|
 |
Pay me to learn Esperanto | ||
 Language Learning Forum : Esperanto |  | |
| Lucas Pentaglot Groupie Switzerland Joined 4964 days ago 85 posts - 130 votes  Speaks: French*, English, German, Italian, Russian Studies: Mandarin | Message 25 of 26 15 November 2010 at 11:59am | IP Logged |
|
@Romanist
I think that esperanto is A LOT MORE than five times easier than french (or any other natural language). Let's examine the three levels of grammar: (1) phonetics I don't know how many phonems have esperanto, but I'm sure they are less phonems than in french (no nasals vowels for example) (2) lexicology - semantics: as a constructed language, semantics of esperanto is extremely easy: there's no problems of synonyms, homonyms etc... - etymology: as a constructed language, etymology of esperanto is extremely easy...the origin of a word is easy to determine: it is always a word in a natural indoeuropéan language! - pronounciation: as a constructed language, pronounciation of esperanto is extremely easy...one letter, one sound! And pronounciation of french is tricky, because there's often a big difference between the way you pronounce a sound and the way you spell it. - orthograph: as a constructed language, orthograph of esperanto is extremely easy...one letter, one sound! Moreover, french orthograph is very tricky... - morphology: as a constructed language, morphology of esperanto is extremely easy...I don't know esperanto, but I'm sure his verbal and noun system is not 5 times, but at least 10 times easier than a natural indoeuropéan language! (3) syntax As a constructed language, prononciation of esperanto is extremely easy: the way you put the words together must be relatively free, and the rules about relation between words must be quite simple. Moreover, it's a artificial language so nobody cares of the way you write or speak...nobody will tell you "your sentence is gramatically correct, but a real esperantist wouldn't say that. To be able to write a text in french like a french would have wrote it, you'll need years of reading (for example everybody notice that English is not my mothertongue because of my "non-native" style)! Taking all of these factors in consideration, I would say that it would take you not five, but TEN times more time to masterize french the way you would masterize esperanto! :) 3 persons have voted this message useful | |
| Enriquee Triglot Groupie United States esperantofre.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5132 days ago 51 posts - 125 votes Speaks: Spanish*, Esperanto, English | Message 26 of 26 18 November 2010 at 12:27am | IP Logged |
|
Time to learn Esperanto compared with other languages.
Some Esperanto speakers say that it takes about 20 % or 10 % of the time needed to learn other languages. I believe the number is lower. People learn languages at very different speeds. And, languages like English and French, (and Chinese, Japanese,) require to learn 2 languages: spoken and written languages. Esperanto, written or spoken is the same language. I started to learn English when I was 5 years old. Then I could read Spanish and my father had some beginner books for English. Short time after I discovered Esperanto, in August 1959, I read a basic Esperanto textbook in about 20 hours within 2 days ... I was "lucky" to fall sick just when the library-borrowed book was at my house. Then I read 3 books in Esperanto with the only help of a dictionary. First book I understood almost nothing, 2nd book, I understood some, 3rd book ... I understood most of it. Then I was very lucky. That October 12th, 2 months from my first contact with Esperanto, there was an Esperanto meeting within 2 kilometers from my house. It lasted 2 days and there were 200+ participants from several cities. The first day was very hard. The second day I met a girl my age, fluent in Esperanto. For more than 4 hours we spoke only in Esperanto. My Esperanto was very slow at the beginning and much faster by the end of the day. Up to then, I had never heard spoken Esperanto. After knowing Esperanto, finally I started to understand English. A couple of years later I moved to New York City. Then, I could understand when reading the NY Times. It took several more years for my ears to adapt to English. Now I can use my three languages, both spoken and written, about the same level, but I feel more comfortable in Esperanto than in English. The proportion of the time I needed to speak Esperanto is in the order of one hundredth of the time needed to reach the same level for spoken English. I was writing Esperanto before finishing the text-book, after less than 2 days (20 hours) after starting to study Esperanto. It is important to notice that my ears needed lots of time to adapt to the sound of English and no time at all for Esperanto. I teach Esperanto by email. Those students that really want to learn, finish the basic course in about 15 hours. Some of them start to write one or two paragraphs in Esperanto with each message. For those that go on to the second course, I write to them only in Esperanto. Most of what they say is also in Esperanto. My experience tells me that most people (people that wants to learn) become able to speak and write Esperanto in about 50 - 100 hours. They make mistakes ... much less mistakes than people that had studied other languages during 10 times that many hours. Some Esperanto speakers complain that takes much longer to speak and write "good Esperanto". It takes much less than to speak and write "good other-language". Many English-native people, after finishing high school and listening to immersion-English during 18 years, cannot write "good English". The goal of a language is not perfection ... but communication. Edited by Enriquee on 18 November 2010 at 12:34am 4 persons have voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
