Esperanto or Ido?

User avatar
'''
Posts: 1748
Joined: 2008-08-29, 14:20
Real Name: Withheld
Gender: male
Location: Canberra
Country: AU Australia (Australia)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby ''' » 2011-11-27, 3:15

I believe in m n p t k w y and null as initials, a i u as vowels, and y w n as finals, with the provisor that glides cannot be adjacent to their corresponding vowel
26/♂/hetero/Hu/★☭/PRESCRIPTIVIST
(en)(hu) - native
(de)(fr)(fa) - intermediate

Hampayof
Posts: 45
Joined: 2010-08-01, 17:07
Real Name: Bobby
Gender: male
Country: GB United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby Hampayof » 2012-02-03, 14:40

I'm a casual Esperantist of four years, and I'd like to take this opportunity to give my two-penneth on Ido. I've detected a theory, probably disseminated by the Idists, that: "most Esperantists secretly accept that Ido is an improvement on Esperanto, but they stay with Esperanto because it has a much bigger community". I want to challenge this theory.

I summarise the situation thus. Esperanto has several "old chestnut" imperfections (as described by ''' in his earlier post) and it also has some suboptimal roots, and Ido does indeed improve on these things. BUT, the Idist reform goes beyond the "old chestnuts", and in my opinion introduces numerous bad and ugly features of its own, as part of its overhaul of the languages. I'll now list them.

The vocabulary is 90% French/Latin, making it less neutral than Esperanto and favouring the Francophone world.

Faced with an excess of fricatives, they just merge /Z/ and /dZ/ as <j>. What's the rationale behind this? I'd guess it's to make life easier for French speakers.

The digraphs <ch> and <sh> create ambiguity, e.g. <sh> could represent /s.h/ instead of /S/.

The <j> diphthongs were purged because they were deemed too hard to articulate, and yet <eu> is retained! This is an upside-down situation to English speakers, et al.

They introduced a plural article <le>, but what happens if you have a foreign noun that you want to use indefinitely? Do you suffix an <-i>? If so, why is <le> needed when it's definite?

They scrapped the distinction between adjective and noun plurals, which restricts expression somewhat.

They complicated the stress rule. In Esperanto, you always stress the penultimate syllable, period. But in Ido, you stress the last syllable of an infinitive (why??), the antepenultimate syllable of a word with a diphthong at the end, and otherwise the penultimate syllable.

I think the verb conjugation system is inferior. I don't like <-ab-> and the <-es> suffix, and a question I don't know the answer to is, for the passive perfect, is it <abes> or <esab>?

They say you only need the accusative <n> if the object precedes the subject, but I think you need it for any non-SVO phrase, to avoid confusion with apposition.

The pronoun <quan> is a false friend; it means "whom", not "when". And the compound preposition <aden> is ugly.

The pronoun <me> was introduced to avoid confusion between <mi> and <ni>, but <me> is confusable with <ne>!

Finally, I hate the fact that Ido is full of words that have more than one form. Here's an enumeration of the ones I know about:

di la, dil
de la, del
da la, dal
ad, a
a la, ad la, al
ilu, il
elu, el
olu, ol
onu, on
ka, kad
esas, es
ica, ca
ita, ta

They call these alternatives "euphonic" but I call the whole thing BAD DESIGN. We shouldn't have to learn redundant extra words and make arbitrary morphological decisions in an auxlang. And btw, there's no law that says the pronouns have to conform to the noun morphology.

Also, the prefixes <i> and <e> make the article and the 3P pronouns male or female respectively, so what does prefixing <i> to <ta> do? Does it create a male pronoun? No, it does't change it at all, merely makes it more "euphonic"! This is a bizarre situation.

