The Contemporary Esperanto Speech Community!
!
Auteur: Adelina Solis!
!
Date MS: dix-02-2012!
!
Date FL: 01-01-2013
!
Numéro FL: FL-0000dix-00
!
Citation: Solis, Adelina. 2012. “The Contemporary
Esperanto Speech Community.”
FL-0000dix-00, Fiat Lingua,
!
droits d'auteur: © 2012 Adelina Solis. Ce travail est sous licence
sous une attribution Creative Commons-
Non Commercial-Pas de Dérivés 3.0 Licence non portée.!
!
!
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
!
Fiat Lingua est produit et maintenu par la Language Creation Society (LCS). Pour plus d'informations
à propos du LCS, visitez http://www.conlang.org/
The Contemporary Esperanto Speech Community
par
Adelina Mariflor Solís Montúfar
1
Table des matières
Chapitre 1: Introduction
1.1 Definitions
1.2 Political support for a universal language
1.3 A brief history of language invention
1.4 A brief history of Esperanto
1.5 The construction, structure, and dissemination of Esperanto
1.6 Esperanto and the culture question
1.7 Research Methods
Chapitre 2: Who Speaks Esperanto?
2.1 Number and distribution of speakers
2.2 Gender distribution
chapitre 3: The Esperanto Speech Community
3.1 Terminology and definitions
3.2 Norms and Ideologies
3.3 Approach to language
Chapitre 4: Why Esperanto
4.1 Ideology-based reasons to speak Esperanto
4.2 Practical attractions to Esperanto
4.3 More than friendship
4.4 The congress effect
4.5 Esperanto for the blind
4.6 Unexpected benefits
Chapitre 5: Esperantist Objectives
5.1 Attracting new speakers
5.2 Teaching Esperanto
Chapitre 6: Conclusion
Ouvrages cités
3
4
5
9
14
17
24
29
34
34
47
58
58
65
70
81
83
86
94
95
100
102
103
103
107
116
121
2
Chapitre 1:
Introduction
When we think about invented languages, we may think of childhood games.
Children often generate a secret language to keep foes or adults from understanding,
but this childhood foray is more often a short-lived code based on the language
already spoken by all parties, rather than a true new language. We might also think of
hubris and high ideals and failure: history is littered with the tomes of constructed
languages that failed to attain the popularity their creators desired. Toutefois, as a
nineteen year old in a divided city, Ludwik Zamenhof did create a new language, un
that he hoped would bring the people of the world together on an equal plane. Il
would break down linguistic barriers between people, and pave a path towards peace.
He was so impacted by the language-based social division around him that, le long de
with his language, which he released in 1887 under the pseudonym of Dr. Esperanto –
from the word in his invented language for ‘one who hopes’ – he created an ideology
of equality and brotherhood that he hoped all of his followers would embrace.
3
1.1 Definitions
D'abord, let us set forth some terminology. A ‘universal language’, parfois
also called ‘global’, ‘world’, or ‘international’, is one that is (intended to be) spoken
by every person on earth. There have been many attempts to designate, développer,
construct, or implement a language as a universal language. Proposed universal
languages usually fall within one of five approaches. The first is to use a pre-existing
natural language1, usually a language with political clout or many speakers, or the
native language of whoever is making the argument for its implementation. Le
deuxième:
To use two or more natural languages, either as zonal tongues to serve certain
areas of the earth, which would not give us an international language, mais un
series of geographically separated international languages; or to be learned
bilingually or trilingually by all the peoples of the earth (Pei 1958: 96).
The third approach is to modify a natural language and output something more
standardized and easier to learn. Modifications may range from limiting the lexicon,
making the spelling phonetic, or simplifying the grammar. Fourthly, to combine
langues naturelles: “the mixture is sometimes simple, as when it is suggested that one
language be spoken without change, but be written with the script of another tongue”
(Pei 1958: 96). Franco-Venetian or pidgins are examples of this fourth class, but are
complex fusions of phonologies, grammars, and vocabularies.
Last and most numerous are the fully constructed tongues, which may come
close to the modified national language or the mixed language, or may utterly
depart from the natural tongues … these constructed tongues usually reveal a
blend of many natural languages combined with arbitrary features of grammar
and word-building (Pei 1958: 96).
1 A ‘natural language’ is defined in contrast to a constructed language. A similar term is ‘national
langue,’ but some natural languages are not spoken by an entire nation, or do not have governmental
backing, so the latter term is insufficiently inclusive.
4
Languages in the third through fifth classes are commonly referred to as constructed
languages2. Other terms include planned, artificiel, or invented languages, as the
languages come into existence through the work of a particular person, who either
completely fabricates language or knits together preexisting language elements
according to his or her aesthetic. In this paper, the terms ‘universal language’ and
‘constructed language’ will be used3 except when quoting an author with a different
preferred term. It is important to note that a language’s aim to become universal is not
necessarily to be at the expense of other languages. When this distinction is especially
important, the term ‘auxiliary language’ will be used.
1.2 Political support for a universal language
Enabling universal understanding has been a goal pursued by many, be they
language inventors, economists, or those in the political sphere. While language
inventors have motivations ranging from personal fame to facilitating trade or world
paix, those who support constructed languages have their own reasons to do so.
Political climate has often served as a push for a global language, be it natural or
constructed. Mario Pei explores this facet of universal language movements in his
2 For more on the significance and connotations of this and other terms, see Detlev Blanke’s, “The
Term ‘Planned Language’”.
3 Blanke concludes that ‘international language’ is the most appropriate term, but I feel that to call a
language ‘international’ does not convey the full scope of intended use. If a language were used in two
des pays, it would still be international. Esperanto is intended to be used in all nations, therefore I
choose to call it and any other language with similar intent ‘universal.’
Blanke also concludes that ‘planned language’ is the most accurate or appropriate term but, for the
purposes of this paper, I disagree. I wish to emphasize the role of the creator. One option would be to
use the term ‘invented language,’ but I find that the word ‘invented’ obscures the sustained efforts of
the language creator. Plutôt, ‘constructed language’ best conveys both the presence of a creator and
the process of creation, or construction.
5
biased – if not outright propagandistic – book, One Language for the World. In the
chapter titled, ‘What a world language will do for us’, Pei uses a rhetoric common
among those advocating the adoption and implementation of a global language:
A world language for the future is for a future world of peace and
international cooperation, in which communications and the interchange of
ideas will have their fullest development. By itself, the world language can
never bring about such a world. But it can effectively aid in bringing it about,
through the removal of linguistic and even, to some extent, of ideological
malentendus, and through the creation of a healthy atmosphere wherein
men regard one another as fellow human beings (1958: 50-51).
He waxes on:
Short of a foolproof system for preventing war and ensuring perpetual peace,
coupled with freedom for the individual, the adoption of an international
language is the greatest gift with which we could collectively endow our
children and their descendants (Pei 1958: 60).
Pei’s opinion is clear, but what is his evidence? He asserts that the existence of a
universal language would enable a remarkably rapid transmission of information,
disseminated around the world in a single language rather than going through
countless tedious translations. He discusses how much easier life would be for
tourists and business travelers, who would be able to communicate with more than a
guidebook’s selection of phrases. Pei describes the time and effort required to learn
just one language, and how this investment often resembles a form of academic
roulette, to attempt to identify which people and therefore which language might
come into power and become worthwhile to study (1958: 21-23). En outre,
writing in 1958, six decades away from our present, Pei sees the pressing effects of
globalization or a shrinking world on our communicative needs (1958: 35).
After thoroughly addressing the present need for a universal language, Pei
considers past attempted solutions and then looks to future potential resolutions. Dans
6
his discussion of past attempts, Pei looks at Esperanto, which he calls “probably the
most famous and successful of all constructed languages” (1958: 161). At the time of
Pei’s writing, Esperanto was permitted to be “used internationally in telegrams, le long de
with Latin," et, “in Gallup polls conducted in minor European countries, Esperanto
[turned] out to be the second choice for an international tongue, with English as the
first choice” (1958: 163). Pei mentions those who criticize Esperanto for not being
sufficiently universal, especially because of an excess of Germanic roots that do not
correlate to any other languages, but Pei also comments on its strengths. By “adopting
roots from different sources to distinguish between meanings of what is, even in
langues naturelles, the same word: piedo, par exemple, is ‘foot’ as a part of the body,
but futo is ‘foot’ as a measure,” Esperanto “shows the beginnings of a system that
may prove to be the solution of its own troubles” (Pei 1958: 164). Pei does not
directly state it, but this is a clear reference to those in centuries past who sought a
logical language, free of the confusion of homonyms and the like.
Daniele Archibugi also addresses political issues relevant to linguistic
diversity in a 2005 article titled: The Language of Democracy: Vernacular or
Esperanto? A Comparison between the Multiculturalist and Cosmopolitan
Points de vue. He takes on Will Kymlicka’s assertion that “democratic politics is
politics in the vernacular,” and the complications that arise from this premise within
multilingual communities. While his approach is more analytical than persuasive,
Archibugi echoes some of Pei’s points regarding the reasons some kind of
overarching shared language would be beneficial.
The resurgence of the language problem in our era is the result of two
fundamental contemporary historical processes. The first has to do with the
7
increased interdependence between distinct communities… State political
communities have become increasingly permeable to trade flows, migrations,
mixed marriages, and tourism. The second phenomenon has to do with the
increased importance of individual rights, which has emerged both in a
broadening of rights in democratic states and in an increase in the number of
states in which democracy is in force (Archibugi 2005: 539).
He also provides specific figures indicating the problem – or at the very least, le
strain – caused by linguistic diversity. “Of the nearly 5,000 employees of the
European Parliament, 340 are translators and 238 are interpreters,” and as more
countries vie for membership, this number could as much as double (Archibugi 2005:
551). En outre:
As official languages have increased, so the translation procedure has grown
more complex: there are currently 20 x 19 = 380 possible language
communications (‘into’ and ‘from’), and finding interpreters capable of
translating, par exemple, from Portuguese to Slovak or Lithuanian to Maltese
and vice versa is often impossible, hence the recourse to ‘double translations’
(2005: 551).
Like many who address approaches to cross-linguistic communication, Archibugi
touches on the relevance of Esperanto. Toutefois, Archibugi views it as a noble but
failed attempt, not really a feasible option for the future. He concludes his paper
avec, “rather than to choose today between the vernacular and Esperanto, it might be
more useful to support investment in education to allow individuals to improve their
language skills” (Archibugi 2005: 553). Pei, en revanche, ends his book with
instructions to the reader on how to move forward, closing emphatically with,
“wherever you are, if you believe in one language for the world, let your government,
the UN, and UNESCO know it!” (1958: 251). Both agree that linguistic diversity
makes life, international relations, intranational understanding, and political
representation difficult, and is an issue that needs to be addressed.
8
1.3 A brief history of language invention
Others also found problems with the state of world languages, and they took
in into their own hands to invent a language that would address the issues perceived.
For some, like John Wilkins, taking after George Dalgarno (Okrent 2009: 45-50), le
problem with language was its vagueness. Pour les autres, like Ludwik Zamenhof, le
problem was that languages were not culturally transcendent. It may be asked, étaient
these men linguists? Scholars? Most language inventors were educated, but they were
philosophers, nuns, feminists, mathematicians, and everything in between (Okrent
2009). Zamenhof was an optometrist with a good education and a big dream. Quoi
connects all of these people was the seed of an idea that inevitably sprouts roots
potent enough to consume whoever begins to water it.
The annals of history reveal that the impetus to invent languages has been
around nearly as long as human language itself, though the motivations vary and
overlap. In her popular history, Au pays des langues inventées, Arika Okrent
explores the histories of select languages from five hundred languages created over
nine hundred years, these five hundred presumably being ones among many more
whose documentation disappeared over the centuries. She describes the urge to invent
and redesign as, “at least as old and persistent as the urge to complain about
language” (Okrent 2009: 11). Several language inventors cited the noble cause of
fixing the problems with current language. Language is vague, ambiguous, redundant,
full of exceptions, and still leaves us unable to find the words we want. En bref,
language is inefficient. Philosophers yearned for a perfect, unambiguous, logical
9
language that would unfetter the mind from the effects of imperfect language, freeing
humans to ponder the mysteries of existence at a higher level. This impetus to
systematize language is not as unfounded as it may seem. Up until the seventeenth
siècle, mathematicians represented relationships in a haze of words. Le
Pythagorean theorem, par exemple, was rendered by Sir Thomas Urquhart of
Cromarty in the mid 1600s as:
The multiplying of the middle termes [sic] (which is nothing else but the
squaring of the comprehending sides of the prime rectangular) affords two
products, equall [sic] to the oblongs made of the great subtendent, and his
respective segments, the aggregate whereof, by equation, is the same with the
square of the chief subtendent, or hypotenusa (qtd in Okrent 2009: 31).
When this muddle was replaced with symbols and operators and equations,
relationships revealed themselves, comparisons became much more possible, and best
of all the new system was independent from spoken language and therefore
universally understandable. With such clarity and simplicity came innovation and
rapid progress; calculus and physics were developed. Ainsi, if a systematization of
mathematics could clear the haze and reveal so much that had been obscured by the
murk of words, it stood to reason that a systematization of language would yield
similarly profound results.
After working with scholar and language inventor George Dalgarno and
having his suggestions turned down, John Wilkins of London spent over a decade
working on his own attempt at one such pure language. He named it simply,
Philosophical Language, and described it as being “free from the ambiguity and
imprecision that afflicted natural languages. It would directly represent concepts; il
would reveal the truth” (Okrent 2009: 24). He intended to catalogue the universe, À
dix
reduce everything to its essence under an elaborate system of classification. He had
an expansive tree, an Aristotelian hierarchy, that branched out into forty categories,
each with its own subsequent tree. Concepts were organized by meaning, depuis
general to specific. To get to ‘Beasts’, the node number twenty-eight of the forty, un
would have to correctly navigate down the tree as follows: Special (not general) >
creature (not Creator) > distributively (not collectively) > substances (not accident) >
animate (not inanimate) > species (not parts) > sensitive (not vegetative) >
sanguineous (not Exsanguineous) > Beasts. Clairement, Wilkins’ system was not
particularly simple, albeit perhaps remarkably comprehensive, nor was it as intuitive
as he hoped.
Entertaining was a bodily action, but shitting was a motion – so was playing
dé. While things as different as irony and semicolon were grouped together
(under discourse > elements), things as similar as milk and butter were placed
miles apart (milk with the other bodily fluids in “Parts, Générales,” and butter
with the other foodstuffs in “Provisions”) (Okrent 2009: 58).
One thing was to find the location of a concept in the tree, but still another was to find
the desired meaning of one word with many concepts. Wilkins provided an index for
English words, but the word ‘clear’ had twenty-five options. “Do you mean ‘not
mingled with another’? Then see ‘simple.’ Do you mean ‘visible’? Then see ‘right,'
‘transparent,’ or ‘unspotted.’ Do you mean ‘as refers to men’? Then see ‘candid’…”
(Okrent 2009: 60), and on and on. Wilkins’ language required absolute certainty of
intended meaning and eradicated redundancy by grouping synonyms together at the
tree’s endpoints. Alors, the endpoints were denoted by a ‘word’ constructed from
information indicating the location of the word within the tree. Toutefois, one version
of ‘clear’ expanded to the meaning of its concept, transforms it into “a transcendental
11
relation of action belonging to single things pertaining to the knowledge of things, comme
regards the causing to be known, being the opposite of seeming” (Okrent 2009: 64).
Even with the benefit of exactitude in intended expression, to construct a sentence
with its fully expanded true meaning yields an incomprehensible quagmire, nothing
near the clarifying simplicity yielded in mathematical systematization. Though it
initially gained favor with the king and was slated to be translated into Latin,
Wilkins’ oeuvre, like so many before it, fell into obscurity, never attaining the
intellectually revolutionizing effects of which Wilkins dreamt.
Wilkins was an exception in his time, not because of his linguistic endeavors,
but because of their profundity. In the age of reason, it seemed as though every
gentleman had his own sketch of a constructed language, if only because it was in
vogue and good for the ego. This gentlemanly dabbling, cependant, rarely resulted in
much more than a flighty lexicon at best. Sir Thomas Urquhart of Cromarty described
his language, Logopandecteision, whose name literally means “gold out of dung,” as
“a most exquisite jewel, more precious than a diamond inchased in gold, the like
whereof was never seen in any age,” but he had more praise for what his language
was allegedly capable of than details about how exactly it would do it (Okrent 2009:
27-28). In regards to this array of efforts, Mario Pei asserts:
The main contribution of the seventeenth century to the solution of the
international language question is fundamentally that it called attention to the
problem and established a principle which the interlinguists of future centuries
would make use of, the principle of departing from the illogicity of the natural
langues (1958: 90-91).
It may be more appropriate to assert that the play in logical language construction
bore negligible fruit, except that it suggested a possible path for future peoples
12
frustrated by the absence of a global language. They could look beyond the
implementation of a natural language, and explore constructed languages with
systematized regularity, as was the case with Esperanto, a planned language that
found considerable success within the limited scope of success enjoyed by planned
languages at large, which I will later discuss.
