Print

Print


James Chandler skrev:
>
> Yes, and I'm rapidly losing faith in the ability of those who start off as Espists to learn another IAL such as Ido.  They generally seem unable to shake off the interference from Esp even after many years.  Of course, that view may stem from my belief that Esperanto is the root of all our problems in the IAL movement!
>   
In a way warning bells should ring when people find Esperanto to be so 
difficult that they have got to learn Ido instead. As a hirsoric fact 
this is understandable. People round de Beaufront etc. thought that they 
wanted to do away with the difficult h^that they couldn't pronounce and 
the terrible accusative -n that they couldn't learn to master. The 
result was that Ido was quite an alternative to Esperanto.

Why is ido always referring to Esperanto. This is my most important 
question. Why cannot Ido work as Ido.

Well, now they see that Ido, easy and logical as it is, cannot appeal to 
the masses more than Esperanto did. So de Wahl published his Occidental. 
He was not the first one who tried building a language on the common 
vocabulary. Did that get Occidental any longer? Unfortunately not.

Interlingua is mainly an academic adaption of Occidental. But has it got 
much further?

All those who learn an IAL in a quite advanced age will make mistakes, 
as they will do in Ethnic languages. Most people learned Esperanto in 
quite a young and receptive age. To learn a new language after 
Esperanto, they will be older and less receptive and will have to work 
harder to master their new language.

Perhaps the Europanto style is worth considering. Use the language the 
best you can. Let usage decide what kind of language it will be.

Perhaps we should have to take a step back and try not to be too 
perfectionistic. 

Perhaps we are looking from the wrong angle?

Kjell R