Posts tagged with "criticism"

I apologize for the horrible pun. I have no idea what possessed me to do that. A decent essay found here suggests that part of Esperanto’s sometimes limited appeal stems from its excessive use of consonants. Admittedly, I’ve always preferred the sibilant over the guttural…It’s part of the reason why I decided to study Spanish back in high school over German. I like the point this particular writer raises about the Esperanto character “hx.” There’s a reason we rarely encounter it – nobody wants to try to pronounce it!

So, since I have a definite language bias, in that I prefer Romance languages over Germanic and other language families, I somewhat agree with the assessment that too many consonants hurt a language, although my opinion is that it harms the beauty moreso than the functionality. I doubt that the abundance of consonants alone hampers our favorite language that much.

What do you all think? Can consonants be a bad thing? Or is it all dependent upon one’s manner of thinking? Let us know your opinion. After all, what is a blog without reader input?

If you’re up for a long, thoughtful critique of Esperanto, Justin Rye has compiled a massive and thorough examination of all the things he finds inadequate about the language.

I’ve only had the time to unearth this article today, much less study it! However, if you have an opinion regarding this essay (or thesis, given its size!), then please share! I’ll post again soon, with commentary.

For the time being, I’d like to point out that Section E5, concerning the elegance of Esperanto, seems to confuse the Esperanto meaning of “mal-” with the phonetically identical English prefix. Mi povas vidi unu problemon!

Here’s an interesting critique of the Esperanto movement! This essay by Christopher Culver examines the seemingly self-contradictory Esperanto agenda. Give it a look if you have the opportunity. While I do not think Mr. Culver’s criticism provides an entirely accurate assessment of the state of the Esperanto movement, his opinions caution us not to allow the Esperanto community go as astray as he suggests!

I think that Mr. Culver’s single biggest misstep is that he assumes Esperanto is intended to replace existing languages. I always figured that the goal of Esperanto was to be an international second language, so that one could retain his or her first language, yet still be able to converse with the rest of the world. With this as the case, Esperanto shouldn’t subsume existing languages – it should instead provide an environment where it isn’t a bad thing to keep speaking one’s native tongue.

Anyhow, such is my opinion. What do you all think?

Since it hasn’t stopped raining where I live for the past month or so, I cannot help but be in a mildly pessimistic mood. I’ve taken to examining some of the less sunny arguments against constructed languages, thinking that my present mindset might help me to better understand a position I would not normally support. In my quest I’ve found an interesting one here, that critiques the viability of any constructed auxiliary language.

While I disagree with a few of the author’s points, the article makes for a good read. I’d recommend it, if you’ve ever had a moment where someone questioned why you study Esperanto. If anything, it will equip you with some more counterpoints to raise!

A co-worker recently passed on this link in an email. It’s a review of a fascinating new book about languages, called “Origins of the Specious.” The Darwin pun alone makes me want to read it!

While the book, from what I can discern, does not focus on Esperanto, it addresses some of the peculiar idiosyncrasies of grammar and language that prompted the invention of our favorite second language. I plan to take a look at it in the near future, and will comment further upon it then. For now, you might want to investigate the book yourself.

Back to the Top