been openly embraced by the Esperanto
community for a variety of reasons. My guess is that both went too far
in re-engineering the grammar to satisfy Esperanto users.

As far as Esperanto is concerned, one of the biggest complaints by non-
users, concerns the invention of several diacritical letters in
Esperanto that find no place on any computer keyboard or in any other
alphabet. This is a mystery to me since numerous letters in the Latin
alphabet were totally ignored by its creator Ludwig L. Zamenhoff.
Obviously, he didn't have the benefit of foresight in realizing the
impact that future inventions (IE. computers and the Internet) would
have on the world just 120 or so years hence. I realize that the rules
of grammar for the Esperanto Language are engraved in stone, but it
would seem to me that a little flexibility in one minor area might go
a long way in resolving this one small (or large) issue for many. A
slight modification of the Esperanto alphabet might help move the
language back to its former glory and maybe open it up to others for
whom this has been a problem. The following is an open suggestion as
to how this might be accomplished. Let's face it, all languages evolve
or they're dismissed by their users or potential users. Modern Greek
and Arabic are vastly different from their ancient or classical forms.
Consider modern English compared with that spoken only several hundred
years ago. Things change or we move on. Change can be good for
Esperanto. Let's consider it.

1. The following Esperanto alphabet is suggested. Letters without
comments in parenthesis are unchanged.
a, b, c (ch as in church... formerly ĉ), d, e, f, g (ge as in
gem... formerly ĝ), h, i, j (like z in azure, s in visual... formerly
ĵ), k, l, m, n, o, p, q (ga as in goat... formerly g), r (may roll if
desired, but not required), s, t, u, v, w (like w in English...
formerly ŭ), x (sh as in shine... formerly ŝ), y (ya as in yet...
formerly j), z.

Problems:

1. Need new letter for ĥ. The most logical solution is to eliminate ĥ
altogether and use k in its place, apparently this is frequently done
anyway. As I understand it, there is a rule that ĥ after r can be
replaced by k in both spelling and pronunciation (e.g., arĥitekto =
arkitekto = architect). RESOLVED.

2. Need new letter for ĉ (ts sound)... possibly `c or c`. Using the
"grave accent" at least provides a single keystroke without a "shift".
UNRESOLVED.

Questions:

1. Why select j for the y sound when the language doesn't use the y
letter at all? In addition, a diacritical j (ĵ) was then created
because j was already in use.
SOLUTION: Change j to y since that's probably what it should have
been in the first place, then replace the ĵ with the now available j.
P.S. Yes I do understand the significance of j in the Spanish
language, but Esperanto is not Spanish and can therefore set its own
rules, contrary to its model language, when it clearly makes sense to
do so.

2. Why create a diacritical g (ĝ) with a ge sound when g itself should
have sufficed? Instead, the g letter was assigned the harsh ga sound
which is not how that letter is naturally pronounced.
SOLUTION: Assign g (ga) to q which is not in use. Both g (ga) and q
have a harsh throaty sound so it makes sense to assign the ga sound to
the q letter. In addition their appearance is similar, which is a
bonus. As a result g, with the correct ge sound, is now available to
replace ĝ.

3. Why create a diacritical u (ŭ) with a w sound when the letter w is
not in use anyway?
SOLUTION: Simply assign ŭ to w.

4. The diacritical s (ŝ) generates a sh sound. The letter s is already
assigned the correct s sound. What alternate letter may be assigned
that could logically represent the sh sound?
SOLUTION: Many Chinese words starting with the letters xi produce
just such a sh sound thereby making the letter x, which is not in use,
a logical choice to replace the ŝ.

5. Why require that the r be rolled? If a native speaker is
unpracticed rolling the r then it should suffice to speak it without
the roll. It's clearly understandable in either case.

Conclusion:

Being a realist, I'm fully aware that non of the suggested changes
will be seriously considered, but I just had to have my say. I'm
certainly not educated in the evolution of the language, and these or
similar changes may have been suggested in the past, but I felt
compelled to try even if I am rehashing old arguments.

Thanks... Gary

[Marko Rauhamaa]

Post by Gary
As far as Esperanto is concerned, one of the biggest complaints by
non- users, concerns the invention of several diacritical letters in
Esperanto that find no place on any computer keyboard or in any other
alphabet.

Doo yoo think dhuht reeforming dhuh awd and awkwuhrd orthawgruhfee uhv
Espuhrawntow iz bowdh uh nesuhsuhree and suhfishuhnt preekuhndishuhn
fuhr its uhkseptuhns az uh reel inturnashuhnuhl langwij?

