Esperanto Language Blog

It’s a simple fact that languages, given time, will evolve. If ever you have the chance, take a look at the Oxford English Dictionary, and track the evolution of any random word. Sometimes, the years required for a word to radically alter its meaning are few – take today’s contradictory-seeming definitions of the word “oversight,” for example. One definition means a moment of neglect in which crucial details are missed; the second refers to near-omniscient monitoring of an institution!

The thought of evolving languages always creeps into my mind when I think of Esperanto. I love the language, and want to see it succeed. Yet I cannot help but wonder whether, if it did become the global second language, how long it would last before it evolved differently in varying parts of the world. Perhaps it would take some time…Decades, centuries, eons, I don’t know. Eventually, though, Esperanto would evolve, and again we would have the same diversity of languages that once more begs for a middle ground among them.

Then again, since Esperanto is not intended to be everybody’s first language, there is always the possibility that it would evolve considerably slower that a widely-spoken first language, especially given the contexts in which Esperanto would be used. I imagine may of us have a vision of Esperanto being used in world governments, and as such, it would be a tool for conducting official business. Under those circumstances, perhaps Esperanto would be better off in a static state. Politicians would likely not opt to use words that have come into the regional parlance, but are utterly meaningless to someone from a different milieu.

What do you all think? Is the quest for a global language destined to revert back to the same place from whence it started? Or will it be more tenable once it is finally attained?

Based on an insightful comment from Pascal Blondiau in regards to “krokodili” the other week, I find myself asking whether or not I want to see Esperanto evolve or not. Moreover, if the language needs to change, I wonder how we should go about changing it. Before you read any further, I highly recommend reading Pascal’s commentary. It is well argued, and I hadn’t considered many of his points before.

All set? Then let’s begin a new discussion!

We all want Esperanto be an international language, something that everyone can speak so that everyone may be heard and understood. Under the most ideal circumstances, people the world over would speak, use, and comprehend Esperanto. However, if the entire world spoke Esperanto, I can only assume that various native languages would creep into the vocabulary, producing words like “krokodili.” With this as the case, it isn’t a far stretch of the imagination to think that Esperanto would develop regional words that are spoken only in select places. After further divergence, one would end up with essentially different languages – thus defeating the purpose of a universal language!

The alternative would be to keep non-Esperanto words from entering the Esperanto vocabulary. This solution would ensure that Esperanto remains neutral (in theory) among the world’s native languages, and that new words wouldn’t be too cryptic for Esperantists. Unfortunately, I can see this approach having its own drawbacks. A rigid, purist method like this one risks stagnating the development of the language. Imagine how limited poetry would be, for example, if word usage was completely set in stone!

I can’t say there’s an easy solution to the problem of pluralism versus purism. Perhaps a balance between the two would be best, but I cannot say for sure. What do you all think? Where do you stand on the issue?

Since I’m a student of English, I typically bemoan the decline of proper grammar due to Internet chatrooms and instant-message programs. However, when brevity is imperative, I can see how a few bits of contractions or abbreviations may be appropriate. There are a few commonplace contractions in Esperanto that you might encounter during casual online interaction, and so I thought it might be useful to discuss some of them here. I’ve only run into a few of them in my experiences, so feel free to comment with any of yours if you think they might be useful!

espo = Esperanto, the language we all know and love
stas/stis/stos/stus/stu/sti = All the various conjugations of “esti”
sxli = “Sxi/Li,” for when “they” is not gender-neutral enough
sal/sa = Abbreviation of “saluton,” for hello
salugxis = A merging of “saluton” and “gxis la revido,” somewhat like the Hawaiian “aloha”