Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: aaaboyz1@hotmail.com (Mark Williamson)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: Esperanto nu "cult" ya duutu warusan~!
Date: 1 Sep 2003 10:29:45 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 488
Message-ID: <2367baf9.0309010929.6253473d@posting.google.com>
References: <2367baf9.0308241906.3283b13d@posting.google.com> <bicrj6$jo4$1@news.onet.pl> <2367baf9.0308281208.2299e184@posting.google.com> <birbeq$lfb$1@news.onet.pl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.98.77.167
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1062437385 29868 127.0.0.1 (1 Sep 2003 17:29:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Sep 2003 17:29:45 GMT
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:161
> > > I don't see why Esperantists need to be forced to present an unbiassed
> > > opinion.
> >
> > Of course not. As long as they don't try to force Esperanto on people,
> > or lie about it.
>
> I wish these Esperantists would stop kidnapping kids and forcing them into
> conlinguistic heroin-fuelled slavery.
Oh, I forgot about that. Somebody needs to liberate those poor kids
from their evil Esperantist overlords. XD
> > > If they like Esperanto, they can put up the benefits of Esperanto, they
> > > don't have to do the opposite side's dirty work for them, as there are
> > > people enough who can give reasons why they dislike Esperanto.
> >
> > Sure, but really, saying that it isn't "x-centric" and that it's 100%
> > neutral is a lie. Saying that there are 8,000,000 speakers is a lie.
> > Not that every Esperantist tells lies like that, but really I think
> > it's unacceptable.
>
> Who told you there are 8,000,000 speakers?
> I'm telling you that to the best of my knowledge there are about 2 million
> speakers.
And I agree with you. Who told me there are 8,000,000 speakers? The
infamous TYE, one of the main ways people learn Esperanto. TYE stands
for Teach Yourself Esperanto, and is a common abb. among
Anti-Esperantists who want to drive the evil out of the world.
I've talked to Esperantists 100000000000000000000000000 times more
zealous than you. I'm surprised you haven't.
> > > You could have left that at European. Not that many Americans I've met
> speak
> > > native languages, although I did play chess yesterday with one who knew
> a
> > > few words of Hawaiian.
> >
> > ?
> >
> > When I said American speakers, I meant people from North and South
> > America who spoke Esperanto. There are probably only a handful of
> > people (if any at all) in the Americas that speak only a Native
> > American language (which Hawai'ian is not, since Hawai'i belongs as a
> > Pacific island rather than in the Americas) and Esperanto. Even with
> > such popular languages as Guarani (majority of Paraguayans), Quechua
> > (loads of speakers), and Aymara (large chunk of Bolivians), Esperanto
> > generally does not matter to the monolingual speakers (if they didn't
> > bother to learn the local "lingua franca" for communication between
> > two native tribes, why learn a totally different language?), and those
> > that aren't monolingual can generally be counted as fluent in a
> > European language.
>
> They might learn Esperanto for fun, just out of general curiosity about how
> far a constructed language can go.
...
I'd be surprised if any monolingual speakers of those languages
actually knew what a conlang was!
> > > And of course the European language family is the domibating language
> family
> > > in the economics of the world.
> >
> > The European language family? Are you really very experienced with
> > languages at all? There is no "European language family".
>
> In what way? Are you disputing Proto Indo-European unity here, or what?
No, I'm disputing Proto-European unity. You claim there is a
"European" language family. That is quite untrue. Such a family would
of course include Basque, Finnish, Hungarian, Estonian, Maltese, Sami,
Inuktitut, Turkish... "European language family" is not a substitute
name for "Indo-European language family", the same way you can't say
"yoroppa gozoku" instead of "in'ou gozoku" in Japanese.
> > And I have
> > no problem with Esperanto's use of European roots or being more
> > accessable to some people than others. What I have a problem with is
> > that many Esperantists will tell people that their language is neutral
> > and it is just as easy for a monolingual Chinese as for a monolingual
> > Frenchman to learn. Many say it isn't "x-centric" or "y-centric". In
> > fact, I can't think of any Esperantist I've ever talked to about
> > Esperanto with more than 5 sentences that hasn't said that at least
> > once.
> >
>
> But it's not possible to claim that, as it is obviously based on European,
> mainly even the Latin base, and so you cannot possibly have understood any
> sensible person claiming it is neutral. You came the closest by denying
> there is a Proto Indo European family of languages.
...many Esperantists are not sensible. I have heard many claim this in
such a direct way it could not possibly be understood.
> > > I am of course referring to this planet, you may well be elsewhere.