In mie estimeyshuhn, dhuh biguhst awbstuhkl in dhuh wiedspred
uhkseptuhns uhv Espuhrawntow iz dhuh lak uhv kuhltshuhruhl iekawnz. If
suhmbuhdee startid meyking reelee kool mooveez or myoozik in
Espuhrawntow, it miet beekuhm uh fashuhnuhbuhl thing tuh stuhdee and
now. Awlsow suhm enjineering feets liek pawpyooluhr kuhmpyooduhr geymz
or revuhlooshuhnuhree sieuhntifik reezuhlts puhblisht in Espuhrawntow
miet giv dhuh langwij uh drastik boost.


Marko

[CS]

"Marko Rauhamaa"

Post by Marko Rauhamaa
Doo yoo think dhuht reeforming dhuh awd and awkwuhrd orthawgruhfee uhv
Espuhrawntow iz bowdh uh nesuhsuhree and suhfishuhnt preekuhndishuhn
fuhr its uhkseptuhns az uh reel inturnashuhnuhl langwij?

Meereendah rehspondoh!

Charles

[Klivo Lendon]

Post by Gary
My research into the Esperanto Language suggests that its use is in
somewhat of a decline. Efforts to upgrade the language have resulted
in the creation of alternative languages such as IDO and MondLango.
Both had the goal of eliminating or at least improving the perceived
shortcomings of Esperanto. While each believes they have succeeded to
a large extent, neither has been openly embraced by the Esperanto
community for a variety of reasons. My guess is that both went too far
in re-engineering the grammar to satisfy Esperanto users.

Esperanto is a living language, with its own history and literature.
It's not a project which can be arbitrarily changed.

Post by Gary
...
The following is an open suggestion as 
to how this might be accomplished.
Let's face it, all languages evolve 
or they're dismissed by their users or
potential users. Modern Greek 
and Arabic are vastly different from their
ancient or classical forms.

"The Greek language has not changed much in its long history."
http://www.answers.com/topic/greek-language

Post by Gary
Consider modern English compared with that spoken only several hundred
years ago. Things change or we move on. Change can be good for Esperanto.
Let's consider it.

I did consider it, and have decided against it. Sorry.

Post by Gary
1. The following Esperanto alphabet is suggested.

...

Post by Gary
2. Need new letter for ĉ (ts sound)... possibly `c or c`. Using
the 
"grave accent" at least provides a single keystroke without
a "shift". 
UNRESOLVED.

The letter ĉ is typed without using "Shift".

Post by Gary
1. Why select j for the y sound when the language doesn't use
the y 
letter at all?

It seems that your knowledge of alphabets is limited.

"The great majority of Germanic languages, such as German,
Dutch, Swedish, Danish and Norwegian use J for the palatal
approximant /j/. Notable exceptions are English, Scots and
Luxembourgish. J also represents /j/ in Albanian, and those
Uralic, Baltic and Slavic languages that use the Latin alphabet,
such as Hungarian, Finnish, Estonian, Polish, Czech, Slovak,
Latvian and Lithuanian. Some languages in these families,
such as Serbian, also adopted J into the Cyrillic alphabet for
the same purpose."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J

Post by Gary
...
2. Why create a diacritical g (ĝ) with a ge sound when g itself
should 
have sufficed? Instead, the g letter was assigned the
harsh ga sound 
which is not how that letter is naturally pronounced.

It's difficult to understand out what you are trying to say here.
Do you think that the pronunciation of g in 'get' and 'give' is
unnatural?

Post by Gary
SOLUTION: Assign g (ga) to q which is not in use. Both g (ga)
and q 
have a harsh throaty sound so it makes sense to assign
the ga sound to 
the q letter.

Qreat idea!

Post by Gary
3. Why create a diacritical u (ŭ) with a w sound when the letter w is
not in use anyway?

To make words easily recognizable. For someone who speaks
a Romance or Germanic language, the root 'aŭd' is probably
easier to recognize than 'awd'.

Post by Gary
SOLUTION: Simply assign ŭ to w.
4. The diacritical s (ŝ) generates a sh sound. The letter s is already
assigned the correct s sound. What alternate letter may be assigned
that could logically represent the sh sound?
SOLUTION: Many Chinese words starting with the letters xi produce
just such a sh sound thereby making the letter x, which is not in use,
a logical choice to replace the ŝ.

The problem is that other dilettantes insist that 'x' should be used
for the sound 'ks'.

Post by Gary
5. Why require that the r be rolled?

Why require that the r it be pronounced?

