I think you are going to find a taker for that dictionary: i have seen two
expressions of interest on Idolisto already.

How does my 'overture' differ from what _i_ have said before?  Well, if you
had been around on this list during the last three or so years, you would
know that since the mysterious disappearance of Bruce Gilson (one might even
say he did a 'Lord Lucan'), i have been the fiercest critic of Esperanto on
this list, probably on the net as a whole.  This is a role i have been happy
to assume, for the reasons i gave in my post.  What i am trying to do now is
take one small step back towards Esp and the espists, having moved
progressively further away from them since getting involved in this whole
business some nearly five years ago now.

Whats in it for the espists?  Well, in my post i didnt exactly concentrate
on what was in it for them.  What i am most concerned about is what is in it
for me, in other words, whether by making contact with the espists on
whatever level, i can further my own goal of realizing a planned language
within my lifetime.  I am still young, but the years march on fast, and five
years is a long time to me, as i'm sure it is to anyone.  Its a big chunk of
your life and investment of your time.  I dont want to be like Jespersen,
get into my sixties and seventies and still be trying radical new ways to
break through.  So what i am doing is saying now: i have learnt my lesson.
The answer is not me designing the perfect interlanguage.  The answer is not
to revive or reform Novial.  It is not to become the most fearsome idist
that ever lived and terrorize the espists, only a small minority of who
deserve it.

The answer is that unless we realize now that what we face is a catastrophic
loss of linguistic diversity, a complete disinterest on the part of the
public in the idea of an IAL generally (in most cases they are too engrossed
in bad television, pop music, football and lager to even care), and an IAL
movement that is paralyzed by a disastrous early history, then we will be
swept away by the tide of English and the culture it brings with it along
with great national languages and equally great local cultures.  The only
solution is for anti-espists and espists to work together bring about an
alternative state of affairs, in which a planned language is stood in the
way of English, protecting other languages against its spread.

Having said all this, i do think the espists have something to gain by
consorting with idists and others, namely, that they are saddled with some
pretty unfortunate elements in their language that badly need putting right
if it is to serve as a really effective interlanguage.  I am sure that over
the years many espists have come to realize this themselves, but have
preferred to stay within the movement for what it offers.  What idists and
other can bring to Esp is tentative solutions to some of the problems
inherent in the language itself, in order that Esp can one day be
rationalized and brought more into line with the type of language that is
needed as a global auxiliary for the future.

But in the spirit of rapprochement that i have adopted, i will say no more
about these things now.

Kordiale, James Chandler
[log in to unmask] - IALs index

"...Reinecke observes that transformational generative grammar ... has been
'immensely influential in the field of Creole studies as in all linguistic
theory'.  What he does not say is that it has been for many Creolists an
almost constant love-hate relationship, resulting in eventual divorce." -
Peter Muhlhausler, Pidgin and Creole Linguistics