Okay, I'll wrap this "rant" up now. Ido is an easy language to learn and it has a cool flag, but in many little ways it's a botched reform of Esperanto, which on account of the community sizes, you should only learn if you passionately hate Esperanto's old chestnuts (e.g. the compulsory accusative, the prefix mal-).
Last edited by Hampayof on 2012-02-07, 16:31, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
linguaholic
Posts: 3122
Joined: 2008-06-21, 13:29
Gender: female
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby linguaholic » 2012-02-03, 20:32

Welcome to the forum! :D

I haven't looked into Ido much myself (as I'm not too interested), but I'll keep this list handy for the next time I meet an Idist. (Wait, have I ever met an Idist? Do Idists even exist? :P) I don't really like the overly romance feel of Ido either. Esperanto is romancey too, but then it has those random Germanic and Slavic roots and the funky orthography that make it lovable. :)
native: Deutsch / advanced: English, Nederlands / intermediate: Esperanto / forgotten: Français / fighting my way through: עברית מקראית / dreaming of: Čeština, עברית / admiring from a safe distance: فارسی

Hampayof
Posts: 45
Joined: 2010-08-01, 17:07
Real Name: Bobby
Gender: male
Country: GB United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby Hampayof » 2012-02-04, 18:22

I'd be intrigued to hear an Idist response to my post.

Btw, I'm a proud supporter of <c> for /S/, because I think it's the most sensible way to represent that consonant with one letter in a biggish phonology :)

User avatar
gyrus
Posts: 352
Joined: 2009-01-31, 13:58
Real Name: Rowland Goodbody
Gender: male
Location: Bath
Country: GB United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby gyrus » 2012-03-18, 23:37

zeme wrote:Chinese might have easy grammar

As someone who studies Chinese, I can attest to this being completely false. Anyone who claims this clearly has never tried to learn the "ba" construction or directional verbal complements.

@Hampayof: Yeah, I've always thought Ido was unnecessarily biased towards French and Italian (especially with the ugly and superfluous "-ez" ending. It's pronounced without the "z" in French!). It seems particularly pointless considering that French was a widespread lingua franca for quite a while, so if you're so intent on pleasing the French, surely you should advocate for their language to be used instead?

I think my main problem with Ido is that it just reeks of Interlingua and all the other IALs which prioritise comprehensability over usability. When I look at Ido I see a faintly-Latin mess, but when I look at Esperanto I see a language with far more diverse roots, and above all, it's own personality. Some main complain about the heavy agglutination and grammatical endings not being based off source languages, but I like it for precisely that reason. It makes it more neutral and doesn't make me feel like I'm learning some lame Romance-language cipher. I like coming to languages feeling like I'm learning something new and unique, not some conglomerate mess.
[flag]en[/flag][flag]fr[/flag][flag]de[/flag][flag]ja[/flag][flag]eo[/flag][flag]zh[/flag]
Twitter
YouTube

User avatar
hlysnan
Posts: 3112
Joined: 2010-04-04, 6:21
Real Name: J.
Gender: male
Location: Sydney
Country: AU Australia (Australia)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby hlysnan » 2012-03-19, 5:07

gyrus wrote:As someone who studies Chinese, I can attest to this being completely false. Anyone who claims this clearly has never tried to learn the "ba" construction or directional verbal complements.

Hello there. I studied Chinese at uni and the "ba" construction is pretty simple. All it does is basically switch the position of the verb and the object.
s + ba + o + v + modifiers
In my opinion, Chinese grammar is relatively easy compared to other languages.

Midnight
Posts: 68
Joined: 2012-03-12, 11:30
Gender: male

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby Midnight » 2012-03-19, 6:57

IMO Ido says it's enhanced Esperanto, but comes up with two words fo and (e, ed - depending on the next letter being vowel or consonant) I just think that some "corrections" are welcomed while other are just proof of activity.

User avatar
gyrus
Posts: 352
Joined: 2009-01-31, 13:58
Real Name: Rowland Goodbody
Gender: male
Location: Bath
Country: GB United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby gyrus » 2012-03-19, 10:21

hlysnan wrote:
gyrus wrote:As someone who studies Chinese, I can attest to this being completely false. Anyone who claims this clearly has never tried to learn the "ba" construction or directional verbal complements.

Hello there. I studied Chinese at uni and the "ba" construction is pretty simple. All it does is basically switch the position of the verb and the object.
s + ba + o + v + modifiers
In my opinion, Chinese grammar is relatively easy compared to other languages.

