Direct Object "n"

[razlem]

Please don't Europeanize the language.

Lord forbid...

[Psittakos]

-That is another important lack in Esperanto, there's no a proper syntactic order. People who study it have no a normatize order to follow as reference, rather they can made up its own way--- that avoid the language gets a concreteness it needs as every language does.

- If one can understand an official dictionary as "gxusta literaturo", or as "gxusta verkajxo" at least. The most important chinese-Esperanto dictionary translates yi-yuan 医院 as "hospitalo", besides never appears at its side the word "malsanulejo". The University of Shanghai is, also, one of the most important entities which have ever publish esperanto stuff.

- Ektoras claim don't europeanize Esperanto... I consideer Esperanto can't be more europeanized from it already is... and it always was been, even when still was merely called Lingvo Internacia. Another important lack to a language wich likes to be called "neutral" and "international".

[hedwards]

I'm sorry, but who says that Esperanto is SVO? There is no such rule, and apart from myself, I know a lot of people who make S-O-V sentences, and I'm sure some people use V-S-O. Please don't Europeanize the language. Let people speak it the way they feel the most comfortable - in terms of syntax, of course; not grammarwise. Omitting the accusative -n is absolutely wrong.
If a person always uses S-V-O, then omitting the accusative might not hinder the understanding, but other syntaxes would be hard to understand without it.

Europeanize? Chinese does that as well whereas Latin doesn't. But, pedantry aside, you do have a good point.

One thing that I like about Esperanto is that because of the -n used for the accusative, one isn't limited to ordering it in one way or another, we're given the choice on how to topicalize the sentence. English is rather limited in that regard, if you want to focus on the object, you're largely limited to the passive voice. The main downside being that beginners that are used to languages like limited options can require some time to figure out how to listen to it.

I just wish there was a dative case to go along with it. (Feel free to point out how to do the Dative, I'm still new to this.)

Nun mi havas studi. ĝis baldaŭ

[JuxtapositionQMan]

-That is another important lack in Esperanto, there's no a proper syntactic order. People who study it have no a normatize order to follow as reference, rather they can made up its own way--- that avoid the language gets a concreteness it needs as every language does.

The point of the n was to make almost any order grammatically correct ("Ĉiam diris laj vulpoj grandajn ekstremej rakontojn vilaj." still translates as "The extremely furry foxes always told great stories." despite literally being "Always told the foxes grand extremely stories furry." all because of the n distinction)

- If one can understand an official dictionary as "gxusta literaturo", or as "gxusta verkajxo" at least. The most important chinese-Esperanto dictionary translates yi-yuan 医院 as "hospitalo", besides never appears at its side the word "malsanulejo". The University of Shanghai is, also, one of the most important entities which have ever publish esperanto stuff.

uh, heads up people! both are correct. The point of the derivation system was to make words for things that possibly didn't exist before then. If we have a different word already, THAT WORKS TOO.

- Ektoras claim don't europeanize Esperanto... I consideer Esperanto can't be more europeanized from it already is... and it always was been, even when still was merely called Lingvo Internacia. Another important lack to a language wich likes to be called "neutral" and "international".

I'll agree with you there. It needs more Hindi, Arabic, Russian, and Japanese words. Not Chinese, because tonal Esperanto would be no fun.

btw, grammar. please fix.