Esperanto and Hebrew: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
No edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
* Did you know that Esperanto, from its structure, is very Hebrew-inspired?  -- .aulun.
'''Standard of Complexity'''
* In what way other than the lack of an indefinite article?
 
* Er, aulun, I'm sorry, but inasmuch as I know a <u>lot</u> about the history of Esperanto, I find that claim untenable. A smidgeon of Yiddish in '''edzo''' (Litvak Yiddish version of '''Princ<u>ess</u>in'''), and that's it for overt influences by Jewish languages. -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]].
Languages
**Oh, nitcion, as for me, I don't know a lot about Esperanto (and never had been too interested in, although my late cousin spoke it in the early 50ies). What I wanted to express is also to be found in an article I read a couple of years ago - and happily retrieved through an extensive net search ;-). Here is the URL: [http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00nj0] -- .aulun.
 
*** I read to the part about Esperanto, but it is nothing but propaganda. If it claims that 'all linguists recognize' esperanto as 'the easiest language to learn' (at which point I burst out laughing, having myself once given it a try before I saw through its claims to logical structure (repeated in the article, BTW) and given up on the language as being too similar to natuaral languages to get anywhere they haven't, but I never got as far as I even got with Quechua - which I studied for about the same amount of time; this is part of why I like Lojban but still dislike the claims to total unambiguity that I see now and again), then there is no way I will believe its other claims about the language. Plus it puts forth the idea that Hebrew is the mother tongue of all the world - rather silly, IMHO. The article is full of '''kalci'''. - mi'e. [[.kreig.daniyl.|.kreig.daniyl.]]
* significantly ambiguous grammars.
**** Please, read carefully and think of Frederic II - and do not provoke anyone to use zo selkalci noi ji'a nalclite zo'o - and better try to teach us some of your "easy" Ketchua (which I had the opportunity to listen to for a whole day in my courtroom).
** demonstratable context sensitivity.
***** The article confuses the weird things Semitic vowels do with what simply happens in agglutinative languages. I still giggled when it got to the propaganda bits, but I did contain myself (I'm in class right now and didn't want to disturb the maybe two people who are actually being productive zo'o). I know nothing about Frederic the second, but I do know that its monogenesis idea assumes very little linguistic change, if it is still to be '''almost''' like modern Hebrew though more compact, yet at the same time the ancestor of PIE, which sounds nothing like any of its offspring. Does the author really want to throw out all of historical linguistics? I accept the idea of proto-world, but I don't believe it would look exactly like Hebrew.
 
***** Quechua is a completely regular agglutinative language, similar to Esperanto, but it has actual phonology. It doesn't rely on claims of natural euphony, because every Quechua word fits a definable and pronounceable phonology (try saying esperanto "postscio" sometime). Its grammar is just alien enough that you won't find anyone competent saying 'Just memorize these [["Sixteen Rules" issue|"sixteen rules" issue]], the rest is just like your native language' - the sixteen rules actually hindered my progress in Esperanto; I could probably learn it okay if I could find a way to do so without reference to those sixteen rules. Since its cases are not identical to European languages, it is possible to find learning materials that do not expect you to know all the case names already, which I don't. Conclusion: Quechua is about equal to Esperanto in trying to learn it, but it is easier to find someone who will do a good job teaching it. - mi'e. [[.kreig.daniyl.|.kreig.daniyl.]]
*** I know of no natural spoken language with a [[jbocre: context free grammars ontext free grammar|context free grammars ontext free grammar]].
**** zo'o ki'u lekape'a ledoka pilno be zoily. kalci .ly malylojbo .inajanai le se cusku cu tisna lo kalci
* conjugation
***** I used it because it is more polite than the English word. I would never use it in such a [[malglico|malglico]] way in Lojban.
 
