Re: Who castrated Esperanto?

On Feb 19, 4:39 am, craoibhi...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Feb 19, 6:13 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Feb 18, 5:56 pm, Iain <iain_inks...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Feb 18, 10:28 pm, craoibhi...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Feb 18, 10:04 pm, Iain <iain_inks...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The following dictionary has words such as "aŭtobiografio" and
"ateismo"

And?

The whole unique benefit of Esperanto is the small size of its
vocabulary, without any loss to the range of ideas that can be
expressed, yet here we have words imported from the Romance languages
for meanings that could be expressed with the morphemes in the
original specification.

Esperanto for god is 'dio', for example, not "te".

Thus your version of E-o is on the level of Basic English? So it's
even worse than we thought!

Who is "we", Your Majesty the King of Usenet Peter I of the Daniels
dynasty?-

The many people here who recognize the pointlessness of the E-o and
all similar projects.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Who castrated Esperanto?
    ... without any loss to the range of ideas that can be ... That looks an awful lot like Orwell's agglutinative language ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Who castrated Esperanto?
    ... without any loss to the range of ideas that can be ... yet here we have words imported from the Romance languages ... for meanings that could be expressed with the morphemes in the ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Good old Boycott - another beaut
    ... >whereas if we had goto 50 without loss ... ... pointlessness of stating the blindingly obvious. ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)