> >
> > "this planet" being Mars? Your e-mail address indicates Poland
> > (dum-dum-dum... I'd hoped for a Chinese or an Arab rather than
> > somebody coming from the same land as Zamenhof, but that's fine with
> > me), but I really doubt that is the truth, especially since you think
> > I might be on a different planet than you.
> >
>
> Poland is on a planet called Ziemia.
Not the Poland I know of. Perhaps you live in a different Poland where
your Polish is something other than Slavic and you write it with the
Klingon alphabet?
> > So, yes, I am on Earth, while you are on Mars. Perhaps this is the
> > reason you are so mistaken about Esperanto?
> >
> > > Take it up with Ethnologue. They say 2,000,000 and that is the figure I
> > > accept.
> > > http://193.194.138.190/udhr/lang/1115.htm shows that the United Nations
> also
> > > accepts 2,000,000 speakers, so you can take your problem to the United
> > > Nations if you like.
> >
> > I have no problem with more realistic estimates like that. I take
> > issue with those who say 5 million speakers, or people who say (as
> > does TYE) that there are 8 million fluent speakers of Esperanto.
>
>
> I don't believe anyone makes such a claim.
>
> You are just setting up a straw man in order to attack Esperanto, because
> you want to do that, maybe out of pure trolling purposes, nttawwi, but you
> might as well find some arguments that stick.
dude... haven't you ever heard of TYE?
> The argument I used to use that I thought was best was that not many women
> seem to speak esperanto, but once I went to the Londona Klubo and I met a
> girl there that was so sexy and wanted me to show her London and talk
> Esperanto to her, and I was walking about on three legs just thinking about
> it, and I tell you, if I hadn't already found a partner worth staying
> faithful to I would have had those legs of hers wrapped around my neck
> before you can say ehxo sxajnas cxiujxauxde, or whatever it is.
...knowing you, she was probably a transvestite with a small dick, or
you're lying.
> But I digress...
>
> >
> > > They don't have to be.
> > >
> > > You can't mix roots like that together and still end up with something
> > > aesthetically pleasing any more than you can muddle up the respective
> > > cuisines of the region and expect to have something edible.
> >
> > I don't have a problem with Zamenhof's use of European words. I
> > personally would've preferred something more "x-centric" so it came
> > from one source instead of being a jumble of three or four as
> > Esperanto is.
>
> I think it about as even a mix of Latin and non Latin roots as Romanian is,
> but a lot easier to take to intermediate stage.
...at least Romanian has more Latin roots than non-Latin roots.
> >
> > What I take issue with is the fact that many Esperantists say that
> > Esperanto is completely neutral, that it isn't "euro-centric", or
> > "x-centric", or "y-centric".
> >
> > I don't care whether or not it's anything-centric, what I care about
> > is what Esperantists claim.
>
> Why do you care?
Because of the poor victims of you blood-sucking Esperantists, like
Gxionijo Eformmrenanespreontestio... thanks to evil Esperampires like
yourself, little Gxionijo now has long fangs and uses lots of "x"s in
his usenet posts. That sort of thing should be illegal. And now,
Gxionijo is victimizing others himself! It's so horrible, I can barely
think about it without screaming in agony.
> > > Or dasxer? or danser? or donerundblicen?
> >
> > ...aren't those German?
>
> Moorish, originally.
Really? I wasn't aware "donder", "und", or "blitzen" were from Arabic
words...
> > And do they mean anything related to "earth"
> > or "pacific ocean"? I don't think so.
> >
>
> I expected they dashed away all over the earth, including the pacific rim.
...damn you, you didn't read any of that! Read it again, and this time
ask a native speaker of English for help! (note: normally I don't say
stuff like that, but really you made some racist comments in this
post, so I won't hesitate to say stuff like that)
> > > And so it should be.
> > >
> > > We don't need ying-tong-yiddle-eye-poe elements in Esperanto, thank you
> very
> > > much.
> > >
> > > You orientalists can make up your own lingua changca.
> >
> > Woah. Back up. I don't care whether or not Esperanto actually uses
> > words from oriental languages, what I do care about is that if
> > Esperantists are going to claim it is totally neutral and non
> > "x-centric", then maybe they should make that true.
>
> How can they, when linguistic neutrality is a complete impossibility?
...it really isn't, if you create a language with 100% new vocabulary
and grammar generated by a machine.
And even so, if it's such an impossibility, then why do so many
vampi... I mean Esperantists claim Esperanto is linguistically
neutral?
> > I really don't care what the hell you guys do or don't do to
> > mutilate/fix your prized intauxlang, what I do care about is if you
> > guys lie about it.
> >
>
> No-one's lying, except you for saying that they are.