**.i lenu pilno loi rafsi lenu zbasu loi cnino valsi kei kei; noi le te prosa cu basna; na steci le bangrxivriti .i frili sucta tu'a lei ropno bangu gi'e se ckaji ji'a le bangrvolapiki .i lei la bangrnesperanto ku rafsi cu se jbera le latmo .e le xelso .e le latmyseldze .i la zamenxof cu se cinri tu'a le bangrxiidici gi'e finti lo gerna be le stuna bangrxiidici pu lenu finti le bangrnesperanto .i ku'i ganai loi xebro bangu cu xlura lenu <nowiki>[favrygau]</nowiki> farvygau la esperanton.; gi lenu xlura cu traji sucta -- mi'e [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]. (.i ta'a lenu mi'a casnu la zamenxof cu xamgu .i ku'i lenu casnu ri bau la lojban kei mu'i lenu na steci srana la lojban. cu sarcu)
** numerous irregularities in conjugation
** .i cumki .iku'i cajebaku ma'a na djice (to ni'o stidi lenu pilno zo farvygau .i ni'o ki'a zo mi' <u>a</u> .ue toi) -- mu'o .aulun.
* [[jbocre: symbolism|symbolism]]
** .i mi pu pilno zo mi'a mu'i lenu mi na steci tavla do zo'o
 
** .i je'e zo'o ni'o '''(.i lenu pilno loi rafsi lenu zbasu loi cnino valsi kei kei...)''' .i ta'onai le go'i na se basna le teryro'a .i ku'i ca'a se ckaji falo'e gismu sa'unai (to le genja belo valsi toi) .enai lo'e rafsi .i ta'o paunai tu'a le selro'a cu mutce cinri xu -- mi'e .aulun.
* inflection
 
Writing systems
 
* many transcriptions for the same verbal message
* many/multiple notations for the same audio sound in semi-phonetic alphabets.
 
* non-phonetic notation systems (kanji, etc).
 
----
 
* Languages
** English
 
** Ancient Greek (Nicolas?!)
** Finnish (???)
 
** Basque
** Various Native American languages ''Oh, tell me more!'' --mi'e .aulun. who nevertheless might ''participate'' ;-)
 
*** Any particular ones?
* Writing Systems
 
** Assyrian cuneiform
** Other mixed ideograph-phonetic systems, such as was used for the first great poetry collection in Japanese.
 
*** How does this example differ from modern Japanese, which has 1 ideographic, and 2 phonetic writing systems, which can and ''are'' mixed all in the same text?
**** they're visually rather different, whereas i think the heian (heinian? whatever) era writing system was just one big jumbled mess. (maybe i'm responding to something i wrote ages ago. oh well.)
 
**** man'yougana, as used in the Man'youshu, are ideographic characters used for their phonetic value -- the prototypes from which the current syllabaries derived by simplification. The complexity lies in the fact that AIUI in the Man'youshu, they were not simplified but used alongside ideographic characters used for their meaning. As a bad comparison, it would be a bit like having "4tunes" in English and having to figure out whether those symbols refer to more than three melodies ("4" used for its meaning), or to fates/incidents of luck/wealth ("4" used for its sound). --[[jbocre: pne|pne]]
**** Japanese is quite a good example for "complexity" (as far as I'm understanding the term correctly). There are several different "systems" parallel one has to choose the right one. Yet, this is also a feature of modern Japanese where you e.g. have one kanji (hanzi) character and you must decide how to pronounce it choosing from sometimes up to, say, three or four different possibilities from context: genuine Japanese pronunciation, or several historical "Chinese" pronunciations (e.g. Chinese "ren": hito, jin, nin). It's a bit like various forms of Latin or French loans in English. In this context, also Chinese has its "complexity" (not at all speaking of homophones!) ''--aulun.''
 
Please do tell me what's "complexity" regarding Finnish? ''--aulun.''
 
''What's complex about Finnish & Basque? Just because they are far from English?''
 
''Why don't you start by explaining what your standard of complexity is?''
 
''Anything more than Esperanto is too complex for me ;-)''
 
''.i ma te zmadu (More in what way?)''
 
I would assume ''in complexity''.
 
CIRCULAR LOGIC! A language is complex if it is complex?
 
* A.K.A. the reflexive principle
* The question was ''ma te zmadu'' and obviously the answer is ''le ka pluja''.
 
* the question should've been ''ma se pluja'' or ''pluja fi ma'' (or perhaps ''pluja mama'').