Perhaps in some aspects, but it is often touted that "Chinese has no grammar". Plus, things like measure words are a pain. I understand the ba construction, it's just difficult for an English speaker to know when to use it and to remember to do so.
[flag]en[/flag][flag]fr[/flag][flag]de[/flag][flag]ja[/flag][flag]eo[/flag][flag]zh[/flag]
Twitter
YouTube

User avatar
hlysnan
Posts: 3112
Joined: 2010-04-04, 6:21
Real Name: J.
Gender: male
Location: Sydney
Country: AU Australia (Australia)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby hlysnan » 2012-03-19, 11:35

gyrus wrote:Perhaps in some aspects, but it is often touted that "Chinese has no grammar". Plus, things like measure words are a pain. I understand the ba construction, it's just difficult for an English speaker to know when to use it and to remember to do so.

To put it simply, as often as possible, and whenever things are more than just s+v+o. :P

These things are sort of small compared to the tediousness of memorising characters in your third year. You can think of measure words as they are in English, except we don't use them as extensively. For example, "a bottle of water". Now apply that to everything in existence that is countable. Chinese grammar does exist, but it's really not too far from English and it is pretty simple with few things to remember.

bartlett22183

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby bartlett22183 » 2012-03-20, 17:19

I have been around the conIAL (constructed international auxiliary language) field for a number of years now, and I have come to the conclusion that NO conIAL will satisfy all actual or would-be adult learners. As the old saying goes, One man's meat is another man's poison. You just can't satisfy everybody, period.

Back in the 1950s, in his book One Language for the World, Mario Pei pointed out that, roughly speaking, all languages are equally easy for infant learners in immersion environments. In a sense, to have a worldwide IAL, it would be (theoretically) sufficient for the world to pick a language, any language, "natural" or constructed, provided it has sufficient semantic resources to deal with the modern world, and teach it universally to all children (presuming, of course, that teaching resources would be available). Problem solved.

In practice, of course, in the world today, most (not quite all) learners or would-be learners of conIALs are and for the foreseeable future will be post-adolescents. Abilities and, yes, preferences differ. I have concluded that no conIAL will be one that everybody will like. I have studied several and have written at least some in Interlingua and Esperanto. Ido I have read, although not appreciably written. None of them I have had the actual opportunity to try to converse in. Given the way things are, as long as any one of them is "good enough" -- a criterion I do not pretend to define here -- then it may be usable among those who learn it, as long as we recognize that there will be those who criticize it and prefer another.

If any conIAL is to succeed against the current juggernaut of English -- and watch out for Mandarin and Spanish! -- then I suggest that we let the marketplace of ideas and usage sort things out. It could be possible that there might even be regional IALs, so to speak, in different parts of the world. My personal opinion, and it is only that, is that in the western countries, at least that I can see (I am no longer young), only Esperanto, which is far in the lead, and Interlingua have much hope at all of gaining any appreciable success, no matter how much I consider that IAL X and IAL Y have these or those features preferable to IALs A and B.

marcxjo
Posts: 9
Joined: 2012-04-19, 4:26
Real Name: Marĉjo G.
Gender: male
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby marcxjo » 2012-05-28, 22:26

Remis wrote:Saluton. :D I've recently become quite interested in constructed languages, and especially Esperanto because of the large community. However, I read on a certain website coughzompistcough that Esperanto has a lot of flaws which were (presumably) fixed up in Ido.
So what I'm really asking is:
α. Is Esperanto hard to learn?


Saluton! I imagine you may have already made up your mind on the matter by now, but hey; another viewpoint could always help someone, somewhere, if not just annoy everybody else. :-p

Is EO hard? Not particularly. I personally don't think it's quite as super-easy as is often preached, but I think every auxlang delivers the accidental (but patently false) promise of being so easy you could practically learn it a priori. There's a bit of effort on your part required, but if you're really enthusiastic about it, you could easily reach a level that would enable you to make decent, basic conversation of average length within, say, two weeks of study (i.e., you could go through several minutes or typed lines of small talk without needing access to a dictionary more than once or twice).

Remis wrote:β. Are Ido and Esperanto mutually intelligible?