>From: Thomas Alexander <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: International Auxiliary Languages <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Getting Along (for Jay)
>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 19:12:40 -0500
>Hi Jay,
>         I was hoping someone would pick up where I left off -
>perhaps someone who had seen the "Anglaj Prepozicoj" booklet
>or something else that I may have mentioned.  I took a closer
>look at Being Colloquial in Esperanto.  It's organized mainly
>by Esperanto grammar (e.g. several examples of sentences with
>"ajn" in them) and not English grammar (e.g. several examples
>of sentences with apostrophe-S in them.)  Is this what you mean
>by "such treatment" (i.e. a list of compared sentences organized
>by the grammar of the natlang)?
>         Thanks for forwarding the info on my Ido dictionary.  It's
>a pretty cool piece of IAL-history and I'd prefer to see it in the
>hands of someone who would appreciate it.  It doesn't suit my own
>needs because it's not two-way and it's hard to thumb through because
>it's old.
> > As for your notes, could i ask you to briefly summarize them,
> > as i dont still have them in my intray.  Multa danki.
>         Sure, but I won't promise that it will be brief  :-)
>It was mostly my last few notes in the "getting along" thread,
>which was a reply to the "Rapprochement?" note which you posted.
>The general idea was the following question: How is your recent
>"strategic" overture to the Esperantists different from what has
>been said before, and what's in it for the Esperantists. Since
>writing the notes in question, I read the following in "Kiel
>kompreni la lingvon Idon" [sic].
>         Uniono inter la Esperanto-movado e la Ido-linguo esus maxim
>         bona. La mondo regardas Esperanto e vidas ulo stranja e
>         nekomprenebla. La mondo, plu facile en la formo di Ido,
>         aceptus la ideo quan Esperanto reprezentas.
>         So the idea that Esperanto would benefit by working with
>other languages or reforms is not new.  The people who did reply
>to my notes basically said that the chief benefit for the Esperantists
>would receive for "working together" would be that they wouldn't
>have to speak Esperanto.  I hope that it's not necessary to say
>that I don't find this much of a motivation.
>         Lojbab did mention one potential motivation - and that's
>that "Divided, we end up wasting time that could be spent producing
>materials in our respective languages and thereby PROVING them to be
>useful" and that the "non-productive and demeaning flamewars [...]
>would go away".
>         I definitely think it's best to explore common ground more
>than differences, and so I'm a bit at a loss about what to do with
>the summary I wrote after reading and thinking about the text "Is
>Esperanto Really So Easy" from UMI's web page (an essay which Martin
>Lavallée and Kjell R spoke out against on this list over three years
>ago but is still on UMI's page).  I tried to reply in such a way that
>wouldn't escalate "flame wars", but I half wonder if I should just
>keep it to myself.
>         My own thoughts on Ido is that as long as an Idist isn't
>openly bashing Esperanto, his interest in Ido can only help Esperanto,
>but perhaps not for the reasons he may think.
>         Speaking of "openly bashing", my son (not quite two) recently
>started saying the word "Ido."  Fearing that word of this might get
>out to the general public, we encouraged him to say "Ido bleah!"  Now,
>if you ask him to say something in Ido, he'll say something like
>"bleah", "no Ido", or "Ido bleah!"  :-)
>Here's part of one of my original notes:
> > I asked whether the non-Esperanto auxiliary language movement is
> > really so big so that it could contribute to a "unified movement"
> > in proportion to the contributions which would come from Esperanto.
>[the general answer was that they would not contribute numbers, but
>would save the Esperantists from having to speak Esperanto.]
> > [... James] seems to be saying that in spite of huge disagreements
> > with some of the details of Esperanto, he's come to the conclusion
> > that it is worth putting these disagreements asside to take
> > advantage of the comparative strength [size] of the Esperanto
> > movement.
>I also wrote:
> > Vi pravas pri la angla, sed miaopinie estas pli granda
> > diferenco inter la angla kaj Esperanto, ol inter Esperanto kaj
> > ekzemple Ido.  Eble James devus proponi ke Ido [aux Esperanto]
> > metu flanken la diferencojn kun la movado por la disvastigxo
> > de la angla.  Kompreneble, mi sxercas, sed se ni, oni demandus
> > same - kial la "anglistoj" konsentus kun tia propono?  Kion ili
> > ricevus de kunlaboro kun la idistoj aux ecx kun la esperantistoj?
>I was also wondering what you thought about this, which I
>wrote to Chris Burd:
> > [Are you saying that] from your viewpoint, James's proposal
> > boils down to "the Esperantists should stop promoting Esperanto."
>You had written:
> > > We have a situation where no one group holds all
> > > the cards it needs: the espists have the numbers
> > > and resources, others have, in my view, better
> > > languages.  I think there is probably more to be
> > > gained by working together than by persisting in
> > > the belief that one movement can defeat all the
> > > others and carry the day.
>         Depending on how one looks at this, it doesn't
>really seem very much different from the lines which
>I quoted from the article "Kiel kompreni la lingvon Idon."

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at