Beck 123. So it remains to be explained why this language, with no real rules, has caught on like wildfire; and esperanto languishes on the shelf. I offer that this language serves our individual needs and - most importantly - is created by its users, as are all viable languages.
Jackie. One of my fellow attendees asked the guy what I thought was an interesting question: that, if Esperanto did become really widely used spoken, over a period of at least one whole generation, wouldn't it be likely that different pronunciations and then dialects would develop?
(So again, my question of why bother to keep promoting it?)
Esperanto was created as a language to serve an ideology. A neutral language to serve as a 'bridge' between all different peoples. Almost like a sect. A humanitarian one.
Quote from a Dutch article:
" This bridge-function shows itself a.o. in the international travel network of Eperantists with the title
Pasporta Servo. This network allows Esperanto speakers to travel easy and at low costs to visit other Esperanto speakers all over the world. This gives a person who speaks Esp. the opportunity to learn the culture and habits throught meeting directly with fellow idealists."
As an idea it is certainly well meant, but as a language this is where it maybe should limit itself to. What's the use of translating Shakespeare, Chaucer, Tolstoy, any great litterature to Esperanto, when all those great writers are translated into practically all languages of the world?
