Žinutės: 43
Kalba: English
Alkanadi (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 06:25:13
Roch:Well, esperanto could become the let say, the "pivot" language.I agree. You can learn Esperanto easier than other languages. If I wanted to do trade with China, I would find an Esperatist there and pay them to translate from Chinese to Esperanto.
Alkanadi (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 06:36:46
sudanglo (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 10:46:15
erinja:Good luck leaning over to your spouse in bed in the middle of the night, to ask them a question using a machine translator.I think this argument would have had greater force if you had couched it in terms of a one night stand on a business trip abroad.
The probability that someone you marry will not know your own language sufficiently to understand your questions seems to me to be very small. How did she/he understand your marriage proposal in the first place?
Anyway, if the translator is on your mobile phone it doesn't seem that impractical.
But the issue is really the inconvenience of learning Esperanto to the point where you can have intimate conversations compared to the inconvenience of the device.
sudanglo (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 11:11:51
Evildela:I haven't heard that prediction before ... or have I? The problem is translation technology can't guess intent, sarcasm, secondary meanings, etc. However, it doesn't bother me that much as I'm a Raŭmisto anyways.This argument won't work, Evil.
The recipient of the machine translation is a human being and therefore quite capable of interpreting the translation non-literally.
For example, I might say 'Do you think it's too hot in here' meaning 'Would you mind if I opened a window', but in context any non-autistic adult might be capable of catching my drift whatever language this was translated into.
Similarly the sarcasm of 'Oh, great! meaning 'That's terrible' can survive a literal translation.
The issue here is one of cultural differences, possibly leading to misunderstanding, rather than one of the quality of translation. This problem is present theoretically also for Esperanto, though in practice this is somewhat ameliorated by the Esperantist's awareness of not being understood in an international context, which tends to lead too a more literal usage of the language.
PS Don't use the term 'Raŭmisto' too lightly. A fundamental tenet of Raŭmismo is that Esperanto will never be used to solve the Babel problem. Apart from the barrenness and defeatism of this philosophy, the Raŭmistoj are under some sort of delusion that there is an Esperanto culture - the development of which they put as the main task of the Esperantistoj.
A Raŭmist has no good reason to boost the number of speakers from 2 million to a useful 50 million speakers. Their philosophy requires no more speakers that the adherents of Klingon.
sudanglo (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 11:46:47
The Esperantists therefore need to address this issue now.
The only solution I can see is to concentrate of the educational value of Esperanto in our propaganda.
Getting the number of speakers up to a useful level through the back door of promoting its educational value (e.g. getting it into the schools) will of course have the side effect of actually increasing its value as a solution to the Babel problem.
Any direct argument for Esperanto as the world's lingua franca will, if the prediction about machine translation is any way true, be undermined by the quality of that translation, and the convenience of use of whatever physical devices are used to provide those translations.
opalo (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 12:15:53
PS Don't use the term 'Raŭmisto' too lightly. A fundamental tenet of Raŭmismo is that Esperanto will never be used to solve the Babel problem.Fundamental tenet? No. The Manifesto de Raŭmo doesn't make that claim. It can be called pessimistic and a product of its time, but the basic idea is that Esperantists, in the short term, need to make their language into something new and worth learning about for its own sake before they can plausibly advertise it. I think you identify raŭmistoj too exclusively with those promoting the dubious Esperanta Civito and so forth, which looks to me like an example of how running too far away from one sort of cultishness can lead you directly into another.
Evildela (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 12:23:42
sudanglo:A Raŭmist has no good reason to boost the number of speakers from 2 million to a useful 50 million speakers. Their philosophy requires no more speakers that the adherents of Klingon.Raŭmismtoj are fine with people promoting and growing Esperanto. What we care about is building on the culture of Esperanto. That's what I do, actively work on it's culture. I let others do the promotion because realistically without a culture Esperanto wouldn't have lived this long.
Don1980 (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 12:40:06
sudanglo:Well, even human quality translations by humans vary. If this prediction turns out to be true, I think that many more people will be expected to deal in multiple languages. Doing this by machine will cause enough confusion and be such a pain, that Esperanto will be boosted, not impeded.
By 2026 we will have ubiquitous human-quality translation among all the European Languages.
sudanglo (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 14:03:31
Evildela:Quote from the manifesto from the Wikipage - section Kritiko de Praceloj:sudanglo:A Raŭmist has no good reason to boost the number of speakers from 2 million to a useful 50 million speakers. Their philosophy requires no more speakers that the adherents of Klingon.Raŭmismtoj are fine with people promoting and growing Esperanto. What we care about is building on the culture of Esperanto...
la oficialigo de Esperanto estas nek verŝajna nek esenca - Note: nek esenca
Also nowhere in the section Niaj Celoj is there any talk of increasing the number of speakers so that its pracelo can be realised.
Ni celas disvastigi Esperanton por ... realigi ĝiajn pozitivajn valorojn
But those don't include providing a practical lingua franca for the world - which, of course, means massively increasing the number of speakers.
Evil, you can call yourself a Rauxmisto if you want to, but it means labelling yourself as having given up on the raison d'être of Esperanto. From what I've seen of your video's, I don't think you are one.
As regards Esperanto having a culture, well that doesn't seem to me a good idea. It is essentially a language for intercultural use, and we arguing against English's suitability (that's not the only ground) because it is too culturally saturated.
Esperanto is for everyone not just those who subscribe to some wishy-washy notion of an international culture. Esperanto is also for all those Francoj who recently voted National Front.
I noted with interest a recent article entitled Esperanto ne apartenas al la Esperantistoj in UEA's magazine Esperanto.
Vestitor (Rodyti profilį) 2015 m. gruodis 13 d. 14:32:21
Evildela:It can seem that Raŭmistoj are so busy polishing their tools nothing gets done. Esperanto 'culture' is a bit of a joke; at least the one promoted by Raŭmists. The wider world either knows nothing about it, or periodically peers in to laugh at the crackpots milling about in a subculture. It clearly appeals to people who enjoy being part of a 'special minority'.sudanglo:A Raŭmist has no good reason to boost the number of speakers from 2 million to a useful 50 million speakers. Their philosophy requires no more speakers that the adherents of Klingon.Raŭmismtoj are fine with people promoting and growing Esperanto. What we care about is building on the culture of Esperanto. That's what I do, actively work on it's culture. I let others do the promotion because realistically without a culture Esperanto wouldn't have lived this long.
What is galling is that raŭmists consider themselves active realists, while people trying to promote Esperanto for what it was conceived to be: an international auxiliary language, are derided as the hopeless idealists.
Sudanglo is right, it is a philosophy of defeatism.