Re: Uusisuom, Unilang, auxlang discussions in CONLANG

En réponse à David Peterson <DigitalScream@...>:

>
>     I read this whole part (very thorough), and I think current
> Esperantists
> are of the "no changes ever" type.  I merely suggested that esperanto
> add a
> "t" and "d" with hats to render [T] and [D] and they all jumped down
> my
> throat, saying that the alphabet was one of the things you could never
> change, and blah blah blah.  That made me unhappy.
As an Esperantist auxlang-sceptic (yes, it exists, I'm the living proof of it :)
), I can understand you. Many Esperantists view their lang as something
"sacred", nearly "holy". Don't dare to touch the Holy Lang! :))) That's why when
I am in Esperantist company, I carefully avoid all discussions about the
language itself, even in my amateur-linguistic point of view (most of them are
linguistics impaired anyway...).

  And now it appears
> the
> Esperanto movement at Berkeley has all but failed (at least, to make it
> a
> department, or have some real class status).  Oh well.  I just felt kind
> of
> silly writing "teta" for theta.
>
Not "tetao" or "teto"? :))))

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr