Print

Print


Stephen Rice skrev 2011-04-02 21.32:
> On 4/2/11, Geoffrey King<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>> On 28/03/2011 19:37, Stephen Rice wrote:
>>> Since the Golden Age of Auxlanging (late 1800s through early 1900s)
>>> was marked by conflict between French and German camps (the true cause
>>> of Volap√ľk's demise, IMO), and French lacks this sound, while German
>>> has it, I suspect this was another contested point, with the French
>>> calling in anglophones for support.
>>>
>> I'm sure you're right about Volapuk; and I wouldn't mind betting that
>> France versus Russia had a lot to do with the creation of Ido.
>>
> I hadn't thought about France v. Russia, but it's not impossible. We
> tend to ignore the delicate international relations of the period when
> we talk about why one auxlang did better than another. Eo might have
> done worse if Z had been German; it might have done better if he
> hadn't been a Jew. How much anti-Esperantism was actually
> anti-Semitism? (In Nazi Germany, a lot; but even ignoring that, Z
> should've picked a more popular ethnic group.) Esperantists are about
> the only ones who have any idea how important the sociological
> dimension is.
Or perhaps it was just a strike of 
luck that Zamenhof happened to be a 
Jew as his Esperanto is published 
more or less at the same time as 
Hebrew is reanimated into a modern 
language to be used not only for 
religious purposes. To what extent 
could one see Esperanto as a kind 
of polemic or echoing of the Hebrew 
struggle?

Esperanto was also, but not only, 
of course, popular in the Leftist 
movement.

Kjell R