...are you saying that for a laugh at my expense, or do you really
believe people don't say stuff like that?
> > > A minute ago you were objecting to Europearianity, and now, for
> Interlingua,
> > > it's okaaaaaay, because their grammar is easy.
> >
> > No, it's OK because on the Interlingua website, it actually does say
> > that Interlingua is Eurocentric. Sure, it gives excuses for that, but
> > at least it doesn't lie about it like Esperanto.
>
> Where is the official website of the Movado and Shakado that says it's not
> euro centric?
...
> > I personally would
> > like a better language than Interlingua. I don't like Interlingua. But
> > at least those guys don't lie nearly as much as your crowd. A fine
> > example of your lying tactics can be found in TYE. Not in the lessons
> > themselves, but rather in the introduction and the back cover.
> >
>
> We are not responsible for the way Hodder & Stoughton choose to sell books.
>
> Ask the bookshop for your money back if you're not happy.
??? What bookshop? Teach Yourself Esperanto is famous and many
Esperantists reccommend it to learn Esperanto, and many Esperantists
used it to learn Esperanto themselves.
> > > Why don't you work out what angle you want to attack it from and stick
> to
> > > that, instead of dancing about contradicting yourself like some sort of
> > > gypsy?
> >
> > ...now you're resorting to bigotry? I may not be Romany, but even so I
> > find it highly offensive that you say such things about people of any
> > race.
>
> They dance about, I've seen them do it.
>
> And I'm not talking about a race, I'm talking about an attitude.
>
> If gypsies start to want to live like everyone else then I'm very happy to
> help them do that. But I see another intention when I observe them.
Fuck you, you racist asshole. You can go fuck yourself in hell!
> > How would you like it if I told somebody "...instead of dancing
> > about contradicting yourself like some sort of Pole"? That's mean. I
> > don't care how many rocks you throw at me, but when you say something
> > bigotted like that...
> >
>
> Ah, lighten up.
>
> If you like the Romanies so much, then tell your Government to give even
> more of them entry visas. We don't want them.
That's because you're all racist motherfuckers.
> > > The only reason the Interlingua grammar looks easy is because nobody
> wrote a
> > > PMEG for it yet.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > It doesn't look "easy", it just looks easier than Esperanto. No
> > complicated tenses or cases.
>
> Oh please.
...no explanation... It really doesn't have those features like
Esperanto does... so...
> > Of course, the same is true of that
> > Esperanto offshoot called something like "Esperanto sin Flexioj" or
> > something. It's just that Esperanto is really much too complex
> > grammatically to be an effective intauxlang.
> >
>
> You're nuts. Of course it is effective, as a language, and the only
> limitation is the lack of interest on the part of people who are not sure
> that they will be able to use the language practically if they learn it. But
> this is all a question of critical mass. The critical mass for Esperanto
> needs to be in the area of 10 million speakers. When we get the first ten
> million, the second ten will be a piece of piss.
No, not really. There are probably millions that were interested in
Esperanto, but found it too difficult. Were it easier to learn, you
could have half of Chinese-native-speakers as Esperantists maybe.
> > > It's true that the PMEG looks pretty daunting, but in point of fact
> there is
> > > nothing hard about Esperanto grammar.
> >
> > Oh, really? Maybe not for a speaker of a Slavic language such as
> > yourself.
>
> Several Slavic languages.
>
> All of which I learned from books.
... I meant your native language.
> > *you* have it easy. However, a monolingual Vietnamese man
> > would have to learn concepts such as case, number, tense, and even
> > mood.
> >
>
> It's about bloody time he did, then.
> At least they know the alphabet, so they have some advantages.
I think you're being a racist motherfucker again. Why the
motherfucking hell should he have to know those sorts of things?
Because your superior language has those features, while his
"inferior" one doesn't? Racist asshole.
> > > That would be more the sort of thing the Eastern nations, who languages
> you
> > > seem so desperate to incorporate, would be more likely to do.
> >
> > !!! What the hell? Now you're really being racist.
>
> Ha haah! Of course the Eastern nations have more ancestor worship than
> westerners do.
How do you know that? You're just a motherfucking racist son of a
bitch's asshole. Go fuck yourself in hell. Actually, you can do a
three-way with you, yourself, and your mother.
> Take your PC blinkers off and stop making a girly prat out of yourself.
...
Now you're being sexist. Racist sexist motherfucking asshole...
> > > Oh, my rybz!!
> > >
> > > Didn't you just tell someone to GAL?
> >
> > ...that message was a single post I made a few months ago. Since then,
> > I've done plenty of life-getting/having. I also did it before then. I
> > haven't gone around constantly since then or before then doing similar
> > stuff.
>
> Have you actually even lost your virginity yet?
> You don't write like it.
Ooh! Like you could tell that from writing? From the way you write, I
would say that you are not at all self-confident because you have a
disorder which makes your penis only 3 centimeters long, and you act
tough in your posts to make up for it.
> >
> > > The language can exist as long as nobody takes an interest in it, eh?
> >
> > No, that's far from what I believe. As long as nobody tries so
> > forcefully and lies so much about it. That would be like the people
> > who say English is spoken by almost everybody worldwide.
>
> No-one is lying.
...like tye? I thought you said to the best of your knowledge there
were only 2 million speakers of Esperanto. Lying asshole.
> >
> > > Well marky boy, I've got news for you.
> >
> > ...I already read the news.
> >
>
> Don't we all.
...no, we don't.
> > > Here, for your delectation and enlightenment, is The Universal
> Declaration
> > > of Human Rights, in Esperanto, which proves that we have the recognition
> of
> > > Human Rights for the Esperanto movement, and have a look at Art. 28 if
> you
> > > don't believe me.
> >
> > ...it's also been published in Interlingua and Latin. That proves
> > nothing...
> >
> > > Uncle Davey
> >
> > Wow, I didn't know I had a Polish-Martian uncle named Davey. Are you
> > my mother's brother, or my father's brother?
> >
>
> I am the Uncle of all those who wish to accept me as their personal Uncle.
> If you haven't yet accepted Davey as your personal uncle, there is still
> time.
> Only don't leave it too late, becasue once we die there is no Usenet.
...ahh, I see. You're the bastard son of my mother's step-aunt's
cousin's best friend's asshole. But wouldn't that make you my Uncle
Davey Asshole 5 times removed? Surely you can't be a simple uncle...
> > And now, to pay you back for your posting the entire UDHR in
> > Esperanto, I will post the entire thing in a language called Yapese.
>
> You crack me up.
...seriously, Yapese is a real language. Stupid son of a bitch.
(consult Ethnologue)
> > Yes, it is a real language. Real people speak it. It is a natural
> > language, meaning it was not constructed. There are real monolingual
> > speakers. It's a living language.
> >
> > MATT'AWEN GUBIN E GIDII NI NGAN NANG
> > MORNGAAGEN
> > Bochan ni ngan nang ni gubine gidii mabee mabay matt'awen, meere nge
> > taareb matt'aw dad ngemang lik'ikane puf rogon, nga gazon taab
> > motochiyel nge gapas u faileng,
> >
> > Bochan ni yara n'ag modgun nge pimatt'awene gidii e firr'e beawe tazil
> > nge cham rii' nga lani yanne gidii ni gubin, ere chiney iyan eke taw
> > nga napan e faileng ninge gubine gidii make puf-puf rograd ko namon,
> > memich mange siye modgudag u lan gum'irachaen gubine gidii ma nga'un
> > adag nimod nikan dugliy ni aram fal'ngin lan yanne gidii,
> >
> > Bochan ni batt'uf maba gaafan ni faanra dab ni motogel ngak'bee ngesul
> > nga tomur ara ziliyeg laniyan' ni gomanga dakriy rebo kanowa ngabang,
> > me pigichel ngecham ko am ara pitoogor, mabay matt'awen gidii ni gubin
> > nibe kele motochiyel gafalngin,
*snip*
> > Yang ni 29.
> > Gubine gidii mabay e tin dabisiy e marwel ko binaw nge nam rok' ni
> > zingar irin yaaram bayangi falngin.
> > Matt'awen gubine gidii nge kanowaen e tin bapuf yalen riye kubeyan u
> > yalane motochiyel ko ngin bay ara renam ni keyan ngay, machane, kemus
> > ni gubin e motochiyel makuraitay gaffalngin nge modgun.
> > Matt'awen nge puf rogon ko gubin e gidii e dakuriy bayang ni yara cheg
> > ngey, yaaram e ratogopluw ko fan nge matt'awen e tirok'e United
> > Nations e motochiyel.
> > Yang ni 30.
> > Dariy banen u lan ere ngi Garcheg ney ni ngan abuweg fan nge zil ara
> > togopluw ko tirok'e United Nations e motochiyel ar pingeg fan ere ngi
> > Garcheg ney nga wuruu' e knowa.
>
> That doesn't look too easy, I have to say.
>
> Uncle Davey
That's because you're stupid. It's no harder to learn than
Esperanto...
-Mark
(ps: stupidness wassaibiin doo... shinjichi nkai asshole yaibiin
yaa...)
|
|