Post by Gary
If a native speaker is 
unpracticed rolling the r then it should suffice
to speak it without 
the roll.

Native speakers have no problem pronouncing a rolled r because
the rolled r exists in their native language.

Is that clear?

Post by Gary
...
Being a realist, I'm fully aware that non of the suggested changes
will be seriously considered, but I just had to have my say. I'm
certainly not educated in the evolution of the language, and these
or 
similar changes may have been suggested in the past, but I felt
compelled to try even if I am rehashing old arguments.
Thanks... Gary

Klivo

http://purl.oclc.org/net/klivo/simredoeng
http://purl.oclc.org/net/klivo/merkuro
http://purl.oclc.org/net/klivo/grafikilo7

[cellus]

Saluton Gary!

En la internet oni vidas plurajn mesaĝojn en la angla lingvo. Speciale
homoj kiuj mem jam havas mondlingvon kiel sian propran gepatran sentas
– ŝajne – urĝan bezonon reformi esperanton.

Ido ekaperis jam en 1907. Estas natura afero ke oni probas ŝanĝi ion
en certa produkto, kaj eble lingvo ne multe diferencas de aliaj.

Samtempe oni demandas al si, kio estas la profito de la reformemuloj.
Laŭ mia propra sperto reformemo ofte estas rimedo por anstataŭigi la
fakton ke la reformanto ne sukcesis lerni la lingvon je diskuto!

Ido do ekzistas de 1907, Occidental de 1922, Interlingua de 1951. Tiuj
lingvoj traktas la internacian vortaron en iom alia maniero kaj iliaj
subtenantoj opinias ke tiuj lingvoj, sen la circumflexoj ^, kun pli
internacia vortaro (con un plus international vocabulario) devas esti
pli facilaj ol esperanto, sed kiom da subtenantoj ili havas. Ĉu
nekalkuleblaj nombroj da homoj aliĝis al tiuj lingvoj? Ĉu lingvo nepre
estas pli alloga ĝuste ĉar la gramatiko estas tiom pli facila? Ne
nepre! Kaj ido ne ricevis pli da anoj ĝuste ke ĝi skribis sen la ˆ!

Parolantoj de latinidaj lingvoj tre facile lernas interlinguan de
IALA. Fakte por klera italo sufiĉas kelkaj semajnoj de ne tro intencaj
studoj, sed ĉu tio signifas ke la latinidlingvanoj anarege aliĝas al
interlingua IALA. Principe ne!

Se vi ne havas komunan lingvon kun iu persona, uzado de esperanto ne
estas malbona ideo. Ekzistas materialoj por lerni esperanton en
multege da lingvoj. Se via kontacto scias latinidan lingvon,
interlingua de IALA povas esti probenda.

Se la afero estus tiel simpla ke oni simpligus la alfabeton de
esperanto, tiu reformo jam estus farita, sed la speciala alfabeto de
esperanto estas esenca parto de la lingvo kaj tiel facile oni ne povas
ŝanĝi ion en iu lingvo!

[Dilma Portella]

Post by Gary
My research into the Esperanto Language suggests that its use is in
somewhat of a decline.

We don´t think so. I speak esperanto for 30 years and think Search
for "esperanto" in google or in youtube. After internet esperanto is
spreandig easily.

About the reforms you propose, I suggest that first you learn
esperanto to write them IN esperanto. There are forums about this
matter in esperanto with participants of many different countries.

Emilio
Brazilo

Post by Gary
As far as Esperanto is concerned, one of the biggest complaints by non-
users, concerns the invention of several diacritical letters in
Esperanto that find no place on any computer keyboard or in any other
alphabet. This is a mystery to me since numerous letters in the Latin
alphabet were totally ignored by its creator Ludwig L. Zamenhoff.
Obviously, he didn't have the benefit of foresight in realizing the
impact that future inventions (IE. computers and the Internet) would
have on the world just 120 or so years hence. I realize that the rules
of grammar for the Esperanto Language are engraved in stone, but it
would seem to me that a little flexibility in one minor area might go
a long way in resolving this one small (or large) issue for many. A
slight modification of the Esperanto alphabet might help move the
language back to its former glory and maybe open it up to others for
whom this has been a problem. The following is an open suggestion as
to how this might be accomplished. Let's face it, all languages evolve
or they're dismissed by their users or potential users. Modern Greek
and Arabic are vastly different from their ancient or classical forms.
Consider modern English compared with that spoken only several hundred
years ago. Things change or we move on. Change can be good for
Esperanto. Let's consider it.
1. The following Esperanto alphabet is suggested. Letters without
comments in parenthesis are unchanged.
     a, b, c (ch as in church... formerly ĉ), d, e, f, g (ge as in
gem... formerly ĝ), h, i, j (like z in azure, s in visual... formerly
ĵ), k, l, m, n, o, p, q (ga as in goat... formerly g), r (may roll if
desired, but not required), s, t, u, v, w (like w in English...
formerly ŭ), x (sh as in shine... formerly ŝ), y (ya as in yet...
formerly j), z.
1. Need new letter for ĥ. The most logical solution is to eliminate ĥ
altogether and use k in its place, apparently this is frequently done
anyway. As I understand it, there is a rule that ĥ after r can be
replaced by k in both spelling and pronunciation (e.g., arĥitekto =
arkitekto = architect). RESOLVED.
2. Need new letter for ĉ (ts sound)... possibly `c or c`. Using the
"grave accent" at least provides a single keystroke without a "shift".
UNRESOLVED.
1. Why select j for the y sound when the language doesn't use the y
letter at all? In addition, a diacritical j (ĵ) was then created
because j was already in use.
   SOLUTION: Change j to y since that's probably what it should have
been in the first place, then replace the ĵ with the now available j.
   P.S. Yes I do understand the significance of j in the Spanish
language, but Esperanto is not Spanish and can therefore set its own
rules, contrary to its model language, when it clearly makes sense to
do so.
2. Why create a diacritical g (ĝ) with a ge sound when g itself should
have sufficed? Instead, the g letter was assigned the harsh ga sound
which is not how that letter is naturally pronounced.
   SOLUTION: Assign g (ga) to q which is not in use. Both g (ga) and q
have a harsh throaty sound so it makes sense to assign the ga sound to
the q letter. In addition their appearance is similar, which is a
bonus. As a result g, with the correct ge sound, is now available to
replace ĝ.
3. Why create a diacritical u (ŭ) with a w sound when the letter w is
not in use anyway?
   SOLUTION: Simply assign ŭ to w.
4. The diacritical s (ŝ) generates a sh sound. The letter s is already
assigned the correct s sound. What alternate letter may be assigned
that could logically represent the sh sound?
   SOLUTION: Many Chinese words starting with the letters xi produce
just such a sh sound thereby making the letter x, which is not in use,
a logical choice to replace the ŝ.
5. Why require that the r be rolled? If a native speaker is
unpracticed rolling the r then it should suffice to speak it without
the roll. It's clearly understandable in either case.
Being a realist, I'm fully aware that non of the suggested changes
will be seriously considered, but I just had to have my say. I'm
certainly not educated in the evolution of the language, and these or
similar changes may have been suggested in the past, but I felt
compelled to try even if I am rehashing old arguments.
Thanks... Gary

[Michael Urban]

Post by Gary
As far as Esperanto is concerned, one of the biggest complaints by non-
users, concerns the invention of several diacritical letters in
Esperanto that find no place on any computer keyboard or in any other
alphabet. This is a mystery to me since numerous letters in the Latin
alphabet were totally ignored by its creator Ludwig L. Zamenhoff.
Obviously, he didn't have the benefit of foresight in realizing the
impact that future inventions (IE. computers and the Internet) would
have on the world just 120 or so years hence.

[spelling reforms omitted]

This is the sort of stuff that was of interest twenty or so years
ago when this newsgroup was still an Internet mailing list and MIME
and the Web hadn't been invented. Endless fun discussing how to
use ASCII to type Esperanto. But tech has moved on, and all current
operating systems provide the means to type, transmit, and display
the Esperanto characters (along with all the other world languages'
alphabets) by means of Unicode.

Anyone who is still complaining about Esperanto's character set
not being ASCII is just looking for excuses to complain (or tinker).

By the way, Zamenhof (one 'f', BTW) invented and patented a changeable
typing element similar to the daisy-wheel of the 1980s. He did
not envision modern technologies, but did understand that it was
possible to have flexible systems for typing 'foreign' alphabets.

[Gary]

Thanks to all for your comments. I got EXACTLY the kind of responses
that I expected.

Gary

[Rikardo]

Post by Gary
Thanks to all for your comments. I got EXACTLY the kind of responses
that I expected.

Interesting. So what was the motivation for your article then? To
confirm your prejudices against Esperanto speakers? To simply be annoying?

Rikardo

[Michael Urban]

Post by Gary
5. Why require that the r be rolled? If a native speaker is
unpracticed rolling the r then it should suffice to speak it without
the roll. It's clearly understandable in either case.

This, at least, is not an orthographic question. The answer is
that the trilled or rolled 'r' is a _model_ pronunciation. Various
sounds in Esperanto will be imperfectly imitated by speakers of
many languages; the trilled 'r' is not especially easy for English
(or French) speakers, just as it is not especially easy for us to
use 'pure' vowels at the ends of words instead of dipthongs (it is
tricky to say 'bon-e' instead of something close to 'bon-ej' for
many), or to pronounce the letter 't' clearly between vowels (where
it can turn to 'd') or before 'r' (where it wants to turn to 'ch';
using a trilled 'r' will reduce this tendency!). For British
speakers, a non-trilled 'r' will tend to disappear entirely in some
contexts! In other words, most people will speak Esperanto with
a national accent, and be more or less clearly understood regardless.
But I don't see a problem with having a specific model pronunciation,
and it is hard to imagine defining a language without one.

[Andreas Kueck]

Post by Gary
As far as Esperanto is concerned, one of the biggest complaints by non-
users, concerns the invention of several diacritical letters in
Esperanto that find no place on any computer keyboard or in any other
alphabet.

The operation systems of Microsoft Windows enable to switch the
virtual keyboard "Canadian Multilingual Standard" (details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyboard_layout#Canadian_Multilingual_Standard
). With it one can type most accented letters of the Latin alphabet,
including those of Esperanto.

Post by Gary
Change can be good for Esperanto.

No, it can't. But change can be good for English: Use capital letters
to distinguish between a noun and a non-noun.

Post by Gary
Let's consider it.

Esperantists already did so. Result: Change is neither necessary nor
desirable (
http://h.akademio-de-esperanto.org/decidoj/apartaj_teknikaj_bezonoj.html
).

Post by Gary
1. The following Esperanto alphabet is suggested.

Already in the Esperanto language standard document ("Fundamento de
Esperanto") Zamenhof specified that the circumflex may be represented
by "h", and that the brevis may be omitted (
http://h.akademio-de-esperanto.org/fundamento/gramatiko_angla.html ).

To write Esperanto texts in accordance with said standard, there are
already two options from the beginning of Esperanto on: one with
accents and the other without accents. No reform is necessary.

--
Andreas Kueck

[Lee Miller]

I have a few thoughts about your comments.

I'm not sure at all that the use of Esperanto is "in decline". I'm not sure
it was ever in ascendancy, but certainly its existence in the world today is
as vigorous as it has ever been. The internet, providing the possibility of
various forms of long-distance communication, has given Esperanto new
possibilities both for learning and use.

Proposals for changes to Esperanto emerged as soon as the language appeared.
Numerous alphabet reforms have been suggested, all of them with slight
variations. Generally the goal has been to eliminate diacritics (which
strikes me as a little odd, since many languages--including English--use
them liberally).

It's certainly possible to argue that Esperanto should be different in some
ways. Perhaps the alphabet should be changed; perhaps the accusative should
be eliminated; perhaps the verbal system should be simplified; perhaps the
phonetics should be modified; perhaps there should be a gender-neutral third
person pronoun . . .

All those arguments remain moot because of the fact that Esperanto is a
living language with a living speaker community. Once the language was
"launched", the mechanisms for modification by design disappeared. There is
no authority, no board, no panel, no Academy, with the capability of making
changes. The only possible way for change to occur is through usage. No
reform project has any hope of succeeding as such because there is no way to
impose change on the speakers of the language.

As you noted, all languages change over time. Esperanto has changed and
will continue to do so. But it's a slow process, and one that proceeds
along lines not necessarily governed by logic.

That said, you or anyone else has the right to start using the language
differently. You can write and publish and advocate for any forms or
changes that you want. A. Albault, a former president of the Esperanto
Academy, even published a little journal using his alphabet reform project.
He's gone, along with his proposals, but that doesn't mean you can't try
yours.

LM

[mireille.corobu]

Post by Lee Miller
I have a few thoughts about your comments.
[...]. He's gone, along with his proposals, but that doesn't mean you
can't try yours.

Saluton Lee,
mi ne kutimas legi tiom longe en la usonangla kaj estas certe ke mi ne
povas respondi en la sama lingvo kvankam mi plezure kaj facile komprenis
vin. Nur la lasta frazo ĝenas min ĉu "yours" signifas "vi mem"? kaj
kio pri "He's gone"?
Ĉion bonan al vi en via lando estimata Lee, mi estis kontenta vin legi!
Mireja

[Klivo Lendon]

Post by mireille.corobu

Post by Lee Miller
I have a few thoughts about your comments.
[...]. He's gone, along with his proposals, but that doesn't mean you
can't try yours.

