robbkvasnak:...The other people in my class are just as "strangulaj" as I am...

You know, some people spend their Saturdays throwing balls at each other. And some people just sit and watch other people throw balls at each other.

On the other hand, after a number of your Saturdays, you'll know something. In fact, you'll know something most people don't know*.

I'm not quite sure who the stranguloj really are in this story, to tell you the truth.

-------------------------------------

* Which is a valuable thing by its very nature. No one gets ahead by knowing what everybody else knows.

How I understand, Raumism is some kind of personal strict defense position(*) to avoid automatically to get pocket by peer pressure of traditional political Esperanto organisations and their propageted World domination Internationalism. Someones interested in study and use of Esperanto language like hobby only, those ones have the personal right to do so. They remain part of process to keep alive Esperanto language community i.e. with their participation at E-o events, online forum etc. Political E-o activists who disregard that very personal decision, that ones more hinder to spread Esperanto than to promote Esperanto language.

(*) 'Divided, we are most suitable united'

RiotNrrd:

robbkvasnak:...The other people in my class are just as "strangulaj" as I am...

You know, some people spend their Saturdays throwing balls at each other. And some people just sit and watch other people throw balls at each other.

On the other hand, after a number of your Saturdays, you'll know something. In fact, you'll know something most people don't know*.

I'm not quite sure who the stranguloj really are in this story, to tell you the truth.

-------------------------------------

* Which is a valuable thing by its very nature. No one gets ahead by knowing what everybody else knows.

I meant the whole thing to be sarcasm. Maybe that didn't come through in printed format. I should have written it in green.

erinja:Criticism of Raumism is fine. I don't see any taboo in that. It just needs to be in an appropriately-titled thread. Have at it!

sudanglo:the philosphy of Rauxmismo, which turns it back on the original purpose of Esperanto, potentially undermines the future development of Esperanto, allowing the language to follow the haphazard developmental path of the national languages

This doesn't relate to the idea of looking for two- or three-word combinations in Esperanto that appear frequently, so that you can practice words in a context where they usually appear, as a way of making it a bit easier to learn a language. A collocation isn't a colloquialism. It refers to the idea that you will hear something like "spekti filmon" much more than something like "spekti panon", and some people might find value in the idea of learning "spekti" together with one or two words that are likely to be used with it. If you disagree with that idea, of course you are free to argue that in the other thread.

Perhaps your thinking links a wide variety of different topics to the Raumism, but I think that most people simply don't make the link between Raumism and using frequent word combinations to help in language learning.

Erinja expresses the truth of the matter perfectly in this post.

My thread was coming from a scientific perspective, all I care about is what is or what is not. I don't care what should or shouldn't be. Your political minded posts had no place in my thread to begin with. Instead of telling you this before, I simply overlooked your misplaced posts. I have nothing against freedom of speech but I am against people abusing such freedoms by hijacking my threads, this isn't the first time such a thing has happened to me on this forum, to inappropriately further their politcal or other ideals.

captainzhang:I have nothing against freedom of speech but I am against people abusing such freedoms by hijacking my threads, this isn't the first time such a thing has happened to me on this forum, to inappropriately further their politcal or other ideals.

Threads frequently go off topic but if you feel your thread has been hijacked, please use the report button to flag it. It is evidently something we need to keep a closer eye on.

all I care about is what is or what is not. I don't care what should or shouldn't be

But what is and what isn't in Esperanto has been historically determined by attitudes about what should and shouldn't be and largely continues to be so.

Now it may be profitable pedagogically to, for example, teach what are commonly objects of spekti.

But the general feeling in the community of Esperanto speakers would be that anything can be the object of spekti so long as it makes sense, whereas in the national languages there may be all sorts of restrictions on what verbs can be used with what objects, if you are going to use the language as native speakers do.

This attitudinal stance inhibits the development of features which undermine the consistency and relative simplicity of Esperanto for the adult learner.

The point of my reference (deleted) to Rauxmismo was not so much political as linguistic, in that if this were to become the dominant philosophy in the Esperanto community, it logically would open the door to higgled-piggledy development of the language.

After some years you might end up having to learn some arbitrary collocations rather than just using your common sense.

You could argue that it wouldn't happen, but logically and consistently with this abandonment of Esperanto's original purpose, it might well come to pass.

sudanglo:

all I care about is what is or what is not. I don't care what should or shouldn't be

But what is and what isn't in Esperanto has been historically determined by attitudes about what should and shouldn't be and largely continues to be so.

Now it may be profitable pedagogically to, for example, teach what are commonly objects of spekti.

But the general feeling in the community of Esperanto speakers would be that anything can be the object of spekti so long as it makes sense, whereas in the national languages there may be all sorts of restrictions on what verbs can be used with what objects, if you are going to use the language as native speakers do.

The purpose of the other thread was NOT that spekti could only be used with certain words. The purpose was that it is only LIKELY to be used with certain words, therefore the pedagogical purpose that you just mentioned. No one ever said that you couldn't use spekti with other objects, and no one ever suggested teaching some version of Esperanto that says "use spekti only with these words, punkto fino". You're taking a thread about linguistic analysis and turning it into an unrelated political point.

It's like saying "Corpus linguistics and studying word frequency are a waste of time because in Esperanto we can use any word we want, as frequently as we feel like using it!!! How dare anyone tell me that "kaj" is more frequently used than "eŭklida"! I can use "eŭklida" as much as I want to! Therefore corpus linguistics is Raumism and we must fight against it!"

There are two sorts of collocations or common conjunctions of words. Those that tell us about the world. And those that reveal facts about the language.

It is not linguistically interesting that manĝi may be associated foods and trinki with words for drinks such as vino biero teo. Such associations do not tell us anything about Esperanto. In languages that have equivalents of manĝi and trinki we would expect similar associations.

In English however you make soup, you don't cook it. Also you don't eat soup, you have it. These verbs associated with soup may be different (not equivalent) in other languages that have a word for soup.

But in Esperanto kuiri supon and manĝi supon are not necessarily wrong - ie something a spertulo wouldn't say, or would find ridiculous - because logically given the meaning of kuiri and manĝi, you could apply them to soup. Again what is spektebla in Esperanto is determined by the meaning of spekti rather than being determined by collocational considerations.

Why is this so? Because it conflicts with the (traditional) purpose of Esperanto to have it cluttered with unnecessary idiomatic restrictions.

Take away that purpose (that's what Raŭmismo explicitly does) and you theoretically allow the language to develop idiomatically, or at least to wander off in unpredictable directions.

Maybe you don't acknowledge this logical implication of Raŭmismo. But surely it is clear that the point I have been trying to make is not just political.

In any case, Esperanto has always been about language politics right from the early days. Without its defining purpose it is just a plaything for language nuts. You might just as well devote your time to learning Interglossalia, or Klingon.

sudanglo:Take away that purpose (that's what Raŭmismo explicitly does) and you theoretically allow the language to develop idiomatically, or at least to wander off in unpredictable directions.

If you want to shout "Eek, Rausmism, the end is nigh!" just because someone wants to know whether "vidi filmon", "spekti filmon", or "rigardi filmon" is more commonly used, then I guess there's nothing much to say to you about that.

sudanglo:But in Esperanto kuiri supon and manĝi supon are not necessarily wrong - ie something a spertulo wouldn't say, or would find ridiculous - because logically given the meaning of kuiri and manĝi, you could apply them to soup.

Its not Esperanto special. I say in native German same way. (non-native, into English, interlinear translated):

_Was_wollen_wir__morgen______essen?
What__want_we_tommorrow_(to)_eat?
Wir_werden_uns_eine_Suppe_kochen.
We___will___us__ an__soup__cook.
Iss_deine_Suppe___jetzt____endlich_auf!
Eat_your_soup__right_now_finished_up_(of_the_plate)!

sudanglo:Take away that purpose (that's what Raŭmismo explicitly does) and you theoretically allow the language to develop idiomatically, or at least to wander off in unpredictable directions.

So, your criticism is that Raumism propagates more naturalistic language use which is contrary to historical languages use of Esperanto? Those who want to preserve that political purpose better should learn most possible schematic Lojban language which more or less is intented to let communicate humans to machines 'native' with use of machine's language. Esperanto language is already out of the controled test bed environment which an political movement can preserve against naturalistic language use.

sudanglo:In any case, Esperanto has always been about language politics right from the early days. Without its defining purpose it is just a plaything for language nuts. You might just as well devote your time to learning Interglossalia, or Klingon.

That could be understood like people who don't follow Esperanto's once intented political purpose those folks are not worthy to use Esperanto language and represent Esperanto by Heart community.