Latest revision as of 12:14, 7 July 2014

  • Did you know that Esperanto, from its structure, is very Hebrew-inspired? -- .aulun.
  • In what way other than the lack of an indefinite article?
  • Er, aulun, I'm sorry, but inasmuch as I know a lot about the history of Esperanto, I find that claim untenable. A smidgeon of Yiddish in edzo (Litvak Yiddish version of Princessin), and that's it for overt influences by Jewish languages. -- nitcion.
    • Oh, nitcion, as for me, I don't know a lot about Esperanto (and never had been too interested in, although my late cousin spoke it in the early 50ies). What I wanted to express is also to be found in an article I read a couple of years ago - and happily retrieved through an extensive net search ;-). Here is the URL: [1] -- .aulun.
      • I read to the part about Esperanto, but it is nothing but propaganda. If it claims that 'all linguists recognize' esperanto as 'the easiest language to learn' (at which point I burst out laughing, having myself once given it a try before I saw through its claims to logical structure (repeated in the article, BTW) and given up on the language as being too similar to natuaral languages to get anywhere they haven't, but I never got as far as I even got with Quechua - which I studied for about the same amount of time; this is part of why I like Lojban but still dislike the claims to total unambiguity that I see now and again), then there is no way I will believe its other claims about the language. Plus it puts forth the idea that Hebrew is the mother tongue of all the world - rather silly, IMHO. The article is full of kalci. - mi'e. .kreig.daniyl.
        • Please, read carefully and think of Frederic II - and do not provoke anyone to use zo selkalci noi ji'a nalclite zo'o - and better try to teach us some of your "easy" Ketchua (which I had the opportunity to listen to for a whole day in my courtroom).
          • The article confuses the weird things Semitic vowels do with what simply happens in agglutinative languages. I still giggled when it got to the propaganda bits, but I did contain myself (I'm in class right now and didn't want to disturb the maybe two people who are actually being productive zo'o). I know nothing about Frederic the second, but I do know that its monogenesis idea assumes very little linguistic change, if it is still to be almost like modern Hebrew though more compact, yet at the same time the ancestor of PIE, which sounds nothing like any of its offspring. Does the author really want to throw out all of historical linguistics? I accept the idea of proto-world, but I don't believe it would look exactly like Hebrew.
          • Quechua is a completely regular agglutinative language, similar to Esperanto, but it has actual phonology. It doesn't rely on claims of natural euphony, because every Quechua word fits a definable and pronounceable phonology (try saying esperanto "postscio" sometime). Its grammar is just alien enough that you won't find anyone competent saying 'Just memorize these "sixteen rules" issue, the rest is just like your native language' - the sixteen rules actually hindered my progress in Esperanto; I could probably learn it okay if I could find a way to do so without reference to those sixteen rules. Since its cases are not identical to European languages, it is possible to find learning materials that do not expect you to know all the case names already, which I don't. Conclusion: Quechua is about equal to Esperanto in trying to learn it, but it is easier to find someone who will do a good job teaching it. - mi'e. .kreig.daniyl.
        • zo'o ki'u lekape'a ledoka pilno be zoily. kalci .ly malylojbo .inajanai le se cusku cu tisna lo kalci
          • I used it because it is more polite than the English word. I would never use it in such a malglico way in Lojban.
    • .i lenu pilno loi rafsi lenu zbasu loi cnino valsi kei kei; noi le te prosa cu basna; na steci le bangrxivriti .i frili sucta tu'a lei ropno bangu gi'e se ckaji ji'a le bangrvolapiki .i lei la bangrnesperanto ku rafsi cu se jbera le latmo .e le xelso .e le latmyseldze .i la zamenxof cu se cinri tu'a le bangrxiidici gi'e finti lo gerna be le stuna bangrxiidici pu lenu finti le bangrnesperanto .i ku'i ganai loi xebro bangu cu xlura lenu [favrygau] farvygau la esperanton.; gi lenu xlura cu traji sucta -- mi'e nitcion. (.i ta'a lenu mi'a casnu la zamenxof cu xamgu .i ku'i lenu casnu ri bau la lojban kei mu'i lenu na steci srana la lojban. cu sarcu)
    • .i cumki .iku'i cajebaku ma'a na djice (to ni'o stidi lenu pilno zo farvygau .i ni'o ki'a zo mi' a .ue toi) -- mu'o .aulun.
    • .i mi pu pilno zo mi'a mu'i lenu mi na steci tavla do zo'o
    • .i je'e zo'o ni'o (.i lenu pilno loi rafsi lenu zbasu loi cnino valsi kei kei...) .i ta'onai le go'i na se basna le teryro'a .i ku'i ca'a se ckaji falo'e gismu sa'unai (to le genja belo valsi toi) .enai lo'e rafsi .i ta'o paunai tu'a le selro'a cu mutce cinri xu -- mi'e .aulun.