Re:Esperanto: the language that never was
by TwoBit on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:55AM
(#11775848)
Esperanto's design may have been a good idea 100 years ago. But its design is too shortsighted for this modern world. All it solves is spelling and pronunciation problems, when it could do so much more.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Not quite. It also has a very regular grammar, handles regular composition of words (skribmaŝino, bovido, ...), regular formation of words like [nowhere, someone, whatever], simplifies the formation of verb tenses (also handling things like the future of the past which do not exist in other languages), has a choice of roots that makes it familiar for people knowing any indoeuropean language, and more
Re:Esperanto: the language that never was
by vintermann on Thursday May 26, 2016 @02:09AM
(#11775917)
The coordination problem - agreeing on what what language to agree on - is by far the largest problem with the good idea of an easy auxiliary language (assuming it's a good idea). Any advantages you could get from an esperanto that isn't Esperanto, are trumped by the fact that Esperanto exists - such as it is.