Talk:Gender reform in Esperanto

message: The article gives the impression that Esperanto doesn't have a gender-neutral pronoun, whereas the actual problem seems to be that English speakers don't like it. Also need to change infix to suffix. The infix article shows that Esperanto does not have infixes (= affixes placed within a morpheme). kwami 21:48, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronoun, "infix" 

message: I wonder why there's an article about riismo, since
* I have never seen it used in the Esperanto world (does anyone have a link to places that use it?)
* The "gi" proposal seems to be better or at least equally good
* There are other additions to Esperanto that have acquired larger acceptance: "icx" (icxismo), "far" and maybe "na"
Yuu en 21:10, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why riismo deserves an article? 

message: The article describes what Riism is and why it was created, but leaves out who, where and when.  Who created it?  Where was it created (admittedly less important)?  When was it created?  The article also leaves out how the language has been received and how much it has been used.  Has there been any literature written in Riism?  Are there any organizations that use it?   Edwin Stearns | Talk 21:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's missing 

message: Can anybody create this page? -> icism  (you find material here: iĉismo). Thanks, i can't do that, no permission.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.97.9.85 (talk) 19:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Will no longer needed once riism is merged. kwami (talk) 08:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  iĉismo 

message: Several times mention is made of the 20 or so words that are still inherently male gendered, but no list of them.  The article would be improved if such a list were in the article. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They're there! kwami (talk) 06:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What about bovo?  One of the links indicated that it was inherently male, yet that wasn't on the semi-list, which is why I dismissed it as being the list.  Conversely the semi-list has amiko, which I see no reason why it shouldn't be considered in the same class as doktoro, as inherently neuter. Caerwine Caer’s whines 06:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Language is rather fluid. Originally doktoro was masculine, today it's epicene. It also depends on the language background of the speaker. kwami (talk) 06:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: True, language is fluid, but I can't see any reason why amiko should be considered masculine instead of epicene in either in the 19th century or now. Caerwine Caer’s whines 01:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of languages have separate forms for male and female friends. Amiko was originally masculine, and the epicene use is primarily an English influence. kwami (talk) 07:01, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 20 words 

message: I think it would be silly in English wiki to have separate articles on each proposed reform, since AFAIK none of them are in widespread use. 
Is riism any more notable than any of the other proposals? Or is it simply a case of an advocate pushing it on the web trying to generate publicity? I've met people who use (or at least advocate) gi and -iĉo, but have never met a riist. (Yuu en above says the same.)
I'd have simply moved this, but I wanted to be sure I'm not just ignorant of a significant cultural trend. kwami (talk) 08:57, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've started, but don't have time to clean it up right now. kwami (talk) 02:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move from 'Riism' 

message: It is not clear to me what the purpose of this article is.  The history, extent, and current status of this reform proposal is not mentioned; nor is any mention made of who initiated the proposal(s). Are these widely known and used ideas, found in everyday EO speech; or is this all just the effort of one person?  There is also no mention of the fact that these sorts of reformation proposals could be considered to be counter to the guidelines in the Fundamento, which states that even the smallest change in the language would lead to "nia morto" - or is there something I am missing here?  What are the reaction(s), if any, to these reform ideas?  To me, this article looks like a strong POV-push.  If I am wrong, then I believe the article should cover more material than it currently does. Macduff (talk) 18:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You're absolutely right that the article needs some cleanup, as well as some talk about the reception of such change. I do think that most of the article should stay. Maybe it's a little POV, but it's not bad. Jchthys cont. 23:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of article? 

message: In the article, one can read: "Zamenhof switched to using vir as a prefix in his translation of Genesis in the 1920s." Wasn't Zamenhof dead in the 1920s? --TheLazyDog (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Explained. --Error (talk) 03:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghost Zamenhof? 

message: It was promised at the start of the article that, "when a proposed word or usage is not grammatically correct according to the standard rules of Esperanto grammar, it will be marked with an asterisk."  But this petered out by the section on Gender pronoun proposals and the gender pronoun proposal table.  Please extend the use of asterisks in front of the usages not part of current Esperanto grammar.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.241.130.86 (talk) 20:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Asterisk petered out, dropped off 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gender reform in Esperanto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131019165237/http://tekstaro.com/prenisekciojn.pl?nomo=la-faraono&tipo to http://tekstaro.com/prenisekciojn.pl?nomo=la-faraono&tipo
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:18, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Ĝi estas la sinjoro de nia loko, sinjoro vicgrafo de ..." "They are the lord of our place, lord viscount of ..."
The English for this sentence would be "It is the lord of our place, lord viscount of..." Yes,  that's awkward English, but Zamenhof wanted that to be said in Esperanto, just as in many dialects of English today it's acceptable to call a child "it". This is the heart of the point, and associating this usage with a recent - and politically-loaded - English neologism obscures that significantly. 
"Ĝi estas" is not "they are". Laodah 06:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't call an adult "it" in English, so "it is" is a bad translation. "It is the lord" would mean something different: the event etc. was the lord doing something. "It" wouldn't refer to the lord himself. And how is they are "politically-loaded"? — kwami (talk) 07:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad translation