I could read Ido fairly well before ever studying in it. Writing in it would certainly have been more challenging before I took to actually studying it. I've read anecdotes suggesting that Esperanto seems a bit more demanding to read if you start with Ido, but probably not by much.

Remis wrote:γ. Are these flaws easily noticed, or are they just trivial things?


Flawed to the point that you can't always express yourself properly? Not really. Most of the "flaws" people talk about are really nuanced things that you wouldn't even think much of until you had a pretty deep understanding of the language, at least if my experience is any barometer. Ido has its own issues, though, if you want to talk about "flaws." I keep using scarequotes only because I don't see much point in evaluating a language's logicality; we Indo-Europeans tend to prefer IALs that mimic the logical structure of our own languages, but that's not necessarily a "flawless" approach, either. That said, and here's the kicker: you're probably better off giving either language a shot only if you're in it more for your own enjoyment than for any deluded hope that one or another is eventually going to take the world by storm.

Remis wrote:δ. Does anyone have a clue about how big the Ido community is, if it's separate from the Esperanto one?


This is a tough one. I've never been able to find conclusive numbers, but Parolez Ido (sort of an Ido Facebook) has several quite active speakers... for an IAL. You can make at least ten or twenty friends in Ido pretty easily, but where there are others, they don't generally pop up on the web as often.

Remis wrote:Pacon!


Same al vi! :-)
Fluent: [flag]en[/flag] [flag]eo[/flag]
Near-fluent: [flag]art-ido[/flag] [flag]ia[/flag] [flag]art[/flag]
Little help?: [flag]es[/flag]
Lotta help? (on hold): [flag]it[/flag] [flag]crh[/flag]
Whipping up two of these: [flag]art[/flag]

User avatar
gyrus
Posts: 352
Joined: 2009-01-31, 13:58
Real Name: Rowland Goodbody
Gender: male
Location: Bath
Country: GB United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby gyrus » 2012-06-18, 19:40

hlysnan wrote:
gyrus wrote:These things are sort of small compared to the tediousness of memorising characters in your third year. You can think of measure words as they are in English, except we don't use them as extensively. For example, "a bottle of water". Now apply that to everything in existence that is countable. Chinese grammar does exist, but it's really not too far from English and it is pretty simple with few things to remember.

Third year? :P We've already learnt to read and write 800 or so characters in Simplified and Traditional in first year.
[flag]en[/flag][flag]fr[/flag][flag]de[/flag][flag]ja[/flag][flag]eo[/flag][flag]zh[/flag]
Twitter
YouTube

arpee
Posts: 375
Joined: 2007-08-12, 6:12
Real Name: arpee
Gender: male
Location: US
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby arpee » 2012-08-20, 15:38

Esperanto could work if the phonology was easier, there were less verb tenses, and there were many less synonym and neologism (and only compound words); then the language would be at its easiest but still able to communicate all ideas.

Esperanto cared more about putting in "international" words, instead of taking international basic "vocabulary" and using compounds to build up words.

Both, Esperanto, Ido, and Interlingua have failed. If you are going to learn interlingua you might as well learn french.

Maybe "Lingua Franca Nova" or even "Glosa" would be better than Esperanto and Ido; at least LFN would be more understandable to Romance speakers without them learning the language where this is not the case for Esperanto where it mixes up languages in such a weird way.

Mutusen
Posts: 1126
Joined: 2007-10-17, 19:12
Gender: male
Country: SK Slovakia (Slovensko)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby Mutusen » 2012-08-20, 16:43

What do you mean, "Esperanto could work"? Esperanto works, people use it to communicate successfully.
„Koľko jazykov vieš, toľkokrát si človekom.“

arpee
Posts: 375
Joined: 2007-08-12, 6:12
Real Name: arpee
Gender: male
Location: US
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby arpee » 2012-08-20, 22:47

Mutusen wrote:What do you mean, "Esperanto could work"? Esperanto works, people use it to communicate successfully.



I mean it could work as a true "auxiliary" language. It is just way too difficult for most to pronounce. Most world languages do not have all of those phonemes so how on Earth is a language full of such phonemes international at all? Shouldn't the only phonemes be those popular in most languages to facilitate speaking?

