Print

Print


Dear Sir --

I can answer your question as follows: In the first years of 
Esperanto there were various people who didn't like that or the other 
thing in the language. Each of these people demanded that I must make 
those or other changes in Esperanto. Under the constant bombardment 
of these people I finally yielded, and in the year 1894 I published 
in the magazine of that time "Esperantisto" a project of various 
forms in Esperanto. (In this project I got rid of the supersigns, the 
accusative, the declension of adjectives, the non-Romance words etc.)

It it soon because apparent that what seemed good in theory was in 
practice suitable for *nothing*, and all the reformers and 
malcontents cried out that the reforms proposed would merely *damage* 
(malbonigus) the language (because each of them only liked what he 
had proposed). Then I arranged a vote among all the Esperantists of 
that time; and they decided not to make *any* reforms in Esperanto. 
Since that time we have no longer spoken of reforms.

P.S. Your great battle against the various projects of new languages 
seems to me completely superfluous, because in my opinion you are 
fighting ghosts. They send letters to various people who *understand 
the most importan European languages* and afterwards they broadcast 
to the world that these people have immediately understood their 
letters better than letters in Esperanto. But this is merely a piece 
of illusory trickery (trompa iluzio), which many people unfortunately 
don't notice, but which will immediately appear when they will learn 
their "language". *Polyglot* people will as easily understand them if 
they write in *English, French or Latin*; but are collections of 
words comprehensible for polyglots a *language* and could they serve 
the *whole world*? -- About one type of food it is said that among 
its many good characteristics it is also easily digestible. Then a 
person appears who latches onto the word "digestible" and says: "I 
will immediately give you a better food." He takes simple water, puts 
some sugar in it, gives it to various *non-hungry* (sataj) people and 
asks them: "Isn't my food much more digestible than that one?" And 
when he receives the repsly "yes", then he groadcasts to the world 
that his food is the best. But some there comes a *hungry( child and 
tries this food, and then it cries out in anger: "yes, your food is 
digestible, but it isn't really food!" Only then do people notice 
that for a mixture to be a food, it's not enough for it to be 
digestible for the non-hungry, -- it must before everything be *nourishing*.

From: L. L. Zamenhof
To: J. M. Dow
Date: 1907.02.21


-- Don HARLOW
http://www.webcom.com/~donh/don/don.html
Opinions (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/opinions/
Esperanto (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/esperanto/
Literaturo (Esperante): http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Literaturo