Other creative minds in more recent years have produced fictional languages
to more fully develop fantasy worlds. J. R. R. Tolkien, though known for his book
série, The Lord of the Rings, purportedly created his expansive mythology to create a
world for his languages, and not the other way around (Okrent 2009: 283). Il a dit,
“nobody believes me when I say that my long book is an attempt to create a world in
which a form of language agreeable to my personal aesthetic might seem real. But it
is true” (Okrent 2009: 283). Whatever the motivation for people to undergo the
remarkable task of developing a constructed language – ostensibly a much more
involved task than perceived when the inventors began, few to no languages can be
said to have found the popularity their creators hoped. A handful of these languages
have found a sustained following or had a brief period of popularity. Klingon and
Na’avi, two languages created for Hollywood characters, have yielded an invested
population that often urges the creator to take the language far beyond his original
intent or expectation, forming groups on the Internet that dissect language samples to
codify the grammar and phonology. Toutefois, these languages represent an
anomalous rationale and outcome.
The Internet now serves as a network for the modern equivalent of
seventeenth-century gentleman dabblers. Okrent describes the growing number of
13
online forums for ‘artlang’4 or ‘conlang’5. Ici, language enthusiasts can get
feedback on their creations. Comme toujours, the impetus behind conlanging comes in
many forms:
Toki Pona, a language of simple syllables that uses only positive words, est
intended to promote positive thinking; … Brithenig was designed as “the
language of an alternate history, being the Romance language that might have
evolved if Latin speakers had displaced Celtic speakers in Britain. … The
urge to push features to their limits is also found in languages like Aeo, qui
uses only vowels, et (the self-describing) AllNoun (Okrent 2009: 288).
The contemporary inventors Okrent describes seem to have mostly self-indulgent
motivations, not seeking to right some linguistic wrong or create something practical.
They want to play with language, and test the limits of what constitutes a language.
Whether they be inspired by a ‘what if’ world or the idiosyncrasies found in natural
langues, the languages that populate these forums indicate that perhaps a lesson has
been learned from the slew of failed historic attempts to resolve world problems via
language invention.
1.4 A brief history of Esperanto
In the midst of this history of language invention, peppered with failure and
salted with personal interest, Esperanto emerged. In 1887, under the name of Dr.
Esperanto, Ludwik Zamenhof published the guide to his language, now known as
Esperanto, but its origins were much earlier. Ludwik Zamenhof began inventing his
language as a teen in culturally and linguistically divided Bialystok, now in Poland,
4 Art language
5 Constructed language
14
where Russians, Poles, Allemands, Jews, and others coexisted in space but not in spirit.
He wrote in his journal:
In that city, more than anywhere, a sensitive person might feel the heavy
sadness of the diversity of languages and become convinced at every step that
it is the only, or at least primary force which divides the human family into
enemy parts. … I was taught that all men were brothers, while at the same
time everything I saw in the street made me feel that men as such did not
exister: only Russians, Poles, Allemands, Jews and so forth. … I kept telling
myself that when I was grown up I would certainly destroy this evil (qtd in
Okrent 2009: 94, 95).
Home life taught him Russian, Yiddish, and Hebrew; Polish and perhaps Lithuanian
he learned on the street; Latin, grec, French, and German, he learned in school.
Toutefois, this multilingualism served as a further reminder of division that
surrounded him. He wrote:
No one can feel the misery of barriers among people as strongly as a ghetto
Jew. No one can feel the need for a language free of a sense of nationality as
strongly as the Jew who is obliged to pray to God in a language long dead,
receives his upbringing and education in the language of a people that rejects
him, and has fellow-sufferers throughout the world with whom he cannot
communiquer (qtd in Janton 1993: 24).
Of the myriad language inventors before him, Zamenhof’s experiences may be said to
have given him the noblest intentions and the most profound connection to the cause
of universal language.
He was not an ivory-tower linguist, out of touch with the concrete problems
arising from, and expressed by, language differences… he saw the creation of
an international language as simply a first step toward a more general goal of
peace… directed at all those who suffered or were oppressed by language
discrimination (Janton 1993: 25).
Par conséquent, the nobility of his intentions went beyond the creation of a language.
In his conception, the practice of Esperanto was to be bound to an ideology of
respect, one that would cultivate the fraternity Zamenhof aspired to inspire between
15
all humankind. Zamenhof realized that conflict was not just about language; il
stemmed from religion, class, and capital. It stemmed from power. This was part of
why he felt that his language was better suited to being a language of the world than
some other natural language. The difficulty of natural languages is such that only
those with leisure and financial resource can take up the task of learning one,
resulting only in “an international language for the higher social classes”, not really a
universal language at all (Zamenhof, qtd in Janton 1993:29). Plutôt, with Esperanto,
“everyone, not just the intelligent and the rich, but all spheres of human society, même
the poorest and least educated of villagers, would be able to master it within a few
months” (qtd in Janton 1993: 29). But Zamenhof’s aspirations went beyond universal
linguistic understanding. He wrote to Alfred Michaux:
My work for Esperanto is only part of this idea. I never stop thinking and
dreaming of the other part, … This plan (which I call “Hillelism”) involves
the creation of a moral bridge by which to unify in brotherhood all peoples
and religions, without creating any newly formulated dogmas and without the
need for any people to throw out their traditional religions. My plan involves
creating the kind of religious union that would gather together all existing
religions in peace and into peace (qtd in Janton 1993: 31).
Encore, as with the intended paradigm for the use of Esperanto, he focuses not on
replacing existing beliefs, but on creating a common ground. Though Hillelism,
which was later renamed homaranismo, was sometimes called a religion, it was more
about generating “a ‘neutrally human’ doctrine … toward the common aspirations of
all people. It sought to put the concept of humanity above those of nation, ethnic
groupe, race, class, and religion” (Janton 1993: 32). Zamenhof described it as a means
of “communicating with people of all languages and religions on a basis that is
neutrally human, on principles of common brotherhood, equality and justice” (qtd in
16
Janton 1993: 31). Toujours, this second column of Esperantism, which could in fact be the
central one, as the ideologies that it puts forth are the ideologies that led to the
creation of the language, were often downplayed so as not to make Esperanto the
language too political or controversial. “His ideals, particularly his views on religious
ecumenism, were at odds with many of the more practical and down-to-earth
bourgeois commercial types who adopted his language” (Tonkin 2008: 4), et ainsi
Esperanto was presented as a practical tool with “an optional yet fundamental
philosophy” (Janton 1993: 35). Toujours, Zamenhof knew that those who expressed
passionate commitment found their passion in the ideals of it, not in the practicality of
il (Janton 1993: 35).
1.5 The construction, structure, and dissemination of
Esperanto
Unlike other language inventors, who clung to the rules of their language,
Zamenhof released his sixteen rules of grammar and welcomed innovation within the
framework. He did not seek to micromanage others’ attempts to combine his roots to
produce more words and expand his original lexicon. After 1889, by which point
Zamenhof had published two books on Esperanto as well as a supplementary third
publication, “from [ce] point on, he considered the language not as his own property
but as belonging to everyone. Its development would depend on all friends of the
‘sacred idea’” (Janton 1993: 27). De plus, “he submitted proposals for reform to the
Esperantists, accepted their verdict, and always regarded himself a simple user of
Esperanto among all the others” (Janton 1993: 30).
17
He freely submitted the language to the criticism of his correspondents and to
the readers of La Esperantisto, the earliest Esperanto magazine. … its articles
examined various modifications and reforms in the language, some of which –
including the suppression of certain consonants, abandonment of the
accusative ending and adjectival agreement, and modification of certain
suffixes – show that Zamenhof was willing to depart radically from his
original conception (1993: 41, 42).
Toujours, Zamenhof wanted to protect his language from arbitrary change, and a language
whose grammar was under constant revision would prove difficult to learn. En effet,
the failure of Volapük6, a similar language movement that preceded Esperanto by
eight years, demonstrated the perils of incessant revision (Janton 1993: 42 and Jordan
1997: 41). The downfall of Volapük redirected enthusiasts to Esperanto, and these
new members boosted its numbers but brought with them their zeal for language
revision. In 1894, the defected Volapükists contributed to a rising pressure for reform
of Esperanto, but when Zamenhof submitted a list of proposed reforms to be voted on
by readers of La Esperantisto, the majority of the votes opposed the reforms (Jordan
1997: 42, 43). The first international Esperanto congress in 1905 designated
Zamenhof’s publication, the Fundamento de Esperanto, “which perpetuated the
language in its 1887 form,” as the official model of the language (Jordan 1997: 43
and Janton 1993: 42). Henceforth, the language’s rules were to be held constant.
Ici, I will reproduce the famous ‘Sixteen Rules’ of Esperanto, as presented
in Pierre Janton’s Esperanto: Langue, Littérature, and Community7:
1. There is no indefinite, and only one definite article, la, for all genders,
Nombres, and cases.
2. Nouns are formed by adding –o to the root. For the plural, -j must be
added to the singular. There are two cases: the nominative and the
6 For more on the history of Volapük, see Bernard Golden’s “Conservation of the Heritage of
Volapük.”
7 For an analysis of Esperanto linguistics see Janton’s Chapter 3: “The Language”.
18
objective (accusatif). The root with the added –o is the nominative, le
objective adds an –n after the –o. Other cases are formed by prepositions.
3. Adjectives are formed by adding –a to the root. The numbers and cases are
the same as in nouns. The comparative degree is formed by prefixing pli
‘more’; the superlative by plej ‘most’. ‘Than’ is rendered by ol.
4. The cardinal numerals do not change their forms for the different cases.
Ils sont: unu, du, tri, kvar, kvin, ses, sep, ok, naŭ, dek, cent, mil. The tens
and hundreds are formed by simple junction of the numerals. Ordinals are
formed by adding the adjectival –a to the cardinals. Multiplicatives add
the suffix –obl; fractionals add the suffix –on; collective numerals add –
op; for distributives the word po is used. The numerals can also be used as
nouns or adverbs, with the appropriate endings.
5. The personal pronouns are: mi, vi, li, ŝi, ĝi (for inanimate objects and
animaux), et (reflexive), Ni, vi, ili, oni (indéfini). Possessive pronouns are
formed by suffixing the adjectival termination. The declension of the
pronouns is identical with that of the nouns.
6. The verb does not change its form for numbers or persons. The present
tense ends in –as, the past in –is, the future in –os, the conditional in –us,
the imperative in –u, the infinitive in –i. Active participles, both adjectival
and adverbial are formed by adding, in the present, -ant-, in the past -int-,
and in the future -ont-. The passive forms are, respectivement, -at-, -it-, and –
ot-. All forms of the passive are rendered by the respective forms of the
verb esti (to be) and the passive participle of the required verb. Le
preposition used is de.
7. Adverbs are formed by adding –e to the root. The degrees of comparison
are the same as in adjectives.
8. All prepositions take the nominative case.
9. Every word is to be read exactly as written.
dix. The accent falls on the penultimate syllable.
11. Compound words are formed by the simple junction of roots (the principal
word standing last). Grammatical terminations are regarded as
independent words.
12. If there is one negative in a clause, a second is not admissible.
13. To show direction, words take the termination of the objective case.
14. Every preposition has a definite fixed meaning, but if it is necessary to use
a preposition, and it is not quite evident from the sense, which it should
être, the word je is used, which has no definite meaning. Instead of je, le
objective without a preposition may be used.
15. The so-called foreign words (words that the greater number of languages
have derived from the same source) undergo no change in the international
langue, beyond conforming to its system of orthography.
16. The final vowel of the noun and the article may be dropped and replaced
with an apostrophe.
19
Dans son journal, “Variation on Esperanto,” Bruce Ann Sherwood looks at the
morphology of Esperanto. Aside from grammatical endings, such as those denoting
part of speech or tense, almost all other morphemes are free. This makes Esperanto
highly productive. Take, par exemple, kato ‘cat’ and katido ‘kitten’, and hundo ‘dog’
and hundido ‘puppy’. Ido is not –ido; it can stand alone, and its meaning is
‘offspring’. Sherwood also explores the rather undefined field of proper Esperanto
pronunciation. “Good pronunciation also reflects the phonological character of
Esperanto, distinguishing among all the phonemes, minimizing allophony, et
conserving the strict relation between pronunciation and orthography” (Sherwood
1982: 7). In another sense, “good pronunciation is geographically neutral, not
manifesting regional or national peculiarities and making it difficult to identify the
speaker’s nationality” (Sherwood 1982: 7). Sherwood indicates that mild national
accents are acceptable or even sometimes enjoyed so long as the accent does not
obstruct meaning, “but it appears that speakers do recognize and prize an
international or nonnational pronunciation style” (1982: 7). Sherwood lauds the five-
vowel sound system of Esperanto for minimizing the effect of national accent:
Intelligibility for such a sound system is more resistant to destruction by
national accents than is, dire, English as spoken by foreigners. Par exemple, À
slight error in vowel height in English can change “beat” to “bit”, whereas
such an error in Esperanto must be much larger before timo ‘fear’ is confused
with temo ‘theme’ (Sherwood 1982: 5).
With this vowel system, international Esperanto communication is insulated from
confusion that might be caused by accent interference.
Beyond disseminating the set of rules, Zamenhof provided writing samples,
which yielded insights into the intended syntax of the language. He supplemented the
20
rules with six “specimens of international language”: the Lord’s Prayer; a portion of
the Book of Genesis; a letter in Esperanto; two original poems, Mia penso (My
pensée) and Ho, mia kor’ (Oh, my heart), and a translation of Heine’s poem, Mir
träumte von einem Königskind, which became En sonĝo princinon mi vidis (Tonkin
2008: 3). In addition to the Fundamento and these original supplements, Zamenhof
translated a large body of preexisting literature to “refin[e] Esperanto by tackling the
difficulties and subtleties of natural languages” (Janton 1993: 92). Zamenhof began
with Hamlet in 1894, and gradually processed several European linguistically diverse
masterworks, as well as the complete Old Testament (Janton 1993: 92). Through
these translation projects, Zamenhof drastically expanded the original lexicon, mais
according to Humphrey Tonkin, he also injected Esperanto with cultural legitimacy
and tradition: “the existence of literary works in a language is a guarantee that it has a
life of its own, and that it is connected to the cultural past: it declares that Esperanto is
not a code, but rather a work of art grounded in earlier works of art” (2008: 4). Le
choice to translate the daunting and monolithic Hamlet was particularly significant:
The late nineteenth-century Hamlet of Central and Eastern Europe was no
indecisive weakling, but the very epitome of the seeker after truth. …
Examine the independence movements of Central Europe and Hamlet is never
very far away. Thus Zamenhof begins his linguistic movement – … with a
revolutionary statement, a statement that at one blow might silence those who
suggest that his language has no life. … It was a brilliant move: it gave the
early Esperantists a sense of cultural dignity, and above all it linked them with
the elite cultures of Europe (Tonkin 2008: 6).
Zamenhof translated several other dramas, and Tonkin asserts that this efficiently
generated a written model of the language, as well as a model of natural speech
(2008: 4). En outre, it firmly rooted Esperantists in a tradition of literature, be it
translated or original, and provided “opportunities for linguistic experiment, and a
21
sense of cultural solidarity” (Tonkin 2008: 9). En effet, d'ici 1993, it was estimated that
dix,000 works had been translated into Esperanto (Janton 1993: 93). Maintenant, selon
to the President of the Quebec Esperanto Society, “there [sont] 50,000 books in
Esperanto and CDs from classical music to rap” (Normand). But the contemporary
strength of Esperanto is proven by more than its prolific literary production8. Parce que
it has now been in existence for over 100 years, there have been several generations
of Esperantists. People have met through Esperanto, fallen in love, had Esperanto as
their only common language, and consequently raised their children to speak
Esperanto. A 1968 study located 150 families where Esperanto was the language of
the home, and this information, coupled with Esperanto marriage notices in Esperanto
periodicals, lead Bruce Sherwood to estimate the existence of between one thousand
and two thousand native speakers9 of Esperanto in 1982 (1982: 2). Esperanto has
started to become a natural language.
Needless to say, Esperanto has not attained the level of use that Zamenhof
envisioned. Toujours, the language – albeit among a relatively small community of
speakers and enthusiasts – has carved a place for itself in modern society. Le
international library in Parma, Italie, houses Esperanto periodicals among its
collection of international literature. Facebook, a popular social networking website,
offers an Esperanto option among language settings. Wikipedia, a popular Internet
encyclopedia, can be read in Esperanto. Because Wikipedia is based entirely on user
contribution, this means that all of Wikipedia’s Esperanto content has been generated
8 For more on the history of Esperanto literature, see Jukka Pietiläinen’s “Current trends in literary
production in Esperanto”
9 For more on Esperanto as a natural language, see Jouko Lindstedt’s study, “Native Esperanto as a
Test Case for Natural Language”.
22
by Esperantists who wish to have the option to spread and receive information in
Esperanto, rather than in their native language, and felt so motivated that they took
the time to translate or produce the content themselves. Ubuntu, a computer operating
système, can be installed in Esperanto. Similarly to the Wikipedia case, for Ubuntu to
be available in Esperanto, someone had to take the time to generate an additional
Esperanto interface. Interesting to note is that Ubuntu is named after a Southern
African ethical ideology, and the principle roughly translates as “humanity towards
others” or “the belief in a universal bond of sharing that connects all humanity”
(About the Name). This ideological overlap may be coincidence, or it may point to
why Ubuntu programmers created an Esperanto interface.
Just like contemporary constructed languages, Esperanto has taken advantage
of the Internet to create forums, disseminate information, and recruit new enthusiasts.
Mark Fettes, in “Interlinguistics and the Internet”, describes how, originally, le
spread of languages like Esperanto and Volapük was made possible by “the
development of efficient postal and transportation systems in 19th-century Europe”
(1997: 1). Maintenant, cependant, with the Internet, “rapid, low-cost, many-to-many
communication across political and geographical boundaries,” is possible, qui
augments the spread of constructed languages (Fettes 1997: 1). En outre, il
“lowers, though it does not remove, one of the greatest barriers to research into
Esperanto: its invisibility to the uncommitted” (Fettes 1997: 2), et, ostensibly,
makes it easier for the curious to access resources that might draw them in.
1.6 Esperanto and the culture question
23
Aside from the linguistic criticism Esperanto faced in its earlier years, et le
offshoot language projects organized by disgruntled dissenters10, Esperanto’s
relationship to culture has been a point of contention. Esperanto is intended to be
culturally neutral, but some critics claim that it is not neutral enough. “Seventy-five
percent of the lexemes in Esperanto come from Romance languages, primarily Latin
et français; 20 percent come from Germanic languages; the rest include borrowings
from Greek (mostly scientific words), Slavic languages, et, in small numbers,
Hebrew, Arabic, Japanese, Chinois, and other languages” (Janton 1993: 51).
En outre, because the lexicon of Esperanto continues to grow, there is dispute
about whether it is becoming overly Latinized (Sherwood 1982: 3, 4). Toujours, “the
continued strength of the Esperanto movement in Asia is likely to ensure that the
needs of non-European speakers will not be neglected” (Sherwood 1982: 4). Bruce
Sherwood calls the fact of this European lexical base “one of the few truly well-
founded criticisms of Esperanto” (1982: 4). Because its linguistic foundation is so
heavily European as opposed to global, linguistic determinists argue that Esperanto is
necessarily embedded with European cultural values. Esperanto has tense
transformations absent in many Asian languages; its sound inventory contains sounds
foreign to Asian languages, and its phonology allows for consonant clusters
disallowed in Asian and other languages, so some assert that Esperanto is less
linguistically egalitarian than it claims. These are certainly additional hurdles for an
Asian would-be speaker of Esperanto, such as the l-r distinction that is difficult for
native speakers of Japanese (Sherwood 1982: 6), but these are not necessarily
10 See David Jordan’s section, “Id and Ido” and Okrent pages: 109, 116, 143, 144, for more on related
projects
24
prohibitive difficulties. Sherwood suggests that Asian Esperantists may not have as
much difficulty as might be expected because, “almost all Japanese study English
before they study Esperanto, and this may be the case with some Chinese
Esperantists, aussi, with the result that their use of Esperanto may be colored by
Anglais (and the Latin vocabulary of English)” (Sherwood 1982: 4). In the present
context, “the large number of Latin roots … is more of an advantage than a
disadvantage if we bear in mind that English, so far the most universal of the national
langues, draws over half its words from the Romance languages” (Janton 1993:
51). Tout au moins, to learn Esperanto is like learning any natural language, mais
with a broader scope of utility.
While Esperanto is attacked for being insufficiently neutral, others assume
that an artificial language cannot have a real culture, and consequently believe that
Esperanto lacks some intrinsic value held by natural languages. Arthur Aughey cites
Michael Oakeshott, who calls Esperanto “one of those rationalist projects with which
the history of modern Europe is littered” (1992: 9). The problem with this “joke”,
Esperanto, est: “language is not just communication of the utilitarian kind, but the
expression of the identity and the cultural unity of a people. Language is not about
calculations of convenience, but is the expression of something akin to the ‘national
soul’” (Aughey 1992: 9). Esperanto is a product, and its practicality is not enough of
a draw to compensate for the devaluing effects of being seen as existing in a cultural
vacuum.
Mais, given the common belief that language and culture are almost symbiotic,
is it really possible for Esperanto to be cultureless? Esperanto cites cultural neutrality
25
as part of its appeal to the masses, and while this is not to be confused with
culturenlessness, if the term culture is ambiguous, cultural neutrality is more so.
When Zamenhof set out to create his language, one of hope for the world, he had a
rigorous ideology of brotherhood and peace – albeit one he consented to make
‘optional’ for his followers – embedded in it. If Esperanto’s cultural neutrality were to
manifest by equally representing or including all cultures, favoring none above
another, this would align with its theme of equality. Cultural neutrality might also
intend to refer to not adopting a particular nation-specific culture but, from this
interpretation, Esperanto is still criticized for linguistically favoring European
languages and therefore propagating European ideologies, absorbing cultural
elements via linguistic styling.
Esperanto speakers themselves firmly contend that Esperanto has a culture.
Lernu!, “a multilingual website which aims to inform Internet users about Esperanto
and help them to learn it, easily and free of charge,” has a page dedicated to the
culture of Esperanto (About Esperanto). Tonkin describes the early construction of
Esperanto culture via literary translation and production. Arika Okrent describes the
“distinctly Victorian flavor” of the ceremonies that take place even in contemporary
Esperanto congresses (2009: 117). She puts forth the equation, “forced tradition +
time = real tradition,” and argues that part of the reason Esperanto succeeded where
autre, very similar, projects failed, was because of this cultural injection: “people who
may not have been inspired to learn a language in order to use it for something would
learn a language in order to participate in something” (Okrent 2009: 117). Oakeshott
may have seen Esperanto as a utilitarian artifice, but many others claim that it has
26
developed its own culture, and consider this part of why Esperanto found relative
success:
Although many Esperantists tried, even while Zamenhof was still alive, À
eliminate from Esperanto any hint of ideology, the very name of the language
encapsulated idealistic aspirations and served to inspire enthusiasm in
generation after generation. We can certainly look at Esperanto from a purely
linguistic point of view, but no purely linguistic examination of the
phenomenon can explain its uniquely powerful attraction, its energizing
powers, and its rich diversity (Janton 1993: 27).
Esperanto’s cultural foundation was painstakingly laid by Zamenhof’s writings and
traductions. From this deliberately formed foundation, over a century of speakers and
dreamers has laid down bricks, building a rich, cohesive culture.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis asserts that an individual’s language influences
the structure of thoughts and, par conséquent, the perception of and interaction with the
monde. Though the strength of this correlation is widely contested, it would not be
unreasonable to say that the learned culture linked to a language – not the structure of
the language – could impact a speaker’s interaction with the world. As members of a
speech community, Esperanto speakers have a particular, internal set of norms of use
for their shared language, but the effect of their language ideology is also relevant to
their interactions beyond the speech community.
Membership in the Esperanto community is officially defined in accordance
with the decisions made in the Bolougne Declaration, but to know the grammar of a
language is not the same as cultural competency, or functionality within the speech
community. Aujourd’hui, we know who the speech community was supposed to be:
tout le monde. We know what the speech community’s ideology was supposed to be:
universal brotherhood and equality. Histories of the development of Esperanto
27
abound. There have been several studies concerning the grammar of Esperanto and
the development of Esperanto as a natural language. Mais, relatively few studies have
been made regarding the Esperanto speech community at large, maintenant, over a century
after its inception11. We know the dream and we know the beginnings, but we want to
know today’s reality.
Ainsi, the questions I will address are:
1) Who comprises the Esperanto speech community?
2) What are the norms adhered to and ideologies held by members of the
speech community?
3) Why are people members of the speech community?
4) What are the objectives of the speech community?
The existence of a speech community can be hard to establish, but an observable trait
of a speech community is a shared language ideology: the social and political values
embedded in the language. Par conséquent, analysis will focus on shared norms and
ideologies as evidence of the Esperanto speech community.
1.7 Research Methods
To conduct this study, I solicited participants through a personal contact
involved in the Esperanto community, who distributed my request for participants
through an Esperanto electronic mailing list. Those interested then contacted me and
11 Among notable recent studies, La rondo familia. Sociologiaj esploroj en Esperantio was conducted
by Nikola Rašic’s over the course of sixty years, and completed in 1994. While this study was
published in Esperanto, it has been written about and cited in subsequent English-language articles and
études. Another recent study is “Standardization and self-regulation in an international speech
community: the case of Esperanto” by Sabine Fiedler, published in 2006. For more, see the section,
“the Esperanto movement and speech community,” in Humphrey Tonkin’s article, “Recent Studies in
Esperanto and Interlinguistics: 2006,” published in Language Problems & Language Planning in 2007.
28
in some cases passed on my solicitation to their own contacts within the community.
Finalement, this resulted in thirteen participants (organized by chronology of
interviews):
Chart 1.1: Participants
Participant
Age
Emplacement
Country of Esperanto
Acquisition, if different from
current location
Randy
Normand
Jim
Zdravka
Josué
Helm
stevo
Jorge/Kior
Jerry
Tatyana
Volonté
Joel
Yevgeniya
41 Atlanta, Géorgie, USA
54 Montreal, Quebec, Canada
37 Atlanta, Géorgie, USA
58 Montreal, Quebec, Canada
29 Oakland, Californie, USA
73 Uppsala, Sweden
55
55
68 Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
53 Ukraine
25 Madison, Wisconsin, USA
32 Montreal, Quebec, Canada
32 Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Recife, Brazil
France
Croatia
USA
Ukraine
Jorge was interviewed via textual chat using Google Chat. stevo preferred to answer
questions in written form, via email. All other interviews were conducted via
telephone or Skype and lasted from thirty minutes to an hour. All calls were recorded
for audio and later transcribed. Participants were offered $10 USD in compensation,
though some declined or requested that I make a donation to an Esperanto
organization instead.
Interviews were conducted in a semi-structured format, with a flexible set of
questions and a few demographic questions. Questions asked included:
1. Have you read the participant consent form and do you agree to participate?
29
2. What name or pseudonym may I use as your name in my Thesis?
3. Please tell me the story behind you and Esperanto. When did you develop an
interest in it? How did you find out about it? How old were you? How old are
you now? How long have you been speaking/studying it? Have you ever been
more or less active than you are now?
4. What made you interested in Esperanto?
5. What do you know about the history of Esperanto or its creator? Did this
knowledge play a part in your interest in Esperanto, or did you learn about this
after becoming interested/active?
6. What method(s) did you use to learn Esperanto?
7. How would you describe your level of proficiency in Esperanto? Are you
equally confident speaking, listening, and writing? How comfortable or fluent
are you in the language?
8. What is your native language? Do you speak any other languages? What is
your level of proficiency in those? How does your study of Esperanto
compare to that of any other languages you may have studied?
9. What do you know about any constructed languages other than Esperanto, ou
derivatives of Esperanto? Have you ever been interested in any of them? Pourquoi
or why not? Why do you prefer Esperanto? Do you?
dix. How often do you use Esperanto? In what contexts? Do you participate in any
Esperanto conversation groups or other Esperanto organizations? Do you
subscribe to any Esperanto publications or do you read literature in
Esperanto?
11. Have you ever been to any Esperanto conventions or gatherings? How many
people attended? Have you ever traveled to meet other Esperanto speakers or
interacted with Esperantists outside of this group? What was it like?
12. What do you consider a good accent? Do you find a difference in the
Esperanto (pronunciation) of people with a different first language? Have you
ever had a hard time understanding someone’s Esperanto? Was it because of
their accent or for some other reason?
13. Sometimes people feel like the language they use affects what they can
express or how they express things. Some multilingual people feel like one
language can more accurately convey certain thoughts or feelings. Have you
experienced any of this with Esperanto?
30
14. Would you call yourself an Esperantist? What does that mean to you? Do you
feel different when you are around other Esperanto speakers?
15. Do you think Esperanto has any flaws? Is there anything (about the
community or the language itself) that you dislike or wish were different?
16. I have read that some people are concerned about too many new words being
added to Esperanto instead of using pre-existing roots, or that the new roots
draw too much from languages like English. Have you noticed this? What are
your thoughts? Is this really an issue?
17. How do you think non-Esperantists perceive you given your membership in
this group? Positively or negatively? How do people react when they find out
you speak Esperanto? Do you have any anecdotes about this? Do you usually
tell people, is it something people find out about you organically, or do you
avoid revealing this about yourself? Do you think outside perceptions of
Esperanto/Esperantists are positive or negative, accurate or inaccurate? Comment
donc?
18. Women in Esperanto?
19. Do you have a significant other? Does he/she speak Esperanto? Would you
take a partner who does not speak Esperanto? Would you encourage him/her
to learn it? Have you ever thought about whether you would teach it to any
children you may have?
20. Have you ever been more or less active than you are now? Do you continue to
study Esperanto? Do you think you will continue your involvement in the
avenir?
Demographic Questions
1. What level of education have you attained or do you intend to attain?
2. What was your field of study?
3. What is your current occupation?
4. How old are you?
5. What is your city of residence?
As interviews were conducted, new questions arose from certain responses, and these
questions were either interview specific (par exemple. Tell me more about the language you
constructed.) or incorporated into the body of questions for future interviews (par exemple.
How many people were at the congresses you attended?). Most participants permitted
31
me to use their full name or their first name; three elected a pseudonym. Pour
consistency, I use only their first names or pseudonyms here.
There were a few difficulties encountered during the process. While this was
not a prohibitive difficulty, it was sometimes challenging to arrange a mutually
suitable interview time, given that there was often a time difference between my
location and the participants’, some as great as nine hours. Because I do not speak
Esperanto, I was limited to interviewing participants who speak a language that I do
speak.12 One person suggested that I contact a mailing list for Esperanto families, mais
warned me that a request not in Esperanto would not be well-received. For some
participants who were not native English speakers, interview questions were abridged
to accommodate their language comfort level. Joel and Yevgeniya were interviewed
ensemble, which sometimes yielded interesting exchanges between the two, mais
sometimes caused the second respondent’s reply to be an affirmation of the first,
rather than a personal expression.
Dans l'ensemble, participants were very enthusiastic about participating, and expressed
curiosity about the outcome of my research. They admitted that they had never given
much thought to some of the questions, like how they personally defined the term
12 During the interviewing process, I was made hyperaware of the privilege I was born into by having
English as my native language. There I was, talking to people about this culturally neutral language
that is supposed to bring the world together, using exactly the kind of language of power that the
language was invented as a reaction against. Some respondents asked me if I spoke Esperanto, and I
would reply that I wanted to but had not yet progressed enough to conduct the interviews in said
langue. Even without Esperanto, I was able to interview several people from around the world
whose first language was not English. I thought about what it would be like if I did not speak English
or some other major world language. Although many Esperantists have studied several national
langues, I would likely be severely limited in access to respondents until I learned Esperanto myself.
I felt particularly guilty, pour ainsi dire, when I interviewed Zdravka, the Croatian wife of a French-
Canadian Esperantist. While she was very capable of expressing herself in English, she was noticeably
uncomfortable in the language. Part of the idea of Esperanto is to put people on equal footing when
communicating. No one is speaking his or her native language. Encore, my inability to speak Esperanto
required that she use a language that was not her preference, and made it hard for me to communicate
my apologetic gratitude for her participation.
32
“Esperantist,” but valued the push to do so. Because of the semi-structured nature of
the interviews, participants were encouraged to say whatever they wanted, whether or
not it addressed the question being asked. While many apologized for “babbling” or
going off on tangents, I often found these moments the most insightful. It was often
from these moments that I realized that there were other questions I should consider
adding to my original corpus.
33
Chapitre 2:
Who Speaks Esperanto?
“People who get interested in this type of thing, like Esperanto, Ido, or any of
the constructed languages, are a little bit crazy.”
– Jerry
“Ordinary people don’t know much about conlangs; many don’t even know
they exist. En général, conlangers are considered as dreamers, wackos and the
like.”
-Jorge
2.1 Number and distribution of speakers
A main problem facing anyone conducting a study of Esperanto is the need to
provide a rough count of its speakers. Numbers range from tens of thousands to tens
of millions, often depending on whether the researcher is opposing or promoting
Esperanto. Renato Corsetti, in 1996, presents estimates ranging between 50,000 and 8
to 15 million (1996: 265). Müller and Benton, writing in 2006, estimate that
Esperanto speakers number more than 100,000 (2006: 173). Fiedler, also writing in
34
2006, cites estimates ranging from 500,000 to 3.5 million (2006: 74). Ulrich Becker
explains the difficulty behind generating an accurate count:
Most of the speakers of Esperanto are unknown and do not appear in any kind
of statistics. It is not possible to count people who have studied, dire, French,
unless they become members of a linguistic or cultural francophone society or
study the language in school. The same is true for Esperanto. One can count
only members of local, regional, national, and international organizations and
subscribers to periodicals. … The relatively small number of some ten
thousand active members of the Esperanto community … does not reflect the
actually much larger number of people who speak Esperanto, who use it only
sporadically, and do not appear in any sort of statistics (2006: 272-273).
