66
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 May 2024
66 points (95.8% liked)
Asklemmy
42472 readers
1360 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Om mani padme hum.
So do I have it right that gender is mostly neutral? One of the things that kills me about FR (and SP) is the need to clutter my limited brain space with useless gender nonsense.
Esperanto has no grammatical gender, indeed. However, it isn't as gender neutral. For example, the word for "woman" (virino) derives from the word for "man" (viro). Lots of other words referring to females (humans or otherwise) can be derived that way. Examples include:
This is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it helps with the learning of the language by making it easy to derive words from existing ones, but it also makes it easy for someone ascribe sexism in the language. There's also no agreed-upon way to make words gender-neutral. There's a lot of proposals such as listed in this wikipedia article on Esperanto gender reform but I don't think there's been a consensus other than "don't change it!"
Thanks for explaining. So I guess that kind of thing is an artifact of the language being originally designed... what, ~100yrs ago? Still, since the main point is ease of learning and simplicity, maybe this is just something worth putting up with for the time being, no?
Yeah, as far as I've seen, that's the vibe: Esperanto isn't perfect, it can be improved, but it works and changing it would introduce confusion and would make it harder to learn.
I also sense this unease among the Esperanto-speaking community with regards to changing anything in the language. That allowing any one of the proposed changes will lead to a slippery slope of accommodating any and all proposed changes.
And then there's the fact that not many of these changes have gained foothold amongst the community (perhaps due to the aforementioned unease in changing anything about the language).
Thank you for these thoughts & interesting perspective. :-)