From: 72627.2647@compuserve.com (Don HARLOW)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.esperanto
Subject: The Joy of Ido
Date: 17 Aug 92 02:30:39 GMT
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet

To: Esperanto >INTERNET:esperanto@rand.org

Dato: 920816

(The original subject title was something about English being 
easy to learn, but this particular thread has long since ceased 
having anything to do with English, so I've taken the liberty of 
unilaterally dropping it.)

---

Kiuj timas flamojn, tiuj forturnu la kapojn kaj trafoliumu la 
lastan "Kancerklinikon". Alie ...

---

If you're afraid of flames, turn your head and pick up the 
latest issue of "Playboy" or "Playgirl". Otherwise ...

---

Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

Bruce Gilson, having been unceremoniously (and, let me confess 
it who participated, impolitely -- though not by Steve Brewer, to 
whom most of his replies) rebuffed in his first sweetness-and-
light venture into missionary territory, now returns with fire and 
brimstone.

>To Steve Brewer's comment "Don't tell
>us Ido ... is better, SHOW us" I say
>I have done that. People object to
>features like the sexism of Esperanto,
>and I pointed out that Ido has elimin-
>ated that. I think it is exactly that
>sort of post that Steve asks for that
>I have provided.

Bruce, you haven't provided anything. You showed that Ido contains 
_one_ feature that Esperanto's structure is perfectly well set up to handle, 
a feature that it simply hasn't (yet) adopted. This proves that Ido is 
"better"?

>Steve Brewer challenges my use of the
>term "successors to Esperanto." I
>was using the word "successor" only
>in the meaning of "follower." A
>portion of the Esperanto world did
>leave to support Ido, and a portion
>of those ultimately went to develop
>Novial. In that sense, these languages
>are successors to Esperanto.
>Steve asked why the Idists did not
>simply call their language Esperanto.
>In fact they wanted to, because it
>was in fact intended that Ido be a
>form of Esperanto designed to meet
>the objections of those members of
>the 1907 Delegation who were not
>Esperantistists. This idea ran into
>the problem that Zamenhof was still
>alive and refusing to accept any
>changes.

Ido was designed months or even years before the delegation 
met, by a very small cabal of French-speaking Esperantists, as 
you know very well (you know their names, if you would care 
to admit it; I've posted the whole story to the conlang list). Ido 
wasn't created for the Delegation, the Delegation was created 
for Ido. The portion of the Esperanto world that left to support 
Ido consisted of about five percent of the Esperanto speakers at 
that time (the "generals without an army" of the old saying); the 
portion that went on to develop Novial some twenty 
years later consisted of the linguist Otto Jespersen.

Thankfully, you have here more or less implicitly declared that 
you are _not_ the author of the recently posted essay (?) about 
defects in Esperanto; _that_ particular author assures us that 
Zamenhof was a heretic who wanted to change Esperanto, but 
was prevented from doing so by the obstinacy of the Esperantists. 
You, on the other hand (and more correctly; see the preface to 
the "Fundamento"), state that Zamenhof was still alive and 
refusing to accept any changes.

>Steve Brewer seems to think there is
>no way of saying "Mr." in Vorlin other
>than "Ren" and makes a Ran & Stimpy
>joke about that. In fact the word is
>"vonzan" meaning literally "man +
>honorific-suffix." If Steve had looked
>at the Vorlin writings in "vidpuni"
>he would have seen "vonzan" used
>frequently.

I'm sure that Steve will make a note of this in his Vorlin textbook.

>Pierre Jelenc: "Ido is dead"
>Me: "How come I get Ido-Vivo 3 times a
>year?"
>Pierre: "Same reason I get Latin in
>my crossword puzzles much more than 3
>times a year."
>Stupid response. Those puzzles are in
>English (or maybe for Pierre, French).
>Latin is only used to fill in some
>puzzle words. Ido-Vivo is written IN
>IDO. There are Idists in Britain,
>Germany, Czechoslovakia, etc. Pierre7s
>post is typical of the Esperantists'
>attitude: Esperanto is SO PERFECT that
>all that is needed for the whole world
>to adopt Esperanto is for those who
>keep bringing up Ido, etc. to admit
>that Esperanto is so great and stop
>dividing the movement. Well, I for
>one feel Esperanto is so flawed that
>unless Esperantists concede that it
>needs fixing, and accept the fixes,
>there will never be a world inter-
>language. Esperantists so thoroughly
>dominate the discussion that people
>who will not accept Esperanto's serious
>flaws are not made aware of the fact
>that they have a choice beyond Esper-
>anto vs. no interlanguage at all. I
>will state in all seriousness that it
>is Esperanto that is dead -- a fossil
>because it cannot evolve. Any language
>that will not change is as dead as
>Latin. In 1907, a much improved Espe-
>ranto was developed -- this is the
>true development of Esperanto; it is
>called Ido. Ultimately we either will
>have no interlanguage at all or, as
>Erich Weferling fervently hoped, the
>Esperanto advocates will have to face
>up to the fact that Esperanto must
>change.

There are Idists in Russia, too, Bruce -- you forgot to mention 
that; I saw a very pro-Ido letter in "Ido-Vivo" back in 1988 from 
a Russian.  (Oh, sorry; that one was written originally in Esperanto, 
and had to be translated by the editor into Ido. Well, maybe he's 
learned Ido by now.) There are also Idists in other countries which 
you forgot to mention; a dozen such are listed, if I remember 
correctly, on the inside front cover of "Ido-Vivo".

Pierre's comment that "Ido is dead" is indeed an exaggeration -- the 
word "almost" was omitted. (I use "almost" in a quantitative, not a 
temporal, sense; the Ido movement could go staggering on for another 
half century, mumbling to itself. As to Ido itself ... old conlangs never 
die. Not as long as there are resurrection men like yourself floating 
around.)

Pierre was, I suspect, misled by your "three issues a year" comment. 
I don't know how many Esperanto magazines Pierre receives -- I 
average maybe a dozen a month (sad how a limited income cuts 
down on the availability of reading material!).

It is good to know that you have learned so much about 
Esperanto, its history, and its total lack of evolution since 
the time, a mere six months ago, that you publicly asked the 
conlang group for help in translating one line of Esperanto 
that somehow (probably thanks to the worldwide Esperantist 
conspiracy that we've heard so much about lately) got attached 
to a message sent to you. I seem to remember, as a newcomer 
to Conlang, making some kind of innocent suggestion to you 
that you might try the free Esperanto course, and getting blasted 
in return for my temerity, as well as subjected to a lecture on how 
the worldwide Esperanto machine had everything sewed up and 
how it would be better for everybody if ELNA, UEA and the like 
would immediately close their doors and leave the world to better 
constructed languages. Bruce, maybe _you_ should read Piron's 
article that I referenced in another posting, earlier.

One thing I'd like to know -- can you actually _speak_ Ido? I've 
only ever met one professed Idist, and it turned out that he couldn't ...

(Note for others: On subjects other than Esperanto, Bruce can be 
quite rational, helpful, and polite. As can I. We actually agreed 
once about something. It was a traumatic experience.)

(Pardonu min, samideanoj! Mi antauxe neniam ajn flamis iun, 
sed post sesmonata tolerado, mi finfine ne povis rezisti -- ne en 
cxi tiu kunteksto. Nu, mi provos rezisti la tenton en la estonteco. 
Mi denove pardonpetas.)

=============================================
Don HARLOW                                Redaktoro Esperanto U.S.A.
tel. (1 510) 222 0187
CompuServe [72627,2647]
Internet 72627.2647@compuserve.com

"To discipline Esperantists is to eat soup with chopsticks."
                                                          Confucius
=============================================