3 ms·

Esperanto was intended as a sort of diplomatic language. It's got flaws, definitely. The sounds and spelling are very much from the creator's native Polish, a l

Esperanto was intended as a sort of diplomatic language. It's got flaws, definitely. The sounds and spelling are very much from the creator's native Polish, a lot of important terms are rather obscure («Usono,» from "Usonia" is the word for the United States). That said, it is in the end relatively easy to learn, and it is easy to express the ideas of diplomacy, science, and civil society. China and Japan used to have a lot of Esperantists before WWII, for that reason. https://www.loc.gov/item/2021670575/ https://www.loc.gov/item/2021670575/ > After World War I, the League of Nations considered adopting Esperanto as a working language and recommending that it be taught in schools, but proposals along these lines were vetoed by France. It may be Eurocentric, but it's hell of a lot easier for diplomats to learn than English or French!

int_19h 3y ago
Slight correction: Zamenhof's native languages (so far as we can tell), in a sense of what he spoke at home, were Yiddish and Russian, although he certainly learned Polish at a very young age due to place of residence. Not that it makes much difference in this case - the quirks of Esperanto phonology, such all those affricates and consonant clusters are familiar to speakers of pretty much any Slavic language. Esperanto orthography, on the other hand, appears to be inspired more by Czech than Polish - "v" rather than "w", diacritics over digraphs etc.
senloke 3y ago
An actual Esperanto speaker here. I need to correct this. It was never intended to be a "diplomatic" language, as such a language only spoken by diplomats between their kind. So the language of a small elite, which does not want to deal with the average man on the street. That sounds like a story which was said about the predecessor of Esperanto: Volapük. Esperanto was at some point in time the "workers latin", because the less educated worker could learn it as a means to talk with people from other nations. That ended with pushing English or other "more practical languages" in schools to this day. Esperanto still is a working living language with a working worldwide community.
- bmacho 3y ago
  Zamenhof stated multiple times that he wanted to create an universal second language, as opposed to an universal first language. I don't think this distinction makes much sense, had any effect on any design decision, but probably it was important for the marketing of the language. In this sense it was indeed intended to be a "diplomatic" language, so that diplomats can use a single language. (As well as international organizations, merchants, tourists etc.)
  - senloke 3y ago
    I think that view of you is wrong. The distinction is an important one. By saying you create a diplomatic language, you are marketing towards the elite, as I wrote in my post. By saying that everybody speaks it as a second language, which is indeed what Zamenhof, the creator of Esperanto, wanted is a different focus. The first is focusing on an elite, the latter focuses on the people. It's like the distinction between "computers for knowledge workers" and "personal computers", the first is only for a small elite, the latter is for everybody. Or the distinction between "politics for a couple of few" and "politics elected by everybody", the first is called a form of dictatorship, the latter democracy.
    - bmacho 3y ago
      Right, Esperanto wasn't created for the elite, or only for diplomats. That wouldn't make much sense. Also I don't think GP intended to suggest it, but you clarified it anyway, so all's good.
  - Aachen 3y ago
    That doesn't sound logical to me. If Zamenhof didn't intend for it to be a primary language, one you learn from birth, then why couldn't it be used by random people still? There has been trading between countries for much longer than Esperanto exists for, especially in border regions or small countries but also across oceans and continents. Esperanto is from 1887. I was curious what holidays were like at the time: > According to Stowe (1994), “many nineteenth-century Americans traveled, and many more participated vicariously in the experience of travel by reading travel letters, sketches, and narratives in newspapers, magazines, and published volumes” (p. 3). Similarly, the appetite for travel in the U.K. was also voracious --https://regrom.com/2020/08/26/regency-travel-traveling-abroad-in-the-19th-century/ https://regrom.com/2020/08/26/regency-travel-traveling-abroa... So also a goal Zamenhof could intend. I don't know how you get to the conclusion that, because it wasn't intended for my mom to use while I was a baby, it wasn't intended to be used by my mom or me on holiday if we're not "diplomats", unless you call any tourist an international diplomat

int_19h 3y ago

Slight correction: Zamenhof's native languages (so far as we can tell), in a sense of what he spoke at home, were Yiddish and Russian, although he certainly learned Polish at a very young age due to place of residence. Not that it makes much difference in this case - the quirks of Esperanto phonology, such all those affricates and consonant clusters are familiar to speakers of pretty much any Slavic language. Esperanto orthography, on the other hand, appears to be inspired more by Czech than Polish - "v" rather than "w", diacritics over digraphs etc.

senloke 3y ago

An actual Esperanto speaker here. I need to correct this. It was never intended to be a "diplomatic" language, as such a language only spoken by diplomats between their kind. So the language of a small elite, which does not want to deal with the average man on the street. That sounds like a story which was said about the predecessor of Esperanto: Volapük. Esperanto was at some point in time the "workers latin", because the less educated worker could learn it as a means to talk with people from other nations. That ended with pushing English or other "more practical languages" in schools to this day. Esperanto still is a working living language with a working worldwide community.

bmacho 3y ago
Zamenhof stated multiple times that he wanted to create an universal second language, as opposed to an universal first language. I don't think this distinction makes much sense, had any effect on any design decision, but probably it was important for the marketing of the language. In this sense it was indeed intended to be a "diplomatic" language, so that diplomats can use a single language. (As well as international organizations, merchants, tourists etc.)
- senloke 3y ago
  I think that view of you is wrong. The distinction is an important one. By saying you create a diplomatic language, you are marketing towards the elite, as I wrote in my post. By saying that everybody speaks it as a second language, which is indeed what Zamenhof, the creator of Esperanto, wanted is a different focus. The first is focusing on an elite, the latter focuses on the people. It's like the distinction between "computers for knowledge workers" and "personal computers", the first is only for a small elite, the latter is for everybody. Or the distinction between "politics for a couple of few" and "politics elected by everybody", the first is called a form of dictatorship, the latter democracy.
  - bmacho 3y ago
    Right, Esperanto wasn't created for the elite, or only for diplomats. That wouldn't make much sense. Also I don't think GP intended to suggest it, but you clarified it anyway, so all's good.
- Aachen 3y ago
  That doesn't sound logical to me. If Zamenhof didn't intend for it to be a primary language, one you learn from birth, then why couldn't it be used by random people still? There has been trading between countries for much longer than Esperanto exists for, especially in border regions or small countries but also across oceans and continents. Esperanto is from 1887. I was curious what holidays were like at the time: > According to Stowe (1994), “many nineteenth-century Americans traveled, and many more participated vicariously in the experience of travel by reading travel letters, sketches, and narratives in newspapers, magazines, and published volumes” (p. 3). Similarly, the appetite for travel in the U.K. was also voracious --https://regrom.com/2020/08/26/regency-travel-traveling-abroad-in-the-19th-century/ https://regrom.com/2020/08/26/regency-travel-traveling-abroa... So also a goal Zamenhof could intend. I don't know how you get to the conclusion that, because it wasn't intended for my mom to use while I was a baby, it wasn't intended to be used by my mom or me on holiday if we're not "diplomats", unless you call any tourist an international diplomat