bartlett22183:Once again, you must please be aware that this website and many other online fora are by no means whatever the sum total of users of Esperanto (or any other usable constructed international auxiliary language, for that matter). Any results you might conclude from responses here may be badly statistically skewed and not representative. There are many, many users of auxiliary languages who are not active online. Many people have, unfortunately, come to the idea that "the internet" is "all the world." Not at all.

That's as may be, but the responses here, on other websites and in books are more-or-less the same.

Where else has this question been asked but online?

bartlett22183:Once again, you must please be aware that this website and many other online fora are by no means whatever the sum total of users of Esperanto (or any other usable constructed international auxiliary language, for that matter). Any results you might conclude from responses here may be badly statistically skewed and not representative. There are many, many users of auxiliary languages who are not active online. Many people have, unfortunately, come to the idea that "the internet" is "all the world." Not at all.

Don't worry, I understand this. All of these responses are completely valid within my investigation as I was looking for opinions rather than statistical fact to reference in forming my own argument. I have already reference in my work that these opinions may not be representative of all Esperanto speakers. With the time I have been given, this is the best option I have for talking to and getting the opinions of Esperanto speakers of varied levels. I appreciate your warning, but I have already acknowledged all of this. Thank you for your input!

I'd like to jump in and recommend a couple of books: first, "Bridge of Words", by Esther SCHOR -- I'm actually not done with it yet, but so far, it's really very good and answers a lot of the questions you're asking (plus provides a grounding in the history of the language and the various movements that have used -- or coopted, in some cases -- it).

Another good one is Arika OKRENT's "In the Land of Invented Languages". It covers more than Esperanto (including Klingon) and talks about the various reasons why, for example, Esperanto has been much more successful than other auxlangs.

If you can read Esperanto, "La Danĝera Lingvo" by Ulrich LINS is a pretty chilling account of how and why the Esperanto movements in Russia, Germany (and Japan, too) were ruthlessly suppressed.

Lastly, if you do put together a survey, I highly recommend that you post the link not just here, but also hit up the Esperanto groups on Facebook (if you have access).

Bonan ŝancon al via projekto!

What separates Esperanto from other constructed languages such as Interlingua and Ido (a variation of Esperanto)?


This answers your first and last question.
Interlingua ,volapük etc were created only for logic and to facilitate international communication between nations Esperanto was created with an almost religious goal of brotherhood in mind that more peopled find appealing.

Do you consider Esperanto an easy alternative language to learn? If so, why?

Yes. After just nine months of Esperanto I'm 90% fluent and after three years of Spanish I'm only about 20% fluent.

To what extent do you believe that Esperanto has achieved its original aims? Have any of these aims altered in recent years?


The two main goals of Esperanto as I understand are 1: to encourage brotherhood amongst humankind as a whole and 2: encourage nations to get along. The first goal is achieved by every esperantist who greets with love those of his/her country, race,ethnicity, or tribe ordinarily hate. The second will not be achieved because governments tend to not get along.

There are many other invented languages (e.g Klingon, Dothraki, Pig Latin), why don't these qualify as possible alternative languages when they each have an extensive vocabulary, grammar rules and other important aspects of language?


Very few other conlangs were created with the goal of easy international communication. Since people know or think Navi is only for giant blue people to speak they normally leave it to giant blue people to do the speaking.Knowing Esperanto is for all people to speak regardless of their planet of origin will be more likely to at least try to learn it. Klingon like many well known conlangs exists as a fantasy language meant to add appeal to a fictional world. Pig Latin is an old code language that is to easy to decode and nowadays is seen as rather silly.

"Very few other conlangs were created with the goal of easy international communication." Well, certainly there are many, many constructed languages created for various reasons, not necessarily intended as international auxiliary languages. However, some of them have been produced specifically with the goal of improved international communication. Esperanto is not the only one. It just happens to be the one which has lasted longest so far with the most users. In the beginning, I found IALA Interlingua "easier" to read than Esperanto, for example. (I myself have never had the opportunity to speak either.)

Orthographically Interlingua is far more haphazard than Esperanto. In many ways it looks and feels like Italian and like Spanish and French and Latin all at once. That may seem handy for educated people with a familiarity with those languages, but I don't think someone coming to Interlingua "cold" as it were, would feel the same benefit.

It also carries over that old problem of uncertainty, of unspecified pronunciation of certain letters and constructions. What's the point of double consonants if they are not sounded? The 'c' is not a fixed sound. The possibility of written accuracy across the board is at risk.

I feel that Esperanto overcomes those problems. People may complain about the diacritics, but I am glad to be 100% certain that c and ĉ are different sounds and to know how they sound. The use of K rather the Qu also feels more solid.

"There are many other invented languages (e.g Klingon, Dothraki, Pig Latin), why don't these qualify as possible alternative languages when they each have an extensive vocabulary, grammar rules and other important aspects of language?"

Cxar ili ne estas IAL-oj... okej.

StranguloGabeto:"There are many other invented languages (e.g Klingon, Dothraki, Pig Latin), why don't these qualify as possible alternative languages when they each have an extensive vocabulary, grammar rules and other important aspects of language?"

Cxar ili ne estas IAL-oj... okej.

Simply because no-one speaks them. Klingon is not a serious contender. It is deliberately difficult and a toy for people who are excited by it.