Print

Print


Michael Farris skribis:
 
>Uhhhh, I'm a little confused ..... is this supposed to be a good thing?
 
Hey, I said it was a _bit_ fanciful :-)
 
>
>Seriously, I think I like my version better for two reasons:
>
>1) 90% (or 75 % or whatever percent) of humanity doesn't have to die in my
>version
 
90%
 
 
>
>2) There's lots of things  we can do to prepare for my version.
>There's nothing we can do to prepare for yours except
>a) make sure there are lots of copies of Esperanto grammars buried at strategic
>places around the world and
 
Now there's an idea!  Why didn't I think of that???  :-)
 
>b) help  that nuclear holocaust to happen (the sooner almost everybody dies the
>sooner the survivors learn Esperanto)
>
>You maybe wanna try again? Without killing off 98% of the world this time?
 
Sure, I'd love to.  Actually, most of my short stories are like my other
posting, sans Esperanto.
 
>
>You're right, this *might* happen, but I'd rather it didn't.
 
Well, I'm pretty sure of this much: there _will_ be a WWIII that _will_
cause the utter destruction of much of the planet.  After this war, people
will be shocked into working together, much like the shocks after WWI and
WWII, only much greater.  Survival of the fittest; hopefully they will all
be Esperantists :-)
 
 
Ok, here's a second try: (and no one dies in this one!)  :-)
 
 
It's 2048, and the EU has been around about 50 years.  Here's what happened:
        After stalling a long time with a decision on which language(s) were
to be used in the union, word leaked out that English was going to be
chosen.  Although only a rumor, people in all the European countries
involved became highly upset.  They demanded that their national language be
used also.  Union officials denied the fact that they had purposely leaked
the information to get public opinion, however, they eventually decided on 3
major languages for the union.  French and English would be mandatory on all
documents, however, many would also be printed in German and Spanish.  This
seemed to please everybody, except for the Esperantists, who felt that they
had been cheated.  THey seemed to have had been sure that Esperanto would be
the only official language.  Interlinguists also were maddened.  However,
things seemed to be going well, so the E-ists and Ia-ists were ignored.
        After the first 5 years, trouble seemed to plague the union.
Translation costs were weighing down the fragile structure.  People in
Europe began to lose faith in the union and the Eurodollar began to decrease
in value.  To economize on money, the union dropped Spanish and most German,
then later on dropped even German entirely.  THis did not come without the
anger of many German and Spanish dignitaries.
        It was around this time that the union decided to look elsewhere;
namely, to the IAL's proposed earlier.  For a long time the committees
debated on Esperanto and Interlingua.  Novial was also suggested but dropped
because there were almost 20 different versions in use among Novialists at
the time, with more reforms being made.  It seemed that Interlingua would be
a good alternative to the many natural languages in Western Europe but, at
about that time, many Eastern European countries were to join the union.
After much delegation, during which the Czech Republic, Poland, et al,
joined, a vote was taken.  Esperanto was chosen because of its phonetic
spelling, simplicity in syntax, and its varied vocabulary.
        However, nothing comes _that_ easily, so a special committee was
appointed to review the language from top to bottom, and to cast out or
change anything that was disagreeable to the union.  Here are their changes
(later accepted and adopted into Esperanto):
        1. all supersigned letters abolished for the facility of writing and
           "to make the language more appealing to Western Europeans."
           New combinations are ch, gh, jh, sh.  The u combinations are used
without              the breve.
        2. use of accusative -n not mandatory in spoken Esperanto, but
           mandatory in written works.
        3. Adjective aggreement "not necessary, but encouraged" in spoken
Esperanto.
           "Correct" written works should agree.
        4. "-in" suffix retained for female, "-icx" for male (when something
is not               specifically male or female)  i.e.- hundo- dog
hundicxo- male dog
           New words created for "mother," "sister", "woman", etc.  An
alternate to
           "viro" for "man" is "personicxo" with "personino" for "woman".
 
        After finally being worked out, the new system was put into use.  It
took a while for it to filter down into all of Europe, but eventually found
its way onto European news broadcasts and movie subtitles.  The UEA objected
to the reforms, saying that they "had not been decided on by Esperantists,
but by a group of people who did not use the language regularly and
therefore did not make changes out of everyday encounters, but by what they
saw as wrong."  While the UEA tried to promote what they called "correct"
Esperanto, people continued to learn what was coming from the union.
Eventually, the UEA disintegrated.  Now, in 2048, there is one Esperanto.
Of course, you can still get books in "classical" Esperanto, but it is
pretty much a dead language.
 
 
 
 
That does raise an interesting question:  what would happen if the union
decided to adopt Esperanto but then changed it?  Which one would be
Esperanto?  Who _owns_ the language?  The speakers, I would say.  But what
if they didn't get to vote on reforms?
 
 
amike en Esperanto,
_________________________________________________________
 
Emerson Alcott
[log in to unmask]
http://www.geocities.com/athens/academy/6701
 
 
 
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
 
*   Ne estu sola en la mondo, Lernu Esperanton!     *
 
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *