|
Post by gillianren on Dec 10, 2010 16:36:14 GMT -4
Yes, but Esperanto has all sorts of other problems.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Dec 10, 2010 18:46:46 GMT -4
I know this isn't the point of the thread, but it always bothered me how some languages like French and Spanish assign gender to words. What is the point of that? Perhaps the same point of keeping an unusually arbitrary orthography like in English: none. It made a lot of sense at start, but people just memorized it and forgot why, as the language evolved. Ever wondered who decided that "enough" should be written with "-gh" when it clearly sounds like an "f"? Well, some time before Shakespeare, it actually sounded like a "g". Some genders may be due to borrowings from words that had true genders (gods or actual people), or because their endings sounded like words of a certain gender. In Italian, for example, the word for "finger" is masculine in singular, and feminine in plural, because the original (neutral) Latin word looked like an Italian masculine in singular ("digitum"), and an Italian feminine in plural ("digita"). If that mess could happen, I suppose anything simpler can happen too. In languages derived from Latin, I think it comes mostly from the ending (besides the true gender, if there is one). In languages with too irregular endings like German, I have no idea.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Dec 10, 2010 18:56:59 GMT -4
Yes, but Esperanto has all sorts of other problems. Like what?
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 10, 2010 21:45:19 GMT -4
First, I think you're missing the point that someone had to make the decision somewhere along the line; pushing it back to "it's from Latin" only means that someone speaking Latin had to make the decision.
Regarding Esperanto, it's only gender-neutral if you think it's okay that you should have to specify every time something is female. As in, the word for mother is "female father." And the "-ino" suffix is extremely reminiscent of the diminutive in other languages. Maybe it wasn't intentional, but it's hard to believe the creator didn't eventually notice.
The spelling of English doesn't make sense unless you know the origins of the word, it's true. On the other hand, it is extremely difficult to type proper Esperanto on most modern keyboards. (I assume someone somewhere has created one for Esperantists, but I also suspect it's fairly expensive.) This to me suggests that the language is more complicated than it needs to be from a purely phonetic perspective.
The construction of words does not entirely make sense to me. From what I have read, a lot of opposites are denoted by adding the prefix "mal-," which obviously means "bad," even if the thing in question isn't actually bad.
What reading I've done on the subject also makes me think the language must be fairly difficult to learn, given that no word of Esperanto sticks; I've had to look up some of the details here. There's a pretty good analysis in In the Land of Invented Languages : Esperanto Rock Stars, Klingon Poets, Loglan Lovers, and the Mad Dreamers Who Tried to Build a Perfect Language, by Arika Okrent, though. Indeed, it's got a pretty good overview of the failings and advantages of quite a few invented languages.
|
|
|
Post by StoneRoad on Dec 11, 2010 12:51:49 GMT -4
Nope, Esperanto is very easy to learn.
It has 16 rules - and there are no exceptions! (so, for example all verbs are regular!), and with a vocabulary of about 2,500 words - which includes prefixes and endings etc with which you can build up words youself.
To give an example "fervojistino" directly translates as a lady professionally involved with railways.
If you want an esperanto font, there are several available to download, which give the accents "ready placed", or you can use one of the established work-arounds, which came about in the days before wordprocessors when special typewriters were produced. (Mia patro havas una dum sepdeckvin jaroj = My father has one for (during) 75 years)
A number of studies have shown that teaching esperanto for one year greatly helps with learning another language in the next four years. (And I have real difficulty with French as a comparison)
I have been to a couple of international gatherings, where over 2000 participants from 80 nations are all able to chat away to each other, is quite something to attend. I was able to chat to several myself, and I only go with my 90 year old father as his helper!
*gets off soapbox* I wonder if this ought to be split off into another thread??
Back to topic, That is a good joke, Can I "pinch" it for my own ends.....
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Dec 11, 2010 13:30:52 GMT -4
First, I think you're missing the point that someone had to make the decision somewhere along the line; pushing it back to "it's from Latin" only means that someone speaking Latin had to make the decision. I didn't mean to copy the Latin choice. I meant to choose based on how the word ending looks like in one's own language, no matter what was the original gender, nor even what language it came from. If you have a regular relation between genders and endings, like most feminine words ending in "-a", you might feel compelled to treat a new word as feminine just because it also ends in "-a". My example was about this. Of course, some words happened to match the Latin genders, and I wouldn't stop the explanation there; the Latins are likely to have done the same with other languages. And I think that in the very beginning of each etymology, wherever it was, grammatical genders matched the true genders, just like languages with recently created alphabets had very regular orthographies. People clearly don't create that madness on purpose; it's accumulated as an accident along the time. Not quite. Some words are masculine unless specified otherwise, some are feminine unless specified otherwise, and the majority is common or neutral. That is mostly a problem with relatives' names, which are in the first category and are frequent enough to be a bother. At least, the gramatical genders are the real genders. I'd have chosen another kind of sufix for that, but is that a problem comparable to memorizing random genders or orthography for each word? I managed to type it with ease. I just downloaded a tiny keyboard configuration file. It's the same as typing my Portuguese diacritics. I don't think it's the simplest possible, but being biunivocal helps a lot. I learned most of it in two weeks, by myself. Do you mean "difficult to learn" or "difficult to get people to try it"?
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 11, 2010 13:49:45 GMT -4
Frankly, no language which is actually useful for communication in real-world situations can be learned in two weeks. Not well enough for any communication more complicated than looking for the bathroom. Grammar, possibly, but not language. Not anything approaching conversational level. Not anything usable on a professional level.
Any artificial language will have obstacles to overcome in getting people to start speaking it, not least the problem of early adapters. You need someone to speak it to, and until a large enough group of people speaks the language, there's no real reason for the average person to learn. Yes, I know; there's a worldwide community of Esperantists. They even have started to have something approaching a culture, and I have even read of native speakers, for whom I imagine kindergarten was not easy. On the other hand, how long has it taken to have even the small handhold in the world that it does? This is not in and of itself a failing of the language, just of the concept.
I have no real interest in learning Esperanto. This means I am not terribly well-versed in its failings as a language, especially since I haven't read much about it in some months and am trying to pull the information out of the back of my brain. I'm pretty sure the book I read about it in still has a hold list at the library, too, so even were I inclined to check it out again (it was good, but I'm not right now), I wouldn't get it for probably a couple of weeks at best. However, I do remember that the idea that there are no exceptions to its rules is wrong, though I don't remember what those exceptions are. I also can't find the webpage where I read about them in more detail.
But on the original topic, why is it funny to make degrading jokes at the expense of the opposite sex? Why, if you are offended by them, are you told that they're just a joke? I don't think it's funny. The fact that it was meant to be, well, Rob Schneider movies are meant to be funny, too.
|
|
|
Post by StoneRoad on Dec 11, 2010 17:54:29 GMT -4
If you want to, it is possible to learn the basics ie the 16 grammatical rules and a basic vocabulary in two weeks. There is a twelve lesson "postal" course, plus various teach yourself books and several websites. All of which will give you the language as written. It is harder to practice verbal skills, unless you have access to a "phonefriend" and the big advantage of verbalising Esperanto words is that each letter is always sounded exactly the same - no silent letters and no "mutations" as in Welsh - and national or regional accents virtually disappear. I know that from speaking - in Esperanto - to Poles, Scots, Brazillians, French, Germans, Welsh and Americans whilst at the International events I mentioned before.
I am a "komencanto" that is a beginner, as I need more spoken practice! but I can read and write with a reasonable level of skill, yet I have not deliberately studied the language, just picked it up piecemeal from others. Yet even though I spent five or was it six years seriously trying with French I never managed any significant level of competence - I am not a linguist!
Jokes are like beauty - only in the eyes of the beholder. What is very, very funny to one person is offensive to another. Having refreshed my memory of the joke in the OP. I would say that it is equally rude about men and ladies (and also rude about computers!)
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Dec 12, 2010 12:49:23 GMT -4
Gillianren:
I've never gone to chat on meetings, but it was enough to read books and to debate in forums. It was more than sufficient to very complex conversation, and it still came much quicker than any natural language I've ever studied.
I understand that the problem of such a designed language is the pain of the transition; one depends that others do the same, otherwise it'll be wasted effort, and it scares (even more native speakers of English, who are already too comfortable). However, this says nothing about its capacity to work as a better lingua franca, and I don't see exactly why previous failed attempts mean one will never succeed. Maybe during the rise of a too different language, like Mandarin...
I don't think of myself as a militant of Esperanto. I like to study languages and I spent some time studying it, and that's all for now. But I couldn't help noticing how practical it was, and how misplaced the critics were. They mock how Esperanto is not perfect, when what really matters is that it's just better. It seems more of an overreaction to a perceived arrogance.
Many good ideas have failed to be implemented before, like a return to the Moon, or the metric system, or even a better taste for jokes. But I think this this only means people still need to improve, and not that the idea should be dumped. ;D
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 12, 2010 16:13:07 GMT -4
Esperanto is also a solution in search of a problem, so far as I'm concerned. Yes, it would be nice for there to be a universal second language, which was the original intent, but the idea that it will be one that someone has made up is not, to me, a reasonable one. Most of the people I know who have studied another language have done so because they have an interest in the culture. I studied Gaelic in college, arguably one of the least useful languages in all of Europe, because I find the history and literature of Ireland fascinating. But I have to say, I don't think Esperanto is better. As I've said, my reading about it was some time ago, though I did finally find a site which I thought identified what I would consider problems. It could be wrong. I don't know. But here it is. www.xibalba.demon.co.uk/jbr/ranto/
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Dec 13, 2010 7:44:08 GMT -4
But on the original topic, why is it funny to make degrading jokes at the expense of the opposite sex? I think it comes down the the line between gentle ribbing and genuine degrading comments. This joke at the very least had the decency to be equally balanced in its comments. It also has to be said that gender stereotypes, like all stereotypes, arose in the first place because they have a grain of truth. Men and women are different in their outlook, generally speaking, so humour arises out of those differences. Of course there is no universal humour, so some will laugh while others will get offended. The point of saying 'it's just a joke' is to convey the idea that no offence was meant. If you really want to examine the unfair use of 'degrading' comments about the opposite sex, check out the advertising regulations here in the UK, in which it is considered highly offensive to stereotype women in any negative way, but protraying men as hypochondriac idiots obsessed with cars, football and sex is perfectly acceptable. My pet peeve at the moment is an advert for Boots the chemist, in which two women suffering heavily from colds meet on the street, talk about the huge amount of work and shopping they have to do and how they must look after their slightly sniffly men, who have stayed tucked up in bed, the tagline for which is 'when he's ill and you don't have time to be'!
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 13, 2010 12:28:54 GMT -4
Esperanto? Learning Klingon would probably be more useful.
Of course, this is coming from someone who learned Dutch. Sorry all you Nederlanders, but it seems that it's really only useful to impress Dutch speakers that you learned it, since nearly any Dutchman on the internet will also be quite fluent in English (that's a complement to your language abilities, by the way).
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Dec 13, 2010 12:32:30 GMT -4
The only Esperanto I know is how to say 'could you send for the hall porter, there appears to be a frog in my bidet'....
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 13, 2010 12:35:39 GMT -4
I think it comes down the the line between gentle ribbing and genuine degrading comments. This joke at the very least had the decency to be equally balanced in its comments. I didn't find it very balanced - it looked to me like the jokes about men were more offensive. There aren't regulations to that effect, but US advertising is basically the same. Watch just about any non-beer commercial and the woman will almost invariably be portrayed as the wiser, more mature half of the relationship, often compensating for her husband's immature faults.
|
|
|
Post by Jairo on Dec 13, 2010 12:52:41 GMT -4
Maybe not your problem, but surely a problem of everyone who isn't a native speaker of the lingua franca of the moment. Most people I know studied English not because of its culture, but just because it was the lingua franca. They'd welcome an easier one, so they could spend more of their time on their actual interests. I've stumbled on that site a couple of times before. I agree with almost everything, but all it manages is showing how Esperanto isn't perfect, which misses the point. For example, Mark Twain did the same in "The Awful German Language" (and I bet it can be done for any natural language). Are these languages equally hard then? Well, I had German classes for more than a year, yet I still can't use German as well as I used Esperanto after a couple of weeks studying alone. Guess which I found easier.
|
|