User avatar
gyrus
Posts: 352
Joined: 2009-01-31, 13:58
Real Name: Rowland Goodbody
Gender: male
Location: Bath
Country: GB United Kingdom (United Kingdom)
Contact:

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby gyrus » 2012-09-10, 21:31

arpee wrote:I mean it could work as a true "auxiliary" language. It is just way too difficult for most to pronounce. Most world languages do not have all of those phonemes so how on Earth is a language full of such phonemes international at all? Shouldn't the only phonemes be those popular in most languages to facilitate speaking?

If people from different linguistic backgrounds are using it to communicate, on whatever scale it may be, surely that still counts as "auxiliary"?
[flag]en[/flag][flag]fr[/flag][flag]de[/flag][flag]ja[/flag][flag]eo[/flag][flag]zh[/flag]
Twitter
YouTube

User avatar
Dormouse559
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 6562
Joined: 2010-05-30, 0:06
Real Name: Matthew
Gender: male
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby Dormouse559 » 2012-09-17, 3:53

I think, yes, Esperanto does count as auxiliary. However, people from different linguistic backgrounds use English to communicate, too, and that obviously isn't enough for auxlangers.

The question shouldn't be whether Esperanto is an auxiliary language, it should be whether Esperanto is a good auxiliary language. If the only requirement for a good auxiliary language were that people of different linguistic backgrounds communicate in it, Esperanto would never have been created, because English already meets that criterion, plus it's ready-made, with a large and dedicated speaker base. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? :)

I don't think arpee necessarily disagrees that Esperanto is an auxiliary language, in the broadest sense of the term, but other criteria, such as ease of pronunciation, need to be taken into account to decide if an auxiliary language is any good.
N'hésite pas à corriger mes erreurs.

hedwards
Posts: 15
Joined: 2013-09-12, 2:51
Gender: male

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby hedwards » 2013-09-14, 3:04

Why the hate for the accusative? My 3 main complaints about Eo is that it lacks the dative, draws too much on European languages and has a community that's smaller than most other languages I could use for this purpose.

An IAL that lacks the accusative makes no sense. Without the accusative, Eo would be limited in terms of word order. As crazy as that drove me with Latin, it's really the only sensible decision to be made. Some people's native language is SVO, but there are other possibilities like VOS and VSO. Possibly even VOS.

Taking away the accusative would also constrain the way that you emphasize information. In English only one out of the three basic sentence types allows you to put the object up front. And even in that case, you're stuck with the verb in the same place and the DO and subject are stuck as is.

One of my big complaints about English is that we have only one objective case that serve the object of the preposition, the direct and indirect objects, making for grammar that's messy at times. It's no accident that people try to say the ungrammatical "he's taller than me." Sure it's technically not correct, but in languages with proper objects it's what you would do.

Personally, I'm learning Eo and I opted to do so in large part because it has a larger number of speakers. I know there are languages that draw more on African and Asian languages, but it's taken Eo 125 years to accumulate this number, and starting with another language that's better might mean that critical mass is another 100-200 years off in the distance.

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10658
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby mōdgethanc » 2013-09-20, 18:37

One of my big complaints about English is that we have only one objective case that serve the object of the preposition, the direct and indirect objects, making for grammar that's messy at times. It's no accident that people try to say the ungrammatical "he's taller than me." Sure it's technically not correct, but in languages with proper objects it's what you would do.
This is wrong? It sounds fine to me. "He (subj.) is taller than me (obj.)." That sounds like perfectly good English to me I me.

User avatar
Dormouse559
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 6562
Joined: 2010-05-30, 0:06
Real Name: Matthew
Gender: male
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Esperanto or Ido?

Postby Dormouse559 » 2013-09-20, 18:41

mōdgethanc wrote:This is wrong? It sounds fine to me. "He (subj.) is taller than me (obj.)." That sounds like perfectly good English to me I me.
I think the prescriptively correct way is "He is taller than I" because the implied full sentence is "He is taller than I am". It's similar to a distinction between "He likes you more than [he likes] me" and "He likes you more than I [do]".
N'hésite pas à corriger mes erreurs.


Return to “Esperanto”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest