Return-Path: Message-Id: <9205201338.AA29644@relay2.UU.NET> Date: Wed May 20 14:16:54 1992 Reply-To: Edmund Grimley-Evans Sender: Lojban list From: Edmund Grimley-Evans Subject: The Esperanto-Community To: John Cowan Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Wed May 20 14:16:54 1992 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!cuvma.bitnet!LOJBAN > The exact number of native speakers of esperanto is apparently not that fully > documented. All references I've seen have been anecdotal. I do agree that t > there are some. The linguists who do not consider these numbers to be In the book "Esperanto en perspektivo" (844 pages, published in 1974) I found the following sentence: Hodia^u ekzistas minimume 200 infanoj a^u junuloj en pli ol 19 landoj, kies hejma lingvo estas Esperanto. [There are today at least 200 children (or young people) in more than 19 countries who speak Esperanto at home.] The book "Esperanto en perspektivo" is very reliable; the statement can probably be interpreted as meaning, that one of the editors had in his possession the names and addresses of 200 such children. The however is completely IRRELEVANT! The point is, that one is making a big mistake simply by applying the phrase "native speaker" to the international language Esperanto. (The phrase used in Esperanto is "denaska parolanto" [speaker from birth].) The "native speakers" of Esperanto do not in any way have the normative role in Esperantujo that the native speakers of English do in the English-speaking community. If "denaska parolanto" Joe Bloggs and William Auld were to disagree about some grammatical or stylistic question, no one would regard Joe Blogg's opinion as having more weight than William Auld's. (William Auld is generally recognised as the greatest living Esperanto-poet (although his best poems date back to the 1960s). He is also a sober essayist and definitely one of the most important figures in today's Esperanto-culture. He learnt Esperanto as an adult!) > written language community without being part of the speaking > "community" such as there is one.) Why these attempts to denigrate the Esperanto-Community? Is this supposed to help the Lojban Effort? As an English Esperantist living in Germany I have a much stronger feeling of belonging to the Esperanto-Community than I do of belonging to the English-speaking community (such as there is one). Yesterday I read the following in "La Brita Esperantisto": Pro Esperanto mi ekkonis mian edzinon; ni geedzi^gis en Esperanto; niaj filinoj koncipi^gis kaj naski^gis en Esperanto; mia edzino diris al mi siajn lastajn vortojn en Esperanto. En malpli emocia nivelo, miaj konatoj parolas angle, sed miaj geamikoj parolas Esperante. [Through Esperanto I got to know my wife; we were married in Esperanto; our daughters were conceived and born in Esperanto; my wife spoke her last words to me in Esperanto. On a less emotional level, my acquaintances speak English, but my friends speak Esperanto.] To get back to the original point of the discussion: In some (presumably most) national languages (All `real' languages are natural) there is a group of people usually referred to as "native speakers" who have a normative role in defining the grammar of the language. Esperanto is however living proof that this is not the case for all (natural) languages. > Yes, I like this. Down with the native speakers. Hear hear! ======================================================================= Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS dfkihueg@rz.uni-sb.de =======================================================================