Becker calls this a “twilight zone in the statistics” (2006: 273). Mais, researchers are
not the only ones who have trouble finding Esperanto speakers. Despite the networks
that connect active Esperantists to each other, it can be difficult to find a way in13.
Joel, who studied Esperanto on his own, recalls, “little by little I uncovered that …
there were indeed people who spoke this language … and that there were
organizations and there were conventions.” Like an anthill, once the concealing
surface is brushed away, an enormous, bustling community is uncovered. Pour
speakers, that means sudden access to conversation groups, pen-pals, littérature, travel
accommodations, and more. For a researcher, cependant, that means insight, but still an
incomplete picture.
Because speakers cannot be accurately counted, their distribution can also not
be accurately measured. Toutefois, as Becker indicates, membership in Esperanto
13 When I began my research, I found a few local listings and thought it would be easy to get in touch
with at least a handful of Esperanto enthusiasts. The contact information I found, cependant, turned out
to be a dead end. Websites had expired and emails bounced back. Could it be that these Esperanto
groups had fallen apart, or was it that they had just fallen away from publicizing themselves on the
l'Internet? Dans les deux cas, I feared I was about to experience what most Esperanto researchers assert:
Esperantists are hard to find. Toutefois, networking revealed a sure contact, and after an email to him,
my inbox was suddenly flooded with messages from potential participants, and I no longer worried
whether my entire thesis might collapse in the absence of participants. Within the next few days I was
receiving emails from as far as Canada, Suisse, and a kibbutz in Israel.
35
organizations can be used as an indication, though it must be emphasized that
numbers generated that way are in no way comprehensive. In 1985, membership in
the Universal Esperanto Association was 82% European (Fettes 1996: 55). In 2006,
“the Universal Esperanto Association (UEA), the largest international Esperanto
organisation, shows that the national associations have a total of some 23,254
members, while the UEA itself has 7,075 individual members in 119 countries”
(Becker 2006: 272). According to Esperanto-USA, in 2008 there were 633 registered
members, with an average of 11.7 members per state (Membership by State):
36
Chart 2.1.1: Published Esperanto-USA Membership,
by State, in 2008
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Californie
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Géorgie
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Lousiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Registered
Members
4
4
13
7
111
12
5
2
2
18
11
2
3
16
dix
4
1
2
2
5
22
18
16
11
2
12
2
State, continued
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Caroline du Nord
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvanie
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Unknown addresses
Other countries
Total
Registered
Members
7
6
5
11
8
48
15
0
21
7
14
14
1
1
3
1
8
35
5
2
11
31
1
16
2
24
19
633
Research participants primarily reside in the United States: Atlanta, Géorgie
(2); Oakland, Californie; Cincinnati, Ohio; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Madison,
Wisconsin. Other participants reside in Montreal, Quebec, Canada (4); Sweden,
Brazil, and the Ukraine. Two of the Quebec residents were originally from Croatia
37
and the Ukraine14. Most of the participants have interacted with Esperantists from
other countries, either through sustained correspondence, personal travel, travel using
Pasporta Servo, or while attending Esperanto conventions. Through these means,
participants have interacted with Esperanto speakers from over 25 other countries,
y compris: Tanzania, South Africa, Nigeria, Mexico, Cuba, Chile, Corée, Vietnam,
Hong Kong, China, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Nepal, Belgique, Slovenia, Russia,
Bulgaria, Allemagne, Hungary, the United Kingdom, Poland, Portugal, and France.
Almost all participants, when speaking of Esperantists who were foreign with respect
to themselves, mentioned interacting with Esperantists from Japan and Brazil.
Another indication of the geographic spread of Esperanto speakers comes from the
website of Pasporta Servo, a networking service for Esperanto-speaking travelers,
which claims 1450 hosts from over 91 countries (Internacional Hospitality Service).
Figure 2.1.1: Lernu! Map of Registered Users (“Map”)
According to Bruce Arne Sherwood, “the highest density of speakers (as a
fraction of the total population) is found in East European countries, but West Europe
contributes the largest fraction of movement leadership” (1982: 1). It is logical that
14 See Chart 1.1
38
Europe has a particularly high density of Esperanto speakers, both because it is the
region where Esperanto originated, and because so many languages are spoken in
close proximity to one another. People are more likely to hear about Esperanto, et
more likely to see that it has immediate practical value. Toujours:
There are significant Esperanto activities in Asia, in Japan, China, South
Corée, and Vietnam. Numerically small but active groups of Esperanto
speakers are found in the Americas, particularly in Brazil, Canada, et le
États-Unis. There are few speakers in Africa or the Middle East, except for
Iran and Israel (1982: 1,2).
While Europe might be, in terms of numbers, the locus of Esperanto activity,
other regions have notable Esperanto histories, particularly, Asia and Brazil. Parce que
I have nothing new to add to existing literature on this topic, I will not delve deeply
into the history of Esperanto in Asia, mais, according to Ulrich Lins, “shedding
light on it in the East Asian context is particularly interesting because nowhere
outside Europe and the Americas has Esperanto been disseminated as much as it has
in China, Japan, and Korea” (2008: 47)15. De la même manière, Mark Fettes points to
Esperanto’s “long history in Asia,” which is “often neglected in discussions of its
cultural and social significance” (2007: 15). Esperanto made its first appearance in
Japan in 1906, but it the radicalizing political climate of the late 1920s and early
1930s was particularly influential in its development. Left-leaning Esperantists
“sought to make use of Esperanto for a world revolution, and Ōshima Yoshio wanted
to “justify the Esperanto movement within the framework of Marxist theory”
15 For a frame of reference, consider the following: according to a ten-year survey from 1991 to 2000,
a Japanese publishing house published the highest number of pages of Esperanto text: 11,047. During
the same period, a Chinese publishing house, Ĉina Esperanto-Eldonejo, published the fifth-highest
number of titles: 47, but the second-highest number of pages: 9,152. En revanche, the US publishing
house with the highest number of Esperanto titles published 30, ranking tenth, and did not rank in the
top ten for number of pages (Becker 2006: 286).
39
(Hiroyuki 2008: 186). From Ōshima’s writings, Saitō Hidekazu developed a criticism
of linguistic imperialism, criticizing Japan’s language policy as a means of oppressing
“the working masses and the ethnic groups in the colonies” (Hiroyuki 2008: 187).
Alors, in the late 1930s, Japanese police started persecuting left-wing Esperantists,
and center and right-wing Esperantists stepped forward, proposing Esperanto as a tool
to minimize “unnecessary hostilities of ethnic groups under Japanese rule” (Hiroyuki
2008: 187). After World War II, the political environment changed again:
It became less possible to dream of a world revolution or the “unification” of
Asian peoples under Japanese hegemony. … Whereas the prewar movement
consisted mainly of intellectuals from the upper and upper-middle classes, le
postwar democratization of the society and equitable redistribution of wealth
extended its composition to lower economic groups. The rank and file in the
postwar movement felt little need for a theoretical grounding for their
“beloved language.” For most of them, a vague commitment to
internationalism and pacifism was enough (Hiroyuki 2008: 187).
In the early 1900s in China, anarchists and reformists viewed Esperanto as a tool that
could contribute to China’s new place in the world, making it “a pioneer of a world
revolution bringing western and eastern cultures together” (Lins 2008: 48, 49).
Toutefois, in 1928, after the Kuomintang came to power and “began to deal more
harshly with anarchists,” Esperanto shifted from being “a device for obtaining
western knowledge” to a means for spreading China’s propaganda to the West (Lins
2008: 48). Finalement, “the welfare of Chinese Esperantism was always tied to
political factors, whether the Esperantists wanted it or not,” and “Esperanto is back
where it started, dependent on the idealism of individuals” (Müller and Benton 2006:
184).
In “Esperanto, an Asian Language?” Mark Fettes examines Esperanto in Asia,
and its potential future there. “Every year for the past quarter-century, the so-called
40
Komuna Seminario has brought together young people from Japan, South Korea, et
more recently China, to explore their similarities and differences” (Fettes 2007: 14).
Participants are self-motivated, not compelled, invited, or organized by any
governmental or institutional force. They convene not merely to speak Esperanto, le
language they choose to share, but to share their perspectives on important cross-
national issues. Fettes quotes Kitagawa Hisasi, a participant in the first Seminario
OMS, at the conclusion of the meeting and discussion, “felt that the young Koreans
whom [il] met in the Seminario were all brothers and sisters in our human family,
with whom [il] would willingly remain friends” (Fettes 2007: 16). Rather than being
used in formal settings, Esperanto in modern Asia is used “for purposes that might
best be described as aesthetic: forging friendships, making music, discovering new
ways of looking at the world,” while English occupies the business sphere (Fettes
2007: 17). Toujours, Fettes observes that, “from the earliest years of Esperanto in Asia, le
language was associated with modernization, technical rationalism, and social
progress” (2007: 20). Donc, nécessairement, “from an Asian perspective, Esperanto
has always been associated with Europe, the region where modernity had its
beginnings” (Fettes 2007: 20).
Brazil also has a notably high Esperanto-speaking population, whose origins
Jorge explains:
Esperanto is not tied to any religion or philosophy but, in Brazil, Spiritualists
[sic] give it a strong support. I don’t know what you call it in the USA, but the
religion founded in France by Allan Kardec is called ‘Espiritismo’ here and
has many followers. Around 1930, a famous medium called Chico Xavier
received a spiritual message saying that Esperanto had been created by ‘spirits
of light’ and transmitted to Zamenhof. The Brazilian Spiritist Federation
started printing everything they could in Esperanto. … [Spiritists] strongly
41
believe that Esperanto is the language of the 3rd millenium [sic]. It will replace
all other languages when they disappear from the earth.
According to the Federação Espírita Brazileira, the Brazilian Spiritist Federation,
Spiritism and Esperanto are “driven by the same ideals of fraternity”16, or as Jorge
puts it, the Esperanto idea of global brotherhood is “fundamental” to the Spiritist’s
perception of the language (Cem anos). “Many of them think in the future there will
be a Godly world government and Esperanto will become the common language for
tous" (Jorge).
The Federação provides more detail about the rise of Esperanto within
Brazilian Spiritism. They refer to a “triad of inspiring Esperantist achievements in
Brazilian Spiritist circles,” the first of which was written by J. Camille Chaigneau,
and published in 1909 in Reformador, the leading Spiritist journal in Brazil.
Chaigneau asserted, “If we were to seek the origin of this language, we would
confirm that it came to be as an act of collaboration with the Unseen”17 (qtd. in O
Esperanto). This addresses the faith-based rationale for taking up Esperanto, mais
Chaigneau also provided more practical reasons why Spiritists and non-Spiritists alike
should support Esperanto:
It does not threaten any national language, and it was chosen by a commission
of wise men as an auxiliary international language, recommended for adoption
in different countries. Pour cette raison,, most universal movements would
benefit from Esperanto. … Considering the amount of information that escapes
us Spiritists due to a lack of translations, the delay that that very translation
brings to our own documentation, it seems that Spiritism should have every
interest in constructing a core journal in which salient information can be
gathered, thanks to a common language for all nations (qtd. in O Esperanto).
16 Original text in Portuguese. Translation mine.
17 Original text in Portuguese. Translation mine.
42
While Chaigneau set the groundwork for Esperanto in the Spiritist community, c'était
Chico Xavier who brought Esperanto to the forefront some decades later.
Chico Xavier, whom Jorge mentioned above, was a Spiritist Medium, et
produced many texts through psychography, during which spirits take control of the
medium to transmit written messages. Xavier, whose birth name is Francisco de Paula
Cândido, psychographically received the other two texts of the “triad”: “The Mission
of Esperanto, by Spirit Emmanuel, and Esperanto as a Revelation, by Spirit
Francisco Valdomiro Lorenz, … on January 19, 1940 and January 19, 1959,
respectively” (O Esperanto). To understand the extent of Xavier’s impact on the
Brazilian population, it is important to know that he was also a popular television
personality throughout the 1960s and 1970s, and that for thirty-five years he
“welcomed hundreds of thousands seeking spiritual counseling in to his humble
home” (Oliveira 2010). When he died in 2002, “he was revered so highly his viewing
drew a line of mourners that stretched four kilometers (2.4 miles), with 40 people
passing by his coffin per minute” (Oliveira 2010). A biographic film released in 2010,
“during its three-day premier … was watched in the theater by more people than any
Brazilian movie in 15 years. In 10 days, 1.36 million had packed theaters to watch it”
(Oliveira 2010). Xavier’s long-standing popularity as a public figure and
philanthropist contributed to a widespread awareness of Spiritism and, par extension,
Esperanto.
Aujourd’hui, Brazil is one of the leading regions for the publication of Esperanto
texts18 (Becker 2006: 286). According to the Brazilian census, in 2000 there were
18According to a ten-year survey from 1991 to 2000, a Brazilian publishing house, Fonto, published the
second-highest number of titles: 55, and the third-highest number of pages: 7,289 (Becker 286).
43
approximately 2.26 million, or 1.3% self-proclaimed Spiritists in a population of
almost 170 million (Brazil 2000). Plus récemment, according to the 2010 census, le
Brazilian population has increased to over 190 million, qui, assuming a sustained
proportion of Spiritists, would yield almost 2.5 million practicing Spiritists (Censo
2010). This is not to say that Esperanto is necessarily spoken by millions of people in
Brazil, but that these millions of Spiritists, and the many Brazilians familiar with
Spiritism, are all likely to have some idea of what Esperanto is. Finalement, ce
creates a popular awareness of Esperanto more similar to that of European countries
than to that of other countries in the Americas.
Volonté, who is from the United States, speculates about how differing
concentrations of Esperantists affects the experiences of individual Esperantists in
different parts of the world:
En général, the experience of … European Esperantists would be
different from American Esperantists. The sense is typically that the language
is bigger in Europe than it is in the United States. Certainly more congresses
and events tend to happen in Europe than do in the United States. Ainsi, there’s
perhaps more to do that is accessible and close by with Esperanto in Europe as
opposed to the United States, so that tends to change a little bit the approach
people wind up having to the language there, in the sense that … it’s very easy
to get involved with planning things and going to things, whereas in the
United States that’s not as true. … You kind of have to work at that a little bit
more. … There are definitely places where Esperanto enjoys a certain
prominence, … Brazilian Esperantists, par exemple, … may be more open
about their use of the language. They know they don’t have to explain it from
the beginning.
In her description of her experiences as an Esperantist in the Ukraine, Yevgeniya
confirms Will’s speculation: “I never really had to explain and I never really had a
negative reaction.” In Sweden, according to Helm:
Most people have heard about Esperanto. They know about it. … When they
were launching the Euro here in Europe, then it happened that they were
44
speaking all about, “is it some kind of Esperanto money?” … I daresay that
the people in general have an idea of Esperanto … as a bridge language or
whatever you would call it, … but generally people know nothing about how
our language works.
Ainsi, while the word “Esperanto” may not draw a blank, when Helm has been heard
speaking Esperanto in public, il dit, people have “thought we were Finn.
Sometimes they thought we were trying to speak Japanese.” And even though there is
general awareness of Esperanto, that doesn’t mean that outside opinions are entirely
positive. “Sometimes … people think that it’s a very stupid thing to imagine that you
can make a language and then make people speak it, so they would think that many
Esperantists are more or less nerds, that we’re cranks, [mais] I think this has
disappeared over the years.” Even though, as Will suggests, European Esperantists
might have to explain less about the premise of Esperanto, they are not exempt from
having to justify it.
Néanmoins, Yevgeniya’s and Helm’s words reveal a marked difference
between their experiences and those of Esperantists in the United States or Canada.
Though North American Esperantists do not usually confront negative reactions, ils
often encounter complete ignorance or misconceptions from people outside of the
community. Normand shares misinformation that he frequently hears when he tells
someone that he speaks Esperanto:
Usually people will think that the goal or the main purpose of Esperanto is to
replace all languages so that there will be only one language on earth. This is
not the point at all. It is to offer the world a common language to facilitate
communication. So often when I mention I speak Esperanto people around me
react as, “Yeah, but Esperanto will never succeed to replace the language,”
and I have to explain, “No, it’s not the point.” … Or … they say it’s no use to
learn this language because they think that no one can speak it.
Randy, from the United States, has his own stories:
45
In the United States, most people have never heard of it before. So often, le
initial question is, “Is that Spanish?” And then often times if people have
heard of it before, they read it in some encyclopedia when they were a kid and
they say, “Oh yeah, didn’t that die in the 20’s or something? Isn’t that a dead
langue?” So, sometimes you have to do some re-education, so to speak and
tell people, “Well, Non, actually it’s still a working living language and it is a
language in and of itself. It’s not some dialect of Spanish or anything, it is its
own language.”
Joshua feels like there is an expectation that “Esperanto speakers are probably going
to be greasy, unwashed, trench coat-wearing, Dungeons-and-Dragons-playing, Star
Trek convention-attending, social outcasts.”
When you mention Esperanto, if people have heard of it before, they typically
ask you if you attend Star Trek conventions. Et, actually, contrary to that,
my experience with Esperanto is that in general the people I’ve met who have
spoken it or are interested in it have been unusually or surprisingly normal
seeming (Josué).
Joshua estimates that, “two to five percent of the people I talk to have heard of
Esperanto,” but he adds that he often speaks to fellow linguists, who might be more
likely to have an awareness of the language.
Among linguists, unless they’re really interested in created language or just
interested in it from a theoretical standpoint, there’s a lot of derision …
Derision like, “Oh it’s not a real language; it’s not really worthy of study; c'est
not really worthy of learning. Oh, Ha, you’re one of those people” (Josué).
Jim, who runs Esperanto tables at science fiction conventions, might be the only
participant who comes close to filling some of the stereotypes concerning Esperanto
speakers. He compares awareness of Esperanto within different sectors of the
population. “Among family and friends and casual acquaintances, I would say
complete ignorance is the more common response.” In contrast:
The Esperanto information tables we run at science fiction conventions, pour
exemple, … get a larger number of people who are vaguely aware of the
langue, that know what it is, but probably weren’t aware that it has as many
speakers, or was as currently active as it is. Probably out of the people we
46
spoke to, … probably at least a quarter of them knew what the language was,
probably more than half, before we spoke to them.
It is logical that there is a higher awareness among convention attendants if there is
often someone promoting Esperanto at this kind of event. Ainsi, even if there is not a
huge percentage of science-fiction convention attendees who speak Esperanto,
Esperantists seem to think that it is a population worth targeting. Maybe, même si
Esperantists are not predominantly fans of science fiction, a mindset that can embrace
science fiction is a little more primed to embrace the idea of a future world in which
people speak Esperanto as an auxiliary language than is the population at large.
2.2 Gender distribution
In this study and others conducted, there is a noteworthy indication of a
gender imbalance in the Esperanto speech community. In a 1985 hallmark study,
Nikola Rašic found a 7:3 ratio of men to women (Fettes 1996: 55). De plus,
according to Mark Fettes, “this disproportion between the sexes was found in nearly
every study reported, and appears to be related both to greater organized participation
by men and by their greater willingness to respond to surveys” (1996: 55). Of my 13
participants, 10 were male and 3 were female. Beyond the fact that there were only 3
female participants, the only direct responses received were from males; the female
participants were either wives of participants or referred to the study by another male
participant. In the last set of interviews, with Joel and Yevgeniya, who reside in
Canada but are from the United States and the Ukraine, respectivement, the gender
imbalance came up organically:
47
It is interesting to see that in some countries the Esperanto community would
tend to be more young or more old, ou, you know, sometimes there is some …
gender gap. … When I came to the United States I discovered that most of the
Esperanto speakers are male, while in Ukraine –
Here Joel interjected, “—in the United States, the younger people tend to be more
mâle, the older people tend to be more women.” Joel and Yevgeniya pondered
possible reasons behind this disparity at length. Joel explained:
When I was in the Ukraine, I was surprised that it’s the reverse. En particulier,
the young people, the majority are female in the Esperanto clubs and involved
in Esperanto, up to, I would say seventy percent. Et, my take on the
situation in the United States is … I think you’ll find a lot of these young
males who are Esperantists in the United States are also usually very good
with technology, and they most likely learned through the Internet. … If you
took that same sampling of people, of young Esperantists, males, in the United
States, you’d also find a high percentage of computer programmers and
related professions. Say, if you look at average, kind of, US Esperanto
convention, there’s a lot of older retired ladies, there’s men too but more
femmes, who learned Esperanto back, you know, in younger years, maybe left
it for a while when they had families or careers, and they came back to it in
their retirement age, as a hobby that they had missed, whereas with the
younger males it’s the Internet and technology aspect.
En revanche, according to Yevgeniya, “in Ukraine the majority of … speakers would
be somebody who likes playing, who is linguistically inclined, and those are mostly
females in Ukraine.” There, there is also a prevalent social component of Esperanto.
“In Kiev there are two Esperanto clubs where you can go and talk to people in
Esperanto, while in the United States there are not that many.” Normand touches on
this as well, en disant:
The Esperanto community in America is really not as extended as it is in
Europe where you can really find Esperantists all over and it’s easy to
participate. Almost every weekend you can go somewhere and use Esperanto
because there’s something going on. In America there’s only a few Esperanto
weekends organized. … Except for the United States Esperanto Convention
and a few weekends, there’s not too many activities.
Joel adds:
48
There’s more isolation, more distance, among a lot of Esperanto speakers in
the United States because of geography and all of that. That may have bearing
on the gender issue. Maybe the males who are oriented towards technology
may be perfectly comfortable learning the language in isolation and possibly
females … want something more socially engaging.
According to Esperanto-USA, there are as many as 81 registered Esperanto clubs,
groups, or societies in the United States (Local Groups). While this may seem like a
fairly large number, consider that 15 states have no Esperanto registered
organizations, that several of the links to registered organizations lead to expired
URLs, et cela, as seen in Chart 2.1.1, some states have as few as one registered
member. The speculation, donc, is that the reason for different gender
distributions within regionalized Esperanto-speaking populations is the kind of
Esperanto community available to potential speakers.
Taking these insights into consideration, let us examine the participant data.
Participant data will be separated into the following categories for evaluation: Male v.
Female and High-Density Area (HDA) v. Low-Density Area (LDA). Participants who
learned Esperanto while living in the United States of America or Canada are
considered to be from a Low-Density Area; participants from Europe and Brazil are
considered to be from a High-Density Area. This division of subjects is derived from
Joel’s and Yevgeniya’s belief that Esperanto is likely to be spoken by younger males
or individuals with technological rather than social interests in areas where a lower
density of speakers limits the social opportunities offered by Esperanto acquisition.
The expectation is that LDA speakers will be younger, en moyenne, and predominantly
mâle, while HDA females will be more numerous than and younger than HDA males.
49
There were 6 HDA participants, three females and three males. One of the
women is originally from Croatia and two are originally from the Ukraine. Two of the
women now live in Canada and are wives of male participants. The third woman still
lives in the Ukraine, and was referred to the study by Helm. Normand, who is
Canadian, started learning Esperanto while living in France. Because his original
experiences as an Esperanto speaker took place in a HDA he will be counted within
that set, though his subsequent experiences give him insight into the contrasts
between the HDA and LDA experiences. The other two HDA men are from Uppsala,
Sweden and Recife, Brazil. The 7 LDA participants were male, from Atlanta (3),
Oakland, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and Madison. The gender distribution of
participants does not seem anomalous within the distribution of Esperanto speakers at
grand, though women are not the majority among HDA participants. Toutefois, le
fact that participants were solicited through an Esperanto e-mailing list, qui
necessitates a certain level of technological ability, and remembering Mark Fette’s
assertion that men are more likely to participate in a study, might be responsible for a
deceptively low number of female participants.
The numbers of interest are: the current age of participants and the age at
which they started learning Esperanto. Looking at the age of Esperanto acquisition is
significant because participants’ current ages may obscure the fact that participants
once comprised a young sector of the Esperanto-speaking community.
50
Chart 2.2.1: Participant Current Age
Chart 2.2.2: Participant Age of
Acquisition
Participant
Volonté
Josué
Joel
Yevgeniya
Jim
Randy
Tatyana
Normand
Jorge
stevo
Zdravka
Jerry
Helm
Age
25
29
32
32
37
41
53
54
55
55
58
68
73
Participant
Helm
Josué
Zdravka
Joel
Jerry
stevo
Jorge
Randy
Yevgeniya
Volonté
Tatyana
Jim
Normand
Age
13
14
16
16
17
17
18
20
22
22
23
23
24
Average: 47.1
Average: 18.8
Chart 2.2.3: Participant Current Age,
by Gender
Participant
Yevgeniya
Tatyana
Zdravka
Volonté
Josué
Joel
Jim
Randy
Normand
Jorge
stevo
Jerry
Helm
Age
32
53
58
Participant
Chart 2.2.4: Participant Age of
Acquisition, by Gender
Age
16
22
23
Zdravka
Yevgeniya
Tatyana
Average: 47.7
Average: 20.3
25
29
32
37
41
54
55
55
68
73
Helm
Josué
Joel
stevo
Jerry
Jorge
Randy
Volonté
Jim
Normand
13
14
16
17
17
18
20
22
23
24
Average: 46.9
Average: 18.4
51
Chart 2.2.5: Participant Current Age,
by Density Area
(High v. Low)
Chart 2.2.6: Participant Age of
Acquisition, by Density Area
(High v. Low)
Participant
Yevgeniya
Tatyana
Normand
Jorge
Zdravka
Helm
Volonté
Josué
Joel
Jim
Randy
stevo
Jerry
Age
32
53
54
55
58
73
Participant
Helm
Zdravka
Jorge
Yevgeniya
Tatyana
Normand
Age
13
16
18
22
23
24
Average: 54.2
Average: 19.3
25
29
32
37
41
55
68
Josué
Joel
stevo
Jerry
Randy
Volonté
Jim
14
16
17
17
20
22
23
Average: 41
Average: 18.4
Chart 2.2.7: Participant Current Age,
by Gender and Density
Area (High v. Low)
Chart 2.2.8: Participant Age of
Acquisition, by Gender and
Density Area (High v. Low)
Participant
Yevgeniya
Tatyana
Zdravka
Normand
Jorge
Helm
Volonté
Josué
Joel
Jim
Randy
stevo
Jerry
Age
32
53
58
Participant
Zdravka
Yevgeniya
Tatyana
Age
16
22
23
Average: 47.7
Average: 20.3
54
55
73
Helm
Jorge
Normand
13
18
24
Average: 60.7
Average: 18.3
25
29
32
37
41
55
68
Josué
Joel
stevo
Jerry
Randy
Volonté
Jim
14
16
17
17
20
22
23
Average: 41
Average: 18.4
52
The data shows that, as expected, the average current age of HDA speakers is
more than 13 years higher than the average current age of LDA speakers.
En outre, when comparing between HDA and LDA men, that difference changes
to almost 20 years. En fait, only two LDA males’ current ages fall within the range of
current ages for HDA males. Ici, the current age is indicative because the change to
learning via the Internet is relatively recent. Data regarding age of acquisition shows
that Esperanto study tends to commence at an early age, regardless of density area,
genre, or current age. The average age at which all participants began studying
Esperanto is 18.8, and there is only an 11-year spread in ages. The relative average
ages of acquisition between HDA and LDA males, respectivement, are almost the same:
18.3 versus 18.4. The HDA average age of acquisition with women included
increases to 19.3, still very close to the LDA average age. These numbers confirm
that among participants there are currently more young speakers in the LDA group,
which is also entirely male. Toutefois, they also show that there has been no apparent
change in age of acquisition, even if the reasons or methods may have changed. Il
could be suggested that older LDA males may have also learned Esperanto at an older
âge, and that currently young LDA males might have a lower age of acquisition, mais
this does not seem to be the case. Jerry and stevo, the two oldest LDA males, les deux
started learning Esperanto at 17, younger than the average, 18.4.
Regarding the second branch of the expectations, the data is more limited. Comme
discuté ci-dessus, there are only 3 female participants, all of whom are HDA. Ce
number is equal to the number of male HDA participants. Within the group of HDA
53
participants, the average current age of females is 13 years less than that of males.
Only one of the women falls within the range of HDA men’s current ages. Toutefois,
the women’s average current age is still 6.7 years higher than the average current age
of LDA males. Aussi, their average age of acquisition is 2 years higher than the
average for HDA males and 1.9 years higher than the average for all males. Among
participants, this would suggest that women might not comprise a larger proportion of
young HDA Esperanto speakers, but there are few data points. The data shows that
HDA women’s age of acquisition, if marginally higher, follows the general trend
among participants. While the data can support assertions regarding the ages of
different groups of speakers, the numbers alone cannot speak to the reasons behind
observed differences in gender distribution by location and age.
Let us expand the framework to be able evaluate the other part of Yevgeniya’s
and Joel’s proposal: that there is a correlation between age and gender differences
based on a geographic effect on Esperanto learning environments.
54
Chart 2.2.9: Participant Preliminary Methods of Esperanto Study
HDA
Tatyana Ukrainian
Women
Zdravka
Croatian
Yevgeniya Ukrainian
Normand
Canadian
(France)
Men
Helm
Sweden
Jorge
Brazil
LDA
Randy
USA
Josué
USA
Jim
USA
Men
Volonté
USA
Jerry
USA
stevo
USA
Joel
USA
Heard about Esperanto from friends who were
taking a class, and though she at first rejected it,
she later came to it and continued using it even
after her friends lost interest.
Started taking Esperanto as an after-school class
offered by one of her regular teachers. Her father
was also an Esperantist.
Already knew about it but was encouraged to
study Esperanto by her job supervisor, OMS
recommended her for participation in Esperanto
courses.
Heard about Esperanto when he studied abroad in
France and saw a poster announcing that classes
were being offered.
Took a correspondence course, later joining an
Esperanto club/course in Stockholm.
Is originally self-taught from a book, but then
took a course and promptly joined the local
Esperanto Association.
Read about Esperanto in the encyclopedia and
taught himself Esperanto from an English-
Esperanto/Esperanto-English dictionary.
Was often referred to Esperanto because of his
interest in language invention. He bought a
textbook and started teaching it to himself, later
taking a class in college for more exposure.
Found Esperanto while web surfing. He is self-
taught through the use of the Internet and books.
Took a not-for-credit university class but also
studied on his own using a textbook and lernu.net.
Found a reference to Esperanto in a book, started
teaching himself out of a book, and later took a
university class.
Started teaching himself the language out of a
dictionary given to him by a friend.
Read about Esperanto in an encyclopedia and
found a book out of which to teach himself the
langue.
55
All of the women, all of whom learned Esperanto while living in Eastern Europe,
were drawn in to study of the language by another person. All of these women then
studied the language in a class setting. Their Esperanto experience was therefore
social from the outset, and at least partially impelled by social motivators. Normand,
who is Canadian but began studying Esperanto in Europe because he felt
linguistically under equipped, also took a class, thereby having a social first
expérience. Helm might be described as self-taught, but because he took a
correspondence course he was not learning Esperanto in isolation. Only one HDA
mâle, Jorge, was truly self-taught, though he claims to have “devoured the whole
book in a few hours, and then [gone] looking for an Esperanto club.” In contrast, seulement
one LDA male, Volonté, was not self-taught. Toutefois, only Jim and Will specifically
mention using the Internet to teach themselves the language, and will was using it as a
personal supplement to his in-class lessons. En plus, Jim and Will represent the
two highest LDA ages of acquisition. This data supports the assertion that HDA
Esperanto learning tends to be more social, and that this social element plays a role in
an increased participation by women. Participant data does not conclusively support
the observation that LDA young male speakers are more likely to be attracted to
Esperanto through the Internet, but it does show that independent learning is
prevalent.
The fact that so many LDA speakers are self-taught is significant because it
entails that for many, real Esperanto interaction came years after they started to learn
il, and years after they were technically capable of using it. Randy, par exemple,
started studying Esperanto in 1989, but “the first time [il] spoke Esperanto face to
56
face with someone was in 1992 at the US Esperanto Conference.” Joshua, who started
learning Esperanto at fourteen, “never actually talked to anybody, [et] barely even
spoke it out loud until [il] was in [À] class in college,” about four years later. He says
of the transition, “it was kind of funny. Because in a certain way, I’d been learning
all these years and I believed it existed in the world, but to actually speak it and have
somebody understand it was kind of a revelation.” Joel reveals that when he started
learning Esperanto:
I didn’t really think there were people who spoke in Esperanto, at least not in
this continent … I was pretty much isolated because I didn’t have contact with
other Esperanto speakers … I learned basically from a book. … I didn’t have
speaking interaction, spoken interaction with other Esperantists for about two
années.
Jim observes, “I would say that’s a pretty common pattern in my experience, … one
attains reading fluency studying on their own and then in a relatively short time being
among Esperanto speakers they acquire speaking fluency.” In his case, even when he
started attending club meetings in Atlanta, he didn’t speak anyway. “I was really at
that point a little too shy to try talking Esperanto much, or in English for that matter.”
At his first congress, the 1985 Universal Congress of Esperanto, stevo, who had been
“haphazardly” studying Esperanto since 1972, says he was “able to practice [son]
Esperanto quite a bit, although not as much as others might have done, depuis [he’s]
basically shy.” Jim was not so shy as to not attend local gatherings, and stevo was not
so shy as to not attend the congress, but even so it took them years to start
participating in social Esperanto gatherings, and there may very well be many other
Esperanto speakers who are too shy to ever participate in person-to-person Esperanto
communication.
57
chapitre 3:
The Esperanto Speech Community
“By learning the language, Esperanto speakers automatically become
members of the community and participants in the culture.”
– Sabine Fiedler19
3.1 Terminology and definitions
The idea of speech communities is central to sociolinguistic study, et le
variability of its definition speaks to the variability of language use and culture. An
early definition of “speech community” comes from Dell Hymes.
A speech community is defined … as a community sharing knowledge of
rules for the conduct and interpretation of speech. Such sharing comprises
knowledge of at least one form of speech, and knowledge also of its patterns
of use. Both conditions are necessary” (1974: 51).
This traditional definition, while not explicitly so, does not readily consider groups
structured like that of Esperanto speakers. Plus récemment, Marcyliena Morgan
expanded the definition, en disant:
19 (2006: 77).
58
Because they are constructed around culturally and socially constituted
interaction, speech communities cannot be defined by static physical location
and can be experienced as part of a nation-state, neighborhood, village, club,
compound, on-line chat room, religious institution, et ainsi de suite (2001: 31).
Interactions within a speech community are “regulated, represented, and recreated
through discursive practices,” and when it is these discursive practices that bring
people together, they “behave as though they operate within a shared set of norms,
local knowledge, croyances, and values” (2001: 31). “What is shared among its members
is knowledge of language ideology and attitude towards language use” (2001: 32).
Within this broadened definition, the unique conditions of Esperanto speakers do not
exclude them from consideration as a speech community. The speech community of
Esperanto speakers is experienced within clubs, conferences, forums, correspondence,
and households, but none of these is comprehensive of the community. Esperanto
speakers do not have a shared physical location, as the intent is to be global, but small
communities of speakers are often organized in areas with a high enough
concentration. Regional or global conferences may bring more speakers together, mais
many members of the speech community never attend even a local gathering. Le
speech community at large is woven together predominantly through whatever forms
of long-distance communication speakers have available: personal written
correspondence, Skype calls, public Internet forums, and the occasional face-to-face
meeting. Sabine Fiedler describes it as an “active network,” that includes “an
independent press as well as publishing houses20, organizations, correspondence,
collective traveling, radio programs, and meetings and conferences in which only
Esperanto is spoken” (2006: 74). Esperanto speakers who, within their resources,
20 See Ulrich Becker’s “Publishing for a diaspora: the development of publishing in the international
Esperanto movement” for more on this topic.
59
actively engage with other speakers are responsible for the formation of the speech
community.
The group of speakers of Esperanto is often referred to as a community or
mouvement, but also as a diaspora. Sabine Fiedler argues that while “the speech
community… is often compared to a diaspora … Esperanto speakers cannot look
back on life in a common territory” (2006: 74), but Ulrich Becker gives the term
“diaspora” special importance in relation to the Esperanto community:
The term diaspora implies what the other two terms usually used (community,
mouvement) disguise: that the speakers of Esperanto, living spread out in the
monde, have their own individual values, different lives, éducatif
backgrounds, religious and political convictions – and that they have basically
only two things in common: d'abord, they consciously choose the planned
language Esperanto as a language to speak and to use for international
contacts; et, deuxième, after a few years of using this language many of them
incorporate the cultural values Esperanto offers them and develop an identity
as speakers or users of Esperanto, as Esperantists. Toutefois, most of them are
not, or not always, an active part of the community or of the movement and
stay out of touch with it for long periods of time (2006: 270).
Becker explains that the use of “diaspora” is applicable because “the term … has been
taken over by others to describe their own international community,” and its use is “in
most cases not at all in connection with a common religious background, but with the
goal of maintaining a common cultural and linguistic identity” (2006: 270).
“Diaspora” does things that other group terms cannot. “Diaspora” conveys the
element of geographic distance between speakers critical to the Esperanto experience,
while “community” conceals, if not implies the opposite of, this component.
Toutefois, with the exception of native speakers of Esperanto, Esperantists are not
“maintaining” an identity; they are forging one. They are not a people once united
that have been scattered across the world; they are a scattered array of people who
60
have chosen to unite under a language and perhaps its ideals. Aussi, though “diaspora”
clearly communicates the internationality of Esperanto speakers, it neglects the
element of choice. The Manifesto of Rauma better explains the relevance of the word.
One of the first uses of “diaspora” in reference to the Esperanto community was in
1980 in the Manifesto of Rauma, to “point out that the search for a proprietary
identity leads us to the understanding that being an Esperantist means belonging to a
self-elected diaspora of a linguistic minority” (qtd. In Becker 2006: 270, accent
added). Becker concedes that “the most active Esperantists prefer the labels
community and movement because they foreground the common political and
educational goals of the core of active speakers of the language” (2006: 271). Il
would seem that “diaspora” is most suitable when referencing the physical
manifestation of Esperanto speakers; “community” is perhaps the most widely
applicable if only because it is the most general, and “movement” best represents the
active participation in and promotion of Esperanto ideals.
Another commonly used term is “Esperantist,” but it, aussi, generates a variety
of reactions.
Are you an Esperantist?
“I would call myself an Esperantist.” – Will
“Yes, because I speak the language.” – Tatyana
“I do call myself an Esperantist.” – Randy
“I would say yes, but I usually don’t … use that word to describe myself. … I
usually just say Esperanto speaker.” – Jim
61
“I’m an Esperantist because I like the idea of speaking a world language that
is that way, that is neutral, and opens you to other culture and that gives you
the opportunity to make friends around the world.” – Normand
“I have no problem considering myself an Esperantist. Mais, I do use that word
with caution.” – Joel
“I could call myself an Esperantist in a kind of nearly political sense that I
think it should be good if people used it. But otherwise I would merely prefer
to refer to myself as an Esperanto speaker.” – Helm
“I’m still an Esperantist in the sense that I am still a user, but I’m not a
member of the movement anymore.” – Jorge
“I would not call myself an Esperantist now because of the falloff in fluency
and my current lack of dedication to the language. I don’t seek to promote it
or to teach it or, use it as far as that goes. So I would not be qualified as far as
that goes, then.” – Jerry
“I would definitely call myself an Esperantist; I would say it with pride.” –
Josué
Maintenant, in 2011, though definitions provided by participating Esperanto speakers
echoed the original definition of the term, somehow “Esperantist”, at least in English,
seems to have the burden of extensive connotations. According to the original
definition drafted in the Bolougne Declaration of the first international Esperanto
congress, “Esperantist” and “Esperanto speaker” should be equivalent terms. Mais, comme
seen in the excerpts above, most participants gave the word more meaning. Alors que
Volonté, Tatyana, and Randy comfortably call themselves Esperantists, albeit with some
62
further clarification later on, Jim acknowledges that the term is applicable to him but
shies away from it for self-identification. In his aversion to it, he hints at an existing
difference of meaning. By Normand’s definition, to be an Esperantist is to be
someone who supports, or at least agrees with, the idea of a world language. Helm
echoes this, giving the word a political edge, and prefers the alternative of Esperanto
speaker. Jorge and Jerry also tie promotion of the language to the meaning or
connotation of the word, Jerry going so far as to say he is no longer “qualified” to be
an Esperantist because of a lack of dedication to the language. Dernièrement, Josué
provides a glowing confirmation of identifying as an Esperantist.
Unique among all of these responses was the second part of Tatyana’s reply:
"Mais, I divide in my perception of [Esperanto], two things: the language and the idea.
I don’t like the idea. I don’t like any idea, any religion, because they made me not to
see other things. Mais, I like the language, so I am Esperantist.” Unfortunately,
Tatyana does not provide further explanation for this statement, nor does she define
what she means by “the idea”. This could be a reference to the idea of human
brotherhood, or it could be a reference to homaranismo, the faith structure that
Zamenhof tried to link with Esperanto. Si c'était le cas, her dislike of “the idea”
might stem from Soviet/Eastern European atheism. Despite her conceptual aversion,
Tatyana’s experience as a member of the global Esperanto community has given her
many benefits (to be discussed in a later chapter) that have stemmed from Esperantic
ideals.
Part of the perceived problem with the term “Esperantist” comes from the –ist
suffix, which in English generally indicates the holding of a belief. Donc, to call
63
oneself an Esperantist can be misleading, in that others will think it means more than
just ‘a speaker of Esperanto.’ Helm points out that this is an odd nomenclature, as no
one calls himself an Anglicist for speaking English, et ainsi de suite. Joel says that the word
is safe within the community, where people usually know what it is supposed to
signifier, but dangerous outside of the community, where the second reading is likely to
be more prevalent and lead to unintended implications.
Participants also offered alternative terms that explicitly convey some of the
nuances that might be implied or obscured by “Esperantist.” Randy expanded his self-
identification as follows:
I also call myself an active Esperantist. In Esperanto I would say a
“movadano”, which means a member of the Esperanto movement … to me an
Esperantist is someone who speaks and understands Esperanto. So you don’t
have to have any special interest in any special beliefs to be an Esperantist,
you just have to use the language, and I certainly do that. I then also am an
active member of the Esperanto movement, which I don’t believe you have to
be to be an Esperantist.
Adhering to what could be called the basic meaning of “Esperantist,” Randy adds
qualifiers or additional terms to ensure that his intended meaning is conveyed.
De la même manière, Jim says:
If I need to distinguish someone who is fluent in Esperanto from someone
who isn’t fluent in Esperanto but approves of the language and the goals of the
Esperanto movement I would say “friends of Esperanto” or “member of the
Esperanto movement”.
Joshua also offers the term “Esperantujo”, an Esperanto term:
-Ujo is the ending that denotes a container for something, and it used to be
used for countries, so … “Francujo” was a container of Frenchmen, ou
“France”, and it’s not really used that way anymore, but Esperantujo is
theoretically a ‘container of hopers,’ and it’s used to refer to the Esperanto
community at large.
64
Lernu!’s translation device glosses “Esperantujo,” perhaps more literally, comme
“Esperantoland”. Ainsi, this term might be a fitting alternative to represent the collective
of Esperantists, who form a geographically dispersed but ideologically connected
community of hopers: the Esperantujo.
3.2 Norms and ideologies
The assumption might be that the geographic dispersal of Esperanto speakers
would lead to de-regularization of the language through the development of
regionalisms and colloquialisms. Toutefois, several forces inhibit Esperantic
deviations. The Akademio de Esperanto, established in 1905, has the following
responsibilities:
(1) To conserve and protect the language according to its norms and to control
its development; (2) to explore all linguistic questions concerning Esperanto;
(3) to review publications form the linguistic point of view; et (4) to defend
Esperanto against all competitors (Fiedler 2006: 79).
While the Akademio may have official say, it cannot truly control speakers, and does
not try to. In general it “concentrates its activities on conserving and exploring the
language rather than on prescribing rules on the basis of its authority” (Fiedler 2006:
80). This means that when, par exemple, the Akademio accepted the suffixes “-ujo”
and “-lando” for rendering geographic names, but ignored the popular suffix “-io,”
and yet speakers preferentially used “-io,” “the Academy eventually decided to
officially tolerate ‘-io’” (Fiedler 2006: 80). The Internet also has a significant part to
play in the regulation of Esperanto because it enables rapid large-scale transmission
of and access to information. Par conséquent, whether it is a publication or an
exchange in an Internet forum, anyone, anywhere, can access anyone’s Esperanto,
65
and this combats the geographic isolation of speakers, who could otherwise easily
develop Esperanto dialects21. Another factor that insulates Esperanto from change is
the way in which people become speakers. “There’s so many new learners coming in
that are learning out of textbooks that are sort of starting at the same point, and not a
lot of folks who are kind of continuing the genetic growth of the language by, dire,
learning it from their parents. There is a control there” (Josué). La majorité des
speakers acquire Esperanto through a static documentation, not verbalized
communicative use, which keeps deviations from the original standard at bay.
Finalement, speakers have the most control over the linguistic development of
Esperanto. Esperanto speakers who meet monthly to speak the language socially, mais
also communicate individually with other Esperanto speakers elsewhere in the world,
cannot develop local variations within the language without debilitating their own
applications of its international utility. Speakers’ awareness of the pitfalls of the
dispersal of the speech community make them the most powerful tools in preserving
Esperanto’s uniformity. Randy expresses his fears and rationale against the
development of colloquialisms in Esperanto:
[Ils sont] not going through any official process, they’re just being used by
individual speakers, and they catch on or don’t catch on. And the risk there is
that they’ll catch on in one place, and then it becomes not only a colloquialism
but a localism, which is sort of antithetical to the idea of Esperanto.
Central to the Esperanto speaker’s language ideology is the idea of linguistic loyalty,
defined by Uriel Weinreich in 1977:
A language, like a nation, can be thought of as a certain set of rules of
behavior; linguistic loyalty, like nationalism, then describes the state of
consciousness in which the language (like the nation) as a closed unit and in
21 See Flavio Cimonari Rebello’s “Strangaj voĉoj el Interreto [Strange Voices from the Internet]” for
more on the appearance of and reaction to improper Esperanto use on Internet forums.
66
contrast to other languages, has a high rank within a range of values, a rank
that is worthy and in need of “defence” (qtd in Fiedler 2006: 76).
It is not so much that Esperanto is actively policed within the community; plutôt, c'est
the awareness of the intended reach of the language that keeps speakers from
deviating.
Supporting constancy does not translate into a quelling of creativity within
Esperanto. The agglutinative word structure enables enhanced specificity22 and
wordplay through unique morphological combinations; what is dispreferred is the
introduction of new roots, especially unnecessary loanwords23 from dominant
national languages. In Joshua’s experience, lexical innovation is rather rare:
Maybe because of the fact that people are sensitive to this needing to be a
language that would be understandable in its base form to anybody, fabrication
up new words, … I don’t know if I’ve ever actually seen it. Je veux dire, there’s a
lot of creativity with using the existing words and building on them but not
with importing new forms.
Within the Esperanto speech community, the language ideology puts a conscious
premium on constancy, dictating the norms of use.
Toujours, because Esperanto has been around for over a century, language change
is inevitable. Just like a natural language, the Esperantic lexicon has to reflect the
development of new ideas and technologies. “Part of Zamenhof’s idea is that it would
be a living language … so you are allowed to create your own words, but the idea is
that you try and use what morphemes are already out there, and you try and make it as
international as possible, the broadest scope” (Randy). The problem is that “there are
some people who like to just tack an ‘o’ … to the end of an [Anglais] word”
22 See section 4.2: Practical attractions to Esperanto, for more on this topic
23 An Introduction to Language defines a loan word: “Lexicons can be divided into native and non-
native words, called loan words. A native word is one whose history or etymology can be traced back
to the earliest known stages of the language” (474).
67
(Randy)24. In informal Esperanto communication with a limited reach, this kind of
behavior can be seen as benign laziness or as seriously inconsiderate. In far-reaching
Esperanto use, it can have detrimental ramifications on the consistency of the
langue.
The problem of excessive or inappropriate lexical innovation is visible
especially in Esperanto poetry. Jim complains about having “experienced frustration,
par exemple, sometimes reading certain poets.” His complaints stem both from a
literary disapproval as well as from linguistic concern:
It’s a matter of using words that are only used in poetry and their form [est]
supposedly poetic in impact but in practice they are more just academic or
bookish in effect, because they’re never used in ordinary spoken language.
They don’t have the resonance that a more commonly used – and therefore
having a lot more emotional associations – word would have.
Most significant in regard to Esperanto at large, il dit, “bad writing influences other
writers and even speakers, it can have a deleterious effect on the language to make it
harder to learn for new speakers, en général, especially for new speakers whose native
language isn’t Indo-European.” Zamenhof himself established literature as a way of
producing models for spoken Esperanto, so it is not unreasonable to fear that
grammatically sloppy Esperanto writing might have an adverse effect on speakers
seeking to develop their abilities. Randy understands the motivation for lexical
innovation in poetry, but emphasizes the need to stay faithful to the original
Esperanto lexicon.
I certainly understand that for poetic purposes … people want more word
choice, but I don’t see a need for that to go outside the sphere of poetry, et
also I think that when you do that, that really you should gloss those words
24 As shown in Chapter 1, the second rule of the Sixteen Rules of Esperanto states that “nouns are
formed by adding –o to the root.”
68
and provide a Fundamenta explanation of the words, using only words from
the fundaments of Esperanto.
Both Jim and Randy agree that, ultimately, frivolous change is deleterious to the
Esperanto objective. It overcomplicates the language. If excessive borrowing takes
lieu, the language’s lexicon grows unnecessarily and in a way that complicates
acquisition for new speakers who do not speak the source language of the loanwords.
Another feature agreed upon by the Esperanto speech community is the ideal
Esperanto accent. It was unanimously expressed that when listening to the majority of
Esperanto speakers, one can discern their native language, or at least language family.
Toutefois, the effect of their native language rarely affects a listener’s comprehension.
Because Esperanto only has five vowels, there is leeway for altered pronunciation
before meaning is affected, which minimizes the disruptive effect of a foreign accent.
More often, beginner speakers, who are likely to speak with a thicker accent as well
as with grammatical mistakes, are the ones who are hard to understand. Helm
describes the ideal Esperanto pronunciation: “vowels like in German, Polish, et
Espagnol, and Italian; consonants basically as German as Spanish as well, avec le
caveat in that you should be able to differentiate between B as in ‘bottle’ and V as in
‘vent’.” He says the goal is for a “continental European accent without specific traits
of any specific language.” Joel makes a distinction between accent and pronunciation:
There is a correct pronunciation, … and people do have certain accents,
especially if they’re less, Disons, polished Esperanto speakers, and some
people have a harder time with pronunciation, … but, there’s no “correct
accent”. … As long as you pronounce the sounds correctly, then you’re
speaking Esperanto correctly. For example there’s a correct way to pronounce
the ‘r’ sound with the tongue [makes trilled ‘r sound (represented as [le] dans l'
International Phonetic Alphabet)], like in Italian, but if you pronounce it like
in English it’s not a disaster, … or in the throat like in French.
69
Joel contrasts Esperantist attitudes towards accents with American attitudes. An
Esperantist may mentally notice the linguistic background of a fellow speaker, mais
“it’s accepted that people are going to have an accent.” “It’s not like you’re excluded
… if you have an accent in English or whatever and you’re with all native speakers.
They’re going to pick up on that and want to know where you’re from. With
Esperanto, no one’s going to criticize the accent.” In a linguistically homogeneous
société, a foreign accent is marked, and makes the speaker a curiosity. In the
Esperanto speech community, where almost everyone is a non-native speaker – and
even native speakers have another native language – a subtly different accent is more
like a different voice.
3.3 Approach to language
An analysis of the Esperanto speech community necessitates looking at
members’ relationship to language at large. Esperanto speakers are, certainly from a
United States standpoint, anomalous for taking the time to learn additional languages,
not even considering that at least one of them is not a natural language. Tous
participants have studied at least 2 natural languages in addition to their native
langue, 2 have studied 8 languages, and the average number of natural languages
studied is 5.7. The average number of L2 natural languages studied is 4.5. Sabine
Fiedler’s research indicates that this is consistently the case, as “speakers possess a
knowledge of, en moyenne, 3.45 foreign languages in addition to Esperanto” (2006:
75). De la même manière, participants in Nikola Rašic’s study “declared a knowledge of” 3.4
langues, not including Esperanto or their native language (Fettes 1996: 55).
70
Participant
Chart 3.3.1: Number of Natural Languages Studied
or Spoken by Individual Participants
Number of L2 Natural
Languages Studied
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
6
8
8
* Have 2 L1 Languages
Number of Natural
Languages Studied
3
4
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
9
9
Randy
Zdravka
Jim
Volonté
Jerry
stevo
Tatyana*
Yevgeniya*
Normand
Helm
Jorge
Josh
Joel
Chart 3.3.2: Number of Natural
Languages Spoken by Individual
Participants
Number of L2
Languages Spoken
2
3
4
5
6
8
Number of
Participants
1
3
4
2
1
2
Among the languages spoken or studied by participants, at varying degrees of
fluency, sont: American Sign Language, Ukrainian, russe, Anglais, Polish, Espagnol,
Swedish, Croatian, Allemand, French, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Latin, Welsh,
Turkish, hongrois, Catalan, grec, Japanese, Czech, and Dutch. Many would argue
that in contemporary society, just knowing English is enough to render most other
national languages extraneous. Toujours, though all of the 13 participants are proficient or
fluent in English, and 7 of whom are native English speakers, all of them have
71
pursued more languages. De plus, 10 have studied Spanish; 9 have studied French
(one as a native speaker); 9 have studied German, and 6 have studied Russian (two as
native speakers).
Chart 3.3.3: Natural Languages
Spoken by Participants
Langue
ASL
Catalan
Croatian
Dutch
Anglais
French
Allemand
grec
hongrois
Italian
Japanese
Latin
Polish
Portuguese
russe
Espagnol
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Welsh
Number of
Participants Who
Have Studied It
1
1
2
1
13
9
9
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
6
dix
2
1
2
1
Considering English, French, Espagnol, and Russian to be major national languages,25
it is even more notable that all 13 participants speak some combination of two or
more, with three speaking all four.
25 All have an estimated number of speakers in excess of 100 million and are among the six official
languages of the United Nations (Arabic, Mandarin Chinese, Anglais, French, russe, et espagnol).
72
Chart 3.3.4: Number of Participants Who
Speak Multiple Major Languages
Major Languages Spoken
Anglais, russe, Espagnol, French
Anglais, russe, Espagnol
Anglais, russe, French
Anglais, French, Espagnol
Anglais, Espagnol
Anglais, French
Total
Participants
3
2
1
3
2
2
13
While my solicitation for participants was made in English, a fact that likely affected
the prevalence of English among participants, other studies echo these results. Fiedler
found, “the most widely spoken languages among Esperanto speakers are English,
French, Allemand, Latin, Espagnol, and Russian” (75). Rašic, aussi, found, “the most
widely spoken languages apart from Esperanto were English (59%, plus 6% native
speakers), French (46%, plus 12% native speakers), and German (43%, plus 15%
native speakers” (Fettes 1996: 55). The popularity of these major national languages
among participants says something about Esperanto: people are learning it for some
reason beyond mere necessity, and they have a uniquely dedicated interest in
langue. These two conclusions are supported by the high average number of
languages studied by individuals, and by the high number of natural languages
spoken or studied at some depth by participants, cumulatively (19 languages total).
Participants’ study of languages with fewer speakers further points to an interest in
language as something more than a tool.
En effet, several Esperanto speakers are also interested in other constructed
langues, qui, with the exception of Esperanto and a few others, have a limited
73
number of speakers26. All 13 participants have learned about, if not sought to acquire,
constructed languages other than Esperanto, and 9 mentioned having spent time
studying them.
Chart 3.3.6: Number of Constructed
Languages Studied by Individual Participants
Participant
Constructed Languages
Studied
(excluding Esperanto)
Helm
Jerry
Joel
Josué
Tatyana
Yevgeniya
Jim
Jorge
stevo
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
5
8
Langue
Chart 3.3.5: Constructed
Languages Studied by Participants
Number of
Participants
Who Have
Studied It
1
5
6
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
El Glhetg
Ido
Interlingua
Ithkull
Klingon
Láadan
Latejami
Lingua de Planeta
Loglan
à Loj
Novial
Rilsmo Esperanto
Toki Pona
Volapük
They have studied 14 different constructed languages, the two most popular being
Interlingua and Ido. 6 studied Interlingua, a Latin-based universal language project;
and 5 studied Ido, an offshoot of Esperanto. On average, participants who have
studied constructed languages other than Esperanto have studied 3.1. Autre
constructed languages mentioned include: El Glhetg, Ithkull, Klingon, Láadan,
Latejami, Lingua de Planeta, Loglan, à Loj, Novial, Rilsmo (an Esperanto variant),
Toki Pona, and Volapük.
26 Jerry, the President of the North American Ido Society says there are “only maybe 35 or 38
[members], and half of those are from outside of the North American hemisphere.”
74
Even more interesting about the way Esperantists interact with language is
that many have created their own. Joshua started his description of his coming to
Esperanto with the words, “at some point in middle school I picked up the hobby of
inventing languages,” and it is clear that it has been a lifelong endeavor. Initialement,
he wanted to create a universal language, and so he felt like learning Esperanto would
effect to supporting the competition – at least until he gave Esperanto a closer look
and found much to appreciate. Plus récemment, “most of [son] personal efforts have
been in the area of what’s known as artlanging, so not trying to make a philosophical
language or have a particular purpose, but sort of trying to make them as strange and
irregular and odd and cool as languages that actually exist.” His education as a
linguist and his experience as a language constructor give him an appreciation for the
work of other language inventors:
I’m interested in everybody’s constructed languages, but … I have a soft spot
for Volapük; it’s such a terrible terrible language. Mais, this man, you know, il
was his life’s work, and I do sort of have this dream of one day becoming
fluent in Volapük for absolutely no reason except that then I could write
poetry in it and it would be the strangest thing that anybody had ever done.
Toujours, that does not keep him from finding flaws in constructed languages:
When I was first in college, … I was thinking about how irritating some of
Zamenhof’s choices were and then I thought, “Could I actually do better?”
And so I’ve spent, off and on over the last ten or eleven years, a lot of time
trying to come up with something that would be better, which is a fun project.
Natural languages, cependant, receive different treatment from Joshua. They were not
created to be perfect; they do not claim to be perfect, and they display the weathering
of time, perhaps having worn down some complexities and picked up some foreign
bodies over the centuries. And while Joshua may cast a critical eye on constructed
75
langues, he disagrees with the attitudes toward natural languages exhibited by other
Esperanto speakers he has encountered:
Esperanto speakers nonetheless seem to feel that you shouldn’t devote energy
to studying other languages, … and that there is in fact something wrong with
the irregularity of natural language … I find myself really being annoyed by
Esperanto speakers making fun of how stupid it is that languages have idioms,
and things like that. As a lover of language, somebody who spends a whole lot
of time studying other languages for fun, and who thinks it’s a worthwhile
pursuit, that attitude I feel is really not a good one.
While Joshua may have experience with Esperantists who have negative attitudes
toward natural languages, the data presented here makes that perspective seem
anomalous within the Esperanto speech community.
Jim also constructs languages, and he uses Gjâ-zym-byn, his most fully
formed language, “for writing [son] diary and grocery lists and to-do lists and what
have you, and for thinking and praying.” When asked about his intent for the
langue, he replied:
I started out having it as a purely private and personal language. But I didn’t
actually keep its existence secret, and a few people, beginning with an
Esperanto pen-pal at the time, in Brazil, asked me questions about it and I put
up a few of my notes about it online. Et, as more people expressed interest,
… I improved my online documentation for it.
He found motivation in the interest of self-expression, indeed creating a private
linguistic world, with no intent to disseminate his language or encourage others to
learn it. As the history of language invention shows, language inventors usually seek
to fill a void in what natural languages at their disposal allow them to express. Dans
Jim’s case, Gjâ-zym-byn is “better at expressing changes of state, and space-time
relations. It also has a dense vocabulary of emotional state words. … Not only
emotional but mental states in general.” Its focus on internal states is particularly
76
suited for introspection, which is logical given that the language was designed for
personal use, with no expectation of it being used for interpersonal communication.
Jerry, who has shifted his dedication from Esperanto to Ido, describes one of
his own languages, Loijo. It contains only the letters j, k, l, m, est, p, o, J’ai, and u: le
letters typed by the right hand on a standard Qwerty keyboard. Pour lui, developing it
was about exploration, “to see how far [il] could develop that. Mais, the language
des sons, because of its very limited number of phonemes, it sounds a little rough, …
kind of babbling.” He wanted:
to develop it as a language to be taught in the elementary school, actually, as a
first language to learn, so that students would learn components of a language
and how a language goes together … in order to develop language learning
compétences, to allow them … to learn a natural language when they get to the high
école. … English is such a horrible language to attempt to teach or to learn
depuis, … so [le] intent was to use it as a teaching language for how to learn
langues, en effet.
Jerry mentions that he is not a trained linguist, and therefore feels insufficiently
prepared to fully develop a language, so Loijo will probably be left on the drawing
conseil. Toujours, Jerry also helped develop Roila, Robot Interaction Language, to teach
high school students how to communicate with a robot with a constructed language,
and he continues his quest for the perfect universal language. He is the President of
the North American Ido Society, but he is also interested in Lingua de Planeta and
Paqatyl, two more universal language projects.
This brings us to Jorge de Oliveira, the creator of Paqatyl, who prefers to be
referred to as Kior Olfaa, his Paqatyl name, when Paqatyl is being discussed. It would
seem as though Jorge feeds on language. He is currently a member of the El Glhetg
Language Committee, “responsible for several important changes in the language” of
77
the micronation of Talossa. Jorge also used to be a prominent figure in the Esperanto
community. In 1994 he was “invited by Esperanto’s big bosses to participate in a new
effort: the creation of an international Esperanto organization, of which [il] était
going to be the general manager,” But, after people’s personal issues interfered with
its creation and Jorge was left “empty-handed,” he “decided to leave the E-Movement
forever.” He had always disagreed with certain elements of Esperanto27, and now he
began to search for a better universal language. Finalement, he realized that the only
solution was to make one himself. Jorge says, “I started buying books of as many
languages as I could, and studied approximately 400 languages in order to learn
enough to finish my project. I created several different projects before I said to
myself, ‘this is finally what I have always wanted.’” He described the process in more
profondeur:
For some years I was caught between the idea of developing an a priori
conlang28, but a priori conlangs usually sound unnatural. I didn’t have much
access to language books in the beginning, … I wanted the ones which were
hardest to find: Basque, Turkish, African languages… When I buy one of
those books, I read it in a few hours and then re-read it until I have almost
learned it by heart. I usually look for the nice grammatical details. I love
sitting at my desk comparing ten or twenty different languages.
One of the issues that Jorge has with Esperanto is that its linguistic roots are not truly
international. For people whose languages do not have Latinate or Germanic roots,
aside from the purported regularity of the language, ease of acquisition is minimized.
27 Jorge thinks Esperanto is too complex to meet its claims of simplicity and easy acquisition. He says,
“the Esperanto movement tries to sell something it can’t deliver,” calling it a “ripoff.” He believes that
while it’s “good for culture, especially for the translation of works from small countries that otherwise
would be forgotten,” “it’s not very good for international communication, especially person to person.
[It’s] too big, difficult and Pan-European, good for those who know Latin or a Romance language, ou
even English.”
28 Okrent defines an a priori constructed language as one “completely created from scratch,” while a
posteriori constructed languages “takes most of their material from existing natural languages” (2009:
315). Jerry’s Roila is an example of an a priori language, while Esperanto is an a posteriori language.
78
Toutefois, I had to ask whether in including hundreds of world languages, Paqatyl just
becomes more equally exclusive rather than inclusive. Kior’s explanation was, “it’s
psychologically favorable when someone recognizes in Paqatyl a feature from their
own language. I want Paqatyl to be democratic, not a present from Europe and the
USA to the colonized world.” This was a keenly worded reply, because it contests a
central premise that Esperanto, as a culturally neutral language, does not carry the
cultural burden of colonization and imperialism that dominant natural languages
avoir.
Kior knows that he is different, but he has a cause. He feels that “conlanging
has become kind of a sport, and there are wackos who create one every month.” He,
plutôt, belongs to a select group among language creators. “Auxlangers are few and
kind of hated by other conlangers, exactly because they have a higher ideal. Ils sont
interested in people and in communication, not only in themselves.” Kior has
devoted years to Paqatyl, turning his passion into something that will help the world –
if the world can be bothered to learn it.
Saweli, a derivation of Rick Morneau’s Latejami, was developed by stevo,
who prefers that his name not be capitalized. stevo describes Saweli as a “super-
Esperanto, but according to [son] own criteria,” and intended for “personal use and
study.” As a derivation of another language, Saweli’s structure and purpose are
closely linked to those of Latejami, the “fifth major variation” of what was originally
known as Katanda.
Morneau’s design goals included the language being unambiguously
translatable to another language by computer. … He incorporated many
different features into the language so that it could easily transfer meaning to
the target language. Another design goal is known as self-segregating
79
morphologie, which means that any series of syllables can be interpreted in
only one way, even if spaces and punctuation are removed.
De plus:
By using the various features of Latejami, large families of words may be
created from a minimum of components. The most extreme example of this
fonctionnalité, which Esperanto shares to a certain degree, is the group of words
based on the classifier for epistemic probability. There are about 143 regular
grammatical variations of this root in the Latejami dictionary, yet in English a
distinct, often unrelated word is needed for each of the variations.
Another feature stevo touts is that “Latejami and Saweli have one of the smallest
grammars. … It fits onto a single page.” Saweli clearly stems from the language-
inventing motivations of simplifying, eradicating vagueness, and adhering to
logicality.
Esperantists are conscious of the fact that their interests differ from those of
the general population, but it is in these differences that Esperantists come together. UN
curiosity about language is clearly a central commonality. This curiosity, which for
some would be more accurately described as an acquisitive hunger, translates into a
shared language ideology that is a crucial component of the Esperanto speech
community, in that it predisposes them to be receptive to the study of Esperanto.
80
Chapitre 4:
Why Esperanto?
“You can do anything you want in Esperanto: quarrel and be abusive and
kind and loving and whatever.”
– Helm
“Esperanto bridges gaps, bridges communication, cultural gaps, entre
people as we speak. And I’ve experienced that in my own life.”
– Joel
"[Esperanto] provided me with opportunities that I couldn’t find in the rest of
my life.”
