Should I learn Esperanto?

Post Reply New Topic

I like Esperanto, and that's how it will stay. I'll learn Esperanto 1st, Then I'll perhaps construct my own. Anyway, it seems to have heaps of Grammar rules, and though I may be Aspie, AS doesn't affect me in that way. That's one of the reasons that drew me to Esperanto. Speaking in a mathematically-based, incredibly structed, gramatically complicated language jarrs against my way of life, and I want to write prose and verse, in a free language, and this is why I was drawn to Esperanto. I was looking for something rich, free and simple, and that's why I want to learn Esperanto. I hope I've justified my reasons.

Your reasons seem fully justified. However I wasn't trying to attack your opinion so much as respond to your questions about the differences (or lack thereof) between Esperanto and lojban. I haven't learned lojban myself, but its ideas appeal to me on the basis of my interest in computers. Lojban is probably more culturally neutral than Esperanto, but it's also less natural (e.g. synonyms are deliberately removed). So of course Esperanto is a richer language.

Dankon. I was scared I was going to end up fighting with you, amikon, but I'm thankful you understand my views.

S.

why not? i ur interested, go for it
i wont cause its not my interest, i'd like speak chinese, but i dont want to learn it!
i'd like to have that machine in 'matrix' to get the stuff in my brain in just 20 seconds

Machines in your head? Lojban's your language! Chinese, Mandarin, or cantonese, simplified or traditional, still will take eaons to learn. There are heaps of characters, and your pronounciation affects the meanings of the word you are trying to enounciate.

Please tell me I haven't offended anyone!

Your attitude towards Esperanto is about the same as mine was about this time last year.

By the start of this year, after extensive research decided that that it was sexist (though riismo fixes this), culturally biased (angles) illogical (pronouns, phonology, pretty much the whole language beyond the basics), and not very interesting in terms of grammar.

On the plus side its simple, consistent, and easy to learn, and the Esperantists have a network that might prove useful.

It's also a useful, if fairly limited, way to examine the construction of language, since all derivations are clear.

For my part I've made several attempts at constructing consistent English auxlangs and completely logical languages. I don't take these seriously and prefer to work with wild bits of grammar though.

My main conlang has some systems which, as far as I'm aware, are not used in any real languages.