Saluton Lee,
mi ne kutimas legi tiom longe en la usonangla kaj estas certe ke mi ne
povas respondi en la sama lingvo kvankam mi plezure kaj facile komprenis
  vin. Nur la lasta frazo ĝenas min ĉu "yours" signifas "vi mem"?

'Yours' estas poseda pronomo.

"Li estas for, kaj ankaŭ liaj proponoj, sed tio
ne signifas ke vi ne povas provi viajn."

Post by mireille.corobu
kaj kio pri "He's gone"?
Ĉion bonan al vi en via lando estimata Lee, mi estis kontenta vin legi!
Mireja

Klivo

[Lee Miller]

Post by mireille.corobu
Saluton Lee,
mi ne kutimas legi tiom longe en la usonangla kaj estas certe ke mi ne
povas respondi en la sama lingvo kvankam mi plezure kaj facile komprenis
vin. Nur la lasta frazo ĝenas min ĉu "yours" signifas "vi mem"? kaj kio
pri "He's gone"?

Saluton, Mireille!

Estas certe ke la usonangla estas stranga lingvo, kaj ĝi iĝas pli kaj pli
stranga lastatempe. Foje kiam mi parolas mi ekkonscias pri la ŝanĝoj kiujn
mi mem uzas en la ĉiutaga lingvo. Aparte trafa estas tio, ke oni emas buŝe
paroli ege pli rapide, tiel ke frazero alprenas la sonon de unu vorto. Kaj
pro la rapideco okazas ŝanĝoj en la sonsistemo.

Mi laboras kiel profesia interpretisto, kaj konstante aŭskultas la paroladon
de usonaj parolantoj de la angla. Kaj mi konfesu ke foje mi ne kapablas
kompreni iun. Ĉu pro rapideco, ĉu pro stranga fonetiko, ĉu pro novaj
esprimoj, ĉu pro regionaj idiotismoj aŭ akĉentoj . . .

Ekzemple, la frazo "What are you doing?" [Kion vi faras?] en rapida
konversacio povas iĝi "Shadoon?" [ŝadun], kaj restas tute komprenebla al
denaskuloj. Sed mi povas imagi la senesperiĝon de iu kiu provus lerni tian
lingvon . . .

Klivo bone klarigis la vortojn pri kiuj vi demandis. "He's gone" povas
signifi "li jam iris for", aŭ "li jam mortis", aŭ "li malaperis", kc.

Mi ankoraŭ ĉi-matene provas konscii ke jam estas 2010 . . . ĉion bonan al
ĉiuj dum la venonta nova jaro.

LM

[Aaron IRVINE]

UTF8 ĉie ĉie kaj nun ne plu estas problemo pri supersignoj en DNS, do
ŝajne restas nur unu problemo, tiu de la klavaroj en poŝtelefonoj kaj
televidiloj - kaj estas multegaj tiaj aparatoj. Por Google-
poŝtelefonoj (Android) la afero progresas, http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1730
(voĉdoninda!!) kaj http://www.traduku.net/androidklavaro kaj
http://code.google.com/p/softkeyboard, sed por Apple-poŝtelefonoj
(iPhone) kion fari :-(

[Vilius]

sed por Apple-poŝtelefonoj (iPhone) kion fari :-(

Uzu x aŭ h sistemon. H sistemo estas tute oficiala kaj laŭfundamenta,
kiam teĥnikaj kialon ne permesas uzi supersignitajn literojn. Tamen x
sistemo estas pli populara en interreto. Ambaŭ sistemoj estas
kompreneblaj kaj ofte uzataj.

[Bertilo Wennergren]

Por Google-poŝtelefonoj (Android) la afero progresas,
http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=1730
(voĉdoninda!!) kaj http://www.traduku.net/androidklavaro kaj
http://code.google.com/p/softkeyboard

Ha! Funkcias!! Koran dankon. Mi nun povas tajpi ankaŭ
ŭ-ojn per mia Guglo-telefono. Antaŭe mi povis tajpi
nur ĉ, ĝ, ĥ, ĵ kaj ŝ, sed ne ŭ. Brile!

, sed por Apple-poŝtelefonoj
(iPhone) kion fari :-(

Diablo scias. Feliĉe mi ne estas Ajfonulo.

[Kalle Kniivilä]

Post by Bertilo Wennergren

Post by Aaron IRVINE
, sed por Apple-poŝtelefonoj
(iPhone) kion fari :-(

Diablo scias. Feliĉe mi ne estas Ajfonulo.

Hm, sed mi baldaŭ estos. En mia laborejo ĉiuj ĵurnalisto en februaro
ricevos tian aparateton. Do mi jam iom eslporis, sed ŝajne ankoraŭ
mankas bona solvo, jen estas kelkaj iom komplikaj elturniĝoj:

http://iphoneo.info/klavaro-por-ifono

Ĉu iu ĉi tie pli konas la aferon de diversaj klavaroj por iPhone, kiel
oni ilin ŝanĝas, kaj ĉu eblas mem krei ilin?

[cellus]

Post by Lee Miller

Post by mireille.corobu
Saluton Lee,
mi ne kutimas legi tiom longe en la usonangla kaj estas certe ke mi ne
povas respondi en la sama lingvo kvankam mi plezure kaj facile komprenis
vin. Nur la lasta frazo ĝenas min ĉu "yours" signifas "vi mem"? kaj kio
pri "He's gone"?

Saluton, Mireille!
Estas certe ke la usonangla estas stranga lingvo, kaj ĝi iĝas pli kaj pli
stranga lastatempe.  Foje kiam mi parolas mi ekkonscias pri la ŝanĝoj kiujn
mi mem uzas en la ĉiutaga lingvo.  Aparte trafa estas tio, ke oni emas buŝe
paroli ege pli rapide, tiel ke frazero alprenas la sonon de unu vorto.  Kaj
pro la rapideco okazas ŝanĝoj en la sonsistemo.
Mi laboras kiel profesia interpretisto, kaj konstante aŭskultas la paroladon
de usonaj parolantoj de la angla.  Kaj mi konfesu ke foje mi ne kapablas
kompreni iun.  Ĉu pro rapideco, ĉu pro stranga fonetiko, ĉu pro novaj
esprimoj, ĉu pro regionaj idiotismoj aŭ akĉentoj . . .
Ekzemple, la frazo "What are you doing?" [Kion vi faras?] en rapida
konversacio povas iĝi "Shadoon?" [ŝadun], kaj restas tute komprenebla al
denaskuloj.  Sed mi povas imagi la senesperiĝon de iu kiu provus lerni tian
lingvon . . .
Klivo bone klarigis la vortojn pri kiuj vi demandis.  "He's gone" povas
signifi "li jam iris for", aŭ "li jam mortis", aŭ "li malaperis", kc.
Mi ankoraŭ ĉi-matene provas konscii ke jam estas 2010 . . . ĉion bonan al
ĉiuj dum la venonta nova jaro.
LM

Tiajn ŝanĝojn ni povas observi en multaj lingvoj, mi kredas. En mia
sveda gepatra lingvo ekzistas ankaŭ aferoj kiuj povas esti kmplikaj al
nedaskaj svedaj parolantoj.

[Klaus Dieckmann]

The changements of Esperanto in the way Gary proposed are not better than
the original orthography. The existing system of phonems and their writing
are optimized by Zamenhof to express his sight of structure and sounding of
his language invention.

If you change the orthography according to the new rules you get a strange
variant of the language, e.g.

example

Original:
Cu nekalkuleblaj nombroj da homoj aligis al tiuj lingvoj? Cu lingvo nepre
estas pli alloga guste car la gramatiko estas tiom pli facila? Ne nepre! Kaj
ido ne ricevis pli da anoj guste ke gi skribis sen la ^!

New:
Cu nekalkuleblay nombroy da homoy aligis al tiuy lingvoy? Cu lingvo nepre
estas pli alloqa guste car la qramatiko estas tiom pli facila? Ne nepre! Kay
ido ne ricevis pli da anoy guste ke gi skribis sen la ^!

A happy new year!

Klaus
http://esperantologie.blogspot.com/2009/12/vorschlage-zur-orthografie-des.html

[Remuŝ]

Gary: "he didn't have the benefit of foresight in realizing the impact that future inventions"

Are you up-to-date with the current technology?
I can type ĉĝĥĵŝ as fast as ch gh hh jh sh and can recognize those
letters faster when reading.
The advantages of accents are:
1° 1 letter - one sound
2° words are better recognizable when reading
3° handwriting is faster, because accents can be added later.
4° I can sign with my pseudonym Remuŝ without needing to tell I am an
Esperantist.

In Ubuntu, you can type those characters and a lot more, without
needing to install anything special. So Z. had a pretty good foresight
because he foresaw Ubuntu :-)

For more, read http://remush.be/rebuttal/spelling.html#037

Let's face it, all languages evolve or they're dismissed by their users or potential users.

Languages do not disappear because they cannot evolve. All can.

The main reason for the "evolution" of languages in the past was
illiteracy.
Nowadays, cultural languages are changing differently, not that
differently from Esperanto.

For more about that, read http://remush.be/rebuttal/index.html#1469

Remuŝ

[Remuŝ]

Gary: "he didn't have the benefit of foresight in realizing the impact that future inventions"

Are you up-to-date with the current technology?
I can type ĉĝĥĵŝ as fast as ch gh hh jh sh and can recognize those
letters faster when reading.
The advantages of accents are:
1° 1 letter - one sound
2° words are better recognizable when reading
3° handwriting is faster, because accents can be added later.
4° I can sign with my pseudonym Remuŝ without needing to tell I am an
Esperantist.

In Ubuntu, you can type those characters and a lot more, without
needing to install anything special. So Z. had a pretty good foresight
because he foresaw Ubuntu :-)

For more, read http://remush.be/rebuttal/spelling.html#037

Let's face it, all languages evolve or they're dismissed by their users or potential users.

Languages do not disappear because they cannot evolve. All can.

The main reason for the "evolution" of languages in the past was
illiteracy.
Nowadays, cultural languages are changing differently, not that
differently from Esperanto.

For more about that, read http://remush.be/rebuttal/index.html#169

Remuŝ

[William Crawford]

Post by Remuŝ
In Ubuntu, you can type those characters and a lot more, without
needing to install anything special. So Z. had a pretty good foresight
because he foresaw Ubuntu :-)
For more, readhttp://remush.be/rebuttal/spelling.html#037

I'm just starting to learn Esperanto, but I found it fairly easy to
set up Kubuntu for typing the non-English characters for Esperanto.
Mac OSX was even easier, as all I had to do was select the language
'US Extended'. I haven't yet tried a Windows machine, but I'm sure
it's similarly easy. Those systems all have to support languages that
are a lot more complex than Esperanto. Technology is definitely not a
factor.

[Dario Rodriguez]

William Crawford: "I haven't yet tried a Windows machine, but I'm sure
it's similarly easy."

In Windows, the most popular program for esperanto characters is "EK":

http://www.esperanto.mv.ru/Ek/

Dario

[AV3]

Post by William Crawford

Post by Remuŝ
In Ubuntu, you can type those characters and a lot more, without
needing to install anything special. So Z. had a pretty good foresight
because he foresaw Ubuntu :-)
For more, readhttp://remush.be/rebuttal/spelling.html#037

I'm just starting to learn Esperanto, but I found it fairly easy to
set up Kubuntu for typing the non-English characters for Esperanto.
Mac OSX was even easier, as all I had to do was select the language
'US Extended'. I haven't yet tried a Windows machine, but I'm sure
it's similarly easy. Those systems all have to support languages that
are a lot more complex than Esperanto. Technology is definitely not a
factor.

I have Ubuntu installed on a Mac laptop, The keyboard is rather limited
compared with the equivalent PC laptop keyboard. Do you know of a way to
assign the non-English characters on a Mac keyboard? The Mac system is
efficient enough for all the special letters of all European Latin
alphabet languages, but unfortunately some of the keys for this purpose
are otherwise assigned in Linux.

[William Crawford]

Post by AV3

Post by William Crawford
I'm just starting to learn Esperanto, but I found it fairly easy to
set up Kubuntu for typing the non-English characters for Esperanto.

I have Ubuntu installed on a Mac laptop, The keyboard is rather limited
compared with the equivalent PC laptop keyboard. Do you know of a way to
assign the non-English characters on a Mac keyboard? The Mac system is
efficient enough for all the special letters of all European Latin
alphabet languages, but unfortunately some of the keys for this purpose
are otherwise assigned in Linux.

I use Kubuntu, but the general idea should be the same for Ubuntu,
since the underlying input software is the same... I just had to
select the right international version of US English, and the right
options, and then I can type the special characters by holding Alt and
hitting the letter. I'll look up my exact setting when I get back
home tonight.

[SM]

Post by AV3
I have Ubuntu installed on a Mac laptop, The keyboard is rather limited
compared with the equivalent PC laptop keyboard. Do you know of a way to
assign the non-English characters on a Mac keyboard?

En via terminalsimulilo, vi povas tajpi

$ setxkbmap epo

por esperanta klavaro. Funkcias almenaŭ en Debiano. Por usona klavaro,
tajpu "setxkbmap us" kaj tiel plu.