-Humphrey Tonkin29
While Esperanto speakers might be lovers of language, it takes more than
being a language lover to become an Esperanto speaker. There is a “wide range from
idealistic, ‘let’s have everyone in the world speak Esperanto,’ to pragmatic,
‘Esperanto’s fun to use, let’s just use it’” (Randy). Mais, no matter how idealistic a
29 (qtd. in Okrent 2009: 128)
81
speaker is, that does not diminish his pragmatic perception of the language. Normand
is an active idealist precisely because Esperanto has proven its practical value:
By learning Esperanto it’s like getting a world culture … if you learn
Norwegian or if you learn another language you will be really oriented to one
specific culture and one country. But this is not the case with Esperanto and
this is what I appreciate. Because I have spoken Esperanto with people from
all around the world, and that is really opening my mind, and helping my
understanding of what is going on in the world and how the world is today.
Esperanto not only connects speakers with others around the world, it makes
conversations more significant. Instead of making small talk with a new
acquaintance, speakers take the opportunity to gain an understanding of a different
way of life:
It’s quite interesting to speak with Esperantists. … Often conversations will be
– with non-Esperantists – will be about buying a new car, or about sports. …
Compare with Esperantists who will never speak about this kind of topic. …
Usually the conversation with Esperantists will be much more interesting and
completely different than I will speak with my family or friends or relatives. Il
will be completely because of this situation of two people from two cultures
Parlant, trying to explain. (Normand).
For anyone who is interested in a universally useful universal language, and is not
just pursuing some manifestation of an ideal linguistic universality, Esperanto is
really the only choice. Esperanto is self-perpetuating, in that people speak it because
other people speak it. Joshua explains:
As constructed languages go, … and there have been so many obviously
invented for the purpose of international communication, Esperanto is the
only one that really, actually, genuinely works. … There really are people out
there who are speaking it, and you can learn it and you really can go talk to
eux.
En effet, if a language’s only purpose is to enable international communication, mais
there is a pronounced scarcity of speakers, then there is no impetus to learn the
langue, and it remains useless.
82
4.1 Ideology-based reasons to speak Esperanto
Esperanto has more in its favor than its relatively high number of speakers.
Despite being initially controversial and often downplayed, the ideology of human
brotherhood persists in Esperanto. For Randy, part of what drew him to the language
was what he jokingly calls “the ‘Peace, Love, and Understanding’ side of Esperanto.”
De la même manière, for Joel, “Esperanto’s idealistic aspect, goodwill and peace among people,
… intercultural and international understanding, … is very important to [son]
involvement with Esperanto.” Normand, who is perhaps the most idealistic
participant, is nonetheless sincerely passionate, and gives a compelling example of
how Zamenhof’s dream of human fraternity is accomplished through Esperanto.
Bringing up recent natural disasters, he explains that, “when you know people around
the world you can have a feeling of the whole world, you are caring for what’s
happening in the rest of the world, … because you may know that it’s happening to
someone that you know.” Indeed, in Joel’s opinion, Esperanto’s history and sense of
community put it above all other constructed languages. For Joel, “wherever I go, et
what people from whichever countries I meet, … we always feel like we have
something in common right from the get-go, and it bridges a lot of cultural gaps.”
Other participants echoed this sentiment. In Randy’s words:
We’re not our own nationality but … it’s almost like there’s an automatic
friendship when you meet another Esperantist. It’s more than an acquaintance.
You already feel comfortable with them; you already have this thing in
commun, and frequently you find out that you have lots of things in common.
Yevgeniya, aussi, dit, “you can just start talking to some person and you don’t have to
know this person but you feel like this person is your friend, and this person shares
83
similar interests and has the same mindset.” In her study on the Esperanto speech
community, Sabine Fiedler explains, “for many speakers, Esperanto is more than
simply another foreign language. It is not only an instrument but – on the basis of
common cultural consciousness – also a medium of personal identification” (2006:
76). En bref, no matter where a fellow Esperantist is from, as Randy puts it, “It’s not
like they’re the foreigner to me, because we’re both Esperantists.”
There is logic behind the presence of a prevailing outlook among Esperantists.
For there to be an interest in a universal language, there has to be an interest in
universal communication; for there to be an interest in universal communication,
there is likely to be an underlying desire for cultural exchange and universal
compréhension. Zamenhof’s ideals still hold because they are logical motivations for
any constituency supporting a universal language movement. De plus, Esperantists
also tend to have similar political perspectives. According to Randy, “many
Esperantists are interested in progressive causes – often that’s universal.” Normand
dit, “what is interesting with Esperantists is … the proportion of people that are
open to new ideas.” In a similar vein, Joel explains that the few negative reactions he
has received concerning Esperanto have come from the opposite side of the
ideological spectrum. “Often times those who are more to the political right, ou
religious right, Disons, … have a more negative opinion of it, think it’s unnatural or
something linked to, I don’t know, some kind of hippy thing or socialistic or against
God in that it’s against Babel.” Indeed, some among the politically conservative, ou
those for whom allegiance to America precludes global citizenship, actively oppose
84
the idea of Esperanto education.30,31 Again, a preexisting political ideology that
supports globalism predisposes people to support Esperanto and generates a
commonality among speakers.
This same global consideration is appealed to by what Esperanto
communicates metalinguistically. Normand finds value in the culturally umarked
quality of Esperanto.
A world language that is neutral, … is important because my first identity is
not an English identity but a French one. So if I travel with English I just feel
that I don’t travel with a neutral language. Even with French if I go to …
Africa, … because of the past history of colonies … and so on – what I want
to say is that I just feel that with Esperanto when I travel with Esperanto and
meet other Esperantists I feel that I really can speak on a more equal basis.
Both did an effort of learning a new language, of not using our own language
… I like the idea of both of us being more on an equal level.
In theory, Esperanto is free of connotations of privilege and of the historic baggage of
many dominant world languages. Certainement, when someone is already a native
speaker of a dominant world language, the decision to speak Esperanto intimates an
acknowledgement of linguistic privilege and effort to redress iniquity. Jerry takes this
idea further:
English is, I find, a good language for confusing people. … And because it’s a
good language for confusing, it’s a good language for selling, or for politics,
30 Glenn Beck and conservative bloggers have taken to accusing people of being Esperanto speakers as
a way to tarnish their image. On November 10, 2010, Beck ran a program denouncing George Soros,
claiming, “His father was big in Esperanza [sic],” and calling Esperanto and its supporters “global
government in a different way” (Beck).
31 After Change.org, a progressive Internet petition host, revealed the petition “Obama, introduce
Esperanto as a Second Language subject in schools” as a finalist in its 2010 Ideas For Change in
America competition, bloggers ran with the information. Satire blogger That’s Right Nate reported, “a
large part of Obama’s education stimulus is designated for Esperanto instruction in the public schools,”
calling it “Obama’s most insidious attempt at creating a facist [sic] world state–controlling our very
thoughts by controlling the words that we can use to express ourselves” (Thatsrightnate). That’s Right
Nate’s report was then circulated out of context by other blogs and discussion boards, generating
conservative outcry. Notalemming, writing for YourDaddy.net, argues against the implementation of
Esperanto education, en disant, “I don’t know about you but I am a citizen of the Sovereign United States
of America. It is a country in the world. I do not elect or answer to any ‘World Leaders’ so I am not a
‘citizen of the world’ nor do I want to be” (Notalemming).
85
or for lying. Those are all the same, de toute façon, but the ambiguity of English and
the range of abilities in English speakers allow you to intimidate people who
don’t have the command of language that you have. … If you’re a high-level
language user and can use the language kind of as a weapon or a bludgeon on
eux. Ainsi, English is pretty good for that, I think, for intimidating rather than
for persuading. [With] other languages that have refined their vocabulary
more, like Esperanto and Ido, … it’s easier to have logical discussions in
eux. Discussions where heat and passion don’t come up so quickly as they
do in English debates and discussions.
If English were the universal language, it would privilege native speakers. For those
seeking respectful exchange, Esperanto is preferred over other available language
options.
4.2 Practical attractions to Esperanto
The magnanimous implications of international Esperanto communication are
not necessarily a part of the daily Esperanto experience. A more basic thing that
attracts people to Esperanto is its logicality, both in regard to the idea and with
respect to its structure. When Helm first encountered the idea of Esperanto at the age
of 13, he “thought that it was logical. … Why shouldn’t everybody have a second
language to speak? … It was far easier than English, where you have to learn to spell
every new word you learn, basically, … Esperanto … was like a crossword puzzle.”
This perception of Esperanto as a game or puzzle is not uncommon. When Zamenhof
began to disseminate the language, “he suggested that people test the language by
writing to a friend in a foreign land, enclosing a small leaflet with the translations of a
few roots and affixes, and leaving it up to the recipient to make sense of it” (Okrent
2009: 103). In showing that with just a small gloss someone could decode an entire
message, he demonstrated the logical simplicity of the language. stevo, aussi, était
86
“fascinated by the tinker-toy structure of the language, mostly. Any word that could
be created was valid, as long as it was meaningful.” According to Jerry, Esperanto is
superficially attractive those who seek an intellectual challenge:
I’d be willing to bet that in the constructed language community there are far
more cases of autism than there are in the general community. People who
have some personality and communication strengths that the general
community lacks and that are not appreciated. … The fact that it’s just a
mental challenge, something to do with their unoccupied brains, you know,
there’s just not enough interesting stuff going on these days to keep you fully
occupied if you have a real active brain. Ainsi, people get into constructed
languages or mathematics or something … a solitary pursuit in spite of the
fact that it’s a social activity.
It might seem like Esperanto and the sociocultural opportunities it offers would be the
perfect gateway for someone who finds the outside world insufficiently stimulating,
but for some speakers, learning Esperanto is sometimes just one more
accomplishment to add to the list before turning to the next hurdle. “It’s a matter of
personal development, personal pride, to accomplish some level of fluency in
languages” (Jerry). Jerry acknowledges, “there’s a big gap between the intent, le
golden dream;” not everyone who learns Esperanto does it because of its ideals.
Esperanto appeals to more than just idealists. It appeals to those who think that
language would be helped by being simplified, and to those who just want an
intellectual exercise.
Another benefit of Esperanto, often reported by proponents of the language, est
that having studied it makes other languages easier to learn. For Will, this was one of
his motivations to study Esperanto:
I was starting a program in which I was studying Japanese cinema, mais en
addition to Japanese cinema the language as well, and I hadn’t studied a
language in a long time, and so the idea of picking up Esperanto as kind of a
practice language was appealing to me. One of the things the student in our
87
class who spoke Esperanto had talked about was that learning Esperanto …
makes learning other languages easier, and I had struggled with Spanish in
high school.
Retrospectively, Will confirms that having studied Esperanto had a positive effect on
his subsequent study of Japanese:
To a certain extent it allowed a sense of flexibility in thinking about how to
express something, which was helpful in Japanese. Ainsi, even just breaking out
of the idea that … learning a language is learning new words. Really, c'est
learning new words but it’s also learning new ways of putting words together,
ways of kind of thinking about expression. … So that was helpful, to a certain
étendue.
Joel who, after moving to Canada, decided to study French with his wife, expressed
the impact of having a pre-existing knowledge of Esperanto:
It had an enormous impact, especially on learning vocabulary. … I can’t
imagine making that kind of progress if I didn’t have Esperanto as a basis.
Parce que, bien sûr, English helps with certain French words, but Esperanto
filled in the rest. Par exemple, … the French word for mouth, bouche – that’s
buŝo in Esperanto. I would have had a harder time learning that word if I
didn’t already know the Esperanto word. So it helped a lot. And I think
Esperanto helps a lot with language learning in general, because it gives you a
good basis. It certainly helped me, learning other languages, but I think
especially French because of the vocabulary.
Because of Esperanto’s largely Latin-based lexicon, its helpfulness for learning
languages like French, which have a surface similarity to Esperanto, is to be expected.
Toutefois, as Will experienced, Esperanto is also helpful for studying non-Latinate
languages because it exposes a speaker to different grammatical structures. Taking
into consideration that many members of the Esperanto speech community speak an
unusually high number of natural languages, and that at least a few of those are
usually acquired before studying Esperanto, it could just be that most Esperanto
speakers have a natural ability for language learning. Néanmoins, as Will
mentioned, he struggled with Spanish and, though he studied it and Japanese and
88
American Sign Language, Esperanto is the only one of his non-native languages with
which he is “very comfortable,” “comfortable essentially living in the language.”32
Ainsi, even for those not predisposed for language acquisition, Esperanto is learnable
and can help future attempts to learn a natural language.
It is not unusual for multilingual people to say that in different contexts they
find one language better suited for expression than another, and this phenomenon is
not exclusive to natural languages. Participants were asked whether they had ever
experienced this with Esperanto, not because of fluency but because of some quality
of the language. Yevgeniya reveals, “sometimes it’s easier for me to express myself
in Esperanto than in, I would say, Anglais, French, or even Russian,” Russian being
one of her native languages. Other participants mention an increased precision with
Esperanto. Randy speaks to the question at hand, en disant, “in general I feel more
flexibility in Esperanto because of its agglutinative nature. You know, there are these
prefixes and suffixes that can be mixed and matched infinitely. You can often be very
precise in a very concise manner in Esperanto.” Joel expresses a similar feeling,
saying “I’ve definitely had that feeling that I can express myself better in Esperanto in
many situations. En particulier, the flexibility of the language allows me to more
precisely express myself. English is my native language but you have to follow
certain patterns for set expressions.” Jim explains:
Most of the things that are easier to express in Esperanto or easier to talk
about in Esperanto, I would say … with few exceptions it’s not going to be
with words that Esperanto has that are lacking in English, but concise
32 Will is not the only Esperanto speaker who has achieved higher fluency and comfort in Esperanto
than in other languages. “Almost 18% of the respondents in Rašic’s survey reported ‘feeling as
comfortable in Esperanto as their mother tongue,’ 11.54% felt a ‘bit less natural than in other foreign
langues,’ and 43.59% reported ‘feeling more secure than in other foreign languages’” (Fiedler 2006:
77).
89
compounds that Esperanto can come up with that English cannot express as
concisely. … For instance, the Esperanto compound “aligilo” corresponding
to English “registration form”, it’s a very concise and elegant way of
expressing that concept. … There are a number of nifty constructions like that,
… compounds formed purely of a few prefixes and suffixes and prepositions
et autres, that express something that it takes several words to say in
Anglais.
It is not so much that Esperanto is lexically or structurally superior in some particular
category of expression; it is just that there are some things it can do that other
languages cannot.
Esperanto’s history of producing literature persists, and reading is one of the
most frequent, quotidian uses of Esperanto. Randy uses Esperanto for written
communication, subscribes to some digital Esperanto publications, and even has a
personal library of Esperanto books. Randy says:
I use it on a regular basis. I would say every day, but not necessarily every
jour, but I use it day to day. Most of that use is over the Internet, en lisant
articles and posting to discussion groups and sending and reading e-mails in
Esperanto. … Most of it is things related to Esperantists or the Esperanto
mouvement, and therefore is only in Esperanto, but sometimes I read things in
Esperanto for fun, even that are available in English or in German. … Le
Monde Diplomatique, has a website in Esperanto that provides translations of
some of their articles. I don’t read French, so that gives me an opportunity to
read articles about foreign affairs that I wouldn’t have access to without
Esperanto.
Josué, aussi, uses Esperanto to access literature that would not otherwise be available
to him. “There’s a lot of stuff that’s been translated into Esperanto that has not been
translated into English. So I’ve enjoyed a bunch of arcane literature that I probably
wouldn’t have had access to if I hadn’t been a speaker of Esperanto.” Similarly, stevo
dit:
I often read Wikipedia articles, par exemple, in several languages, comparing
the content across languages. Often topics are especially relevant to speakers
of a particular language, so relevant articles in that language tend to be more
90
detailed than in other languages. I often choose Esperanto (or some other
langue) over English when the subject is one I already know about in
Anglais, but don’t know the corresponding terminology in the other language.
He at once learns more about a topic that interests him and expands his vocabulary by
cross-referencing texts in different languages. Mais, bien sûr, there is also an
abundance of Esperanto text that is only accessible to Esperanto speakers because it
was originally written in Esperanto. Jim, who reads “short stories and poetry fairly
souvent, besides more ephemeral junk like magazines, and websites, web blogs and
forum posts and the like,” says that “nearly all of what [he is] reading is original.”
The combination of extensive original literature, a tradition of translation, et le
transnationality of translating into Esperanto, grants Esperanto speakers access to an
expansive literary collection.
For those looking to travel or experience other cultures, Esperanto is a portal.
Normand, who is from Canada, “found that even if [il] could speak three languages
[il] needed to learn more” when he went to Europe.
I was staying in France for a training and I saw a poster saying that they were
offering Esperanto courses and I never heard of it before so I went there and
they explained that with this language you can travel around the world. Et
so I really liked the idea of learning a language that is spoken around the
monde. So that’s how I get into Esperanto, just because … I wanted to travel
and be able to speak with the people in many countries.
Zdravka explains that for her, “it was the language to better knew [sic] l'autre
culture, so I never feel a stranger in some country because when I went somewhere I
visit Esperantists in this country.” For Tatyana, Esperanto was a window to the rest of
le monde. “It was very good language when in Soviet Union, when we had no access
to the information, and we could contact with people. We could speak and then we
could know something about the other countries.” “In the Soviet time it was the only
91
way of seeing the Civil War out of the revