Antonio Fonseca | Re: [LFN] 1894, Ido, etc. [was: From Thomas Alexander….]

Rio, 25/03/05

E...

Ce ave la patalon con la...? :)

Salute
Antonio

======
>Thomas Alexander wrote (privately):
>
> > I've been looking for information on the reform project of 1894
> > and in the process, I've become curious about what modern
> > reformemuloj think about it. [...]
>
>Would never subscribe to esp-novo, eh?  Ego-surfing, eh?  Oh well,
>greetings in any event.  In response to your questions:
>
>It's been a long time since I read anything about the reform project
>of 1894, and what remains in my memory is more a general negative
>impression than any particular details. I can say that nobody has ever
>been particularly enthusiastic about it as far as I know - you know,
>hey, that was a great set of proposals, we really should go with it, etc.
>Most of what was attractive about it was later incorporated into Ido,
>I think, so there was nothing much left to recommend the original proposal,
>which never impressed me as being very good in the first place - or even
>serious. I would characterize it in the U.S. vernacular as "half-assed":
>Zamenhof, yes, would always have liked to have seen Esperanto brushed up
>and its more egregious faults corrected (read, principally, the diacritics),
>but on the other hand he was compromised by several complicating factors
>that I presumably don't have to lay out for you.
>
>You're reminding me... I was going to say that you would need the bound
>collection of "La Esperantisto" to get the details on the 1984 project,
>but now I'm remembering that someone published it separately at some point,
>in a little brochure that would be cheap or even free. The whole thing
>should be on the Web, now that I think of it - or in one of the volumes
>published by "ludovikito" and presumably still available from the UEA
>book service. Anyway, I never liked what I saw of the 1984 project much,
>and if anything in my reform style seems similar to it that's due more
>to coincidence than to imitation.
>
> > Also, I'm curious about your thoughts on Ido -- yours specifically,
> > but also in general, what the people in your Nova Provo think about it.
>
>"Nova Provo", again, was simply the name of the journal. There was an
>association called Novo, but it merely drifted into the Yahoo chat group
>you're familiar with. The others can say what they like - Ray Bergmann
>is fairly positive about Ido, I think, and took various things from it
>that I in turn took from him - but I can say myself simply that I don't
>like Ido and never have, though one would suppose otherwise from the fact
>that when I had the chance in Spain some years ago I read every issue of
>its journal "Progreso" that had ever been published. To me it's simply
>unattractive, no better than Esperanto in that regard and in a certain
>way worse, though I would be hard put to describe this exactly. I'm a lot
>more attracted by Lingua Franca Nova, which is enjoying a vogue at present -
>though I don't have the time for it either.
>
> > How often do people come up with Esperanto-Ido hybrids and the like.
>
>Not often enough, not seriously enough, and - worst of all - with no
>authority whatsoever. It has been and remains a game for amateurs,
>unfortunately, the same as the traditional Esperanto movement and all
>other interlinguistic endeavors. It should be otherwise, but it isn't.
>
> > Your name came up last fall (2003) when we were staying with
> > a couple in New Hampshire.  (I forgot their names.)
>
>Vermont. Andy and Eva Behrens.
>
> > Apparently you'd stayed there a few years before.  I suspect that would
> > have been the same trip where you were calling me as you were driving
> > down the New York State Thruway.
>
>Yeah. Still sorry I missed you.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Roy McCoy

Antonio Carlos Rodrigues da Fonseca
acrfonseca@...
Cel: 021 9107 2430
  ----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.1 - Release Date: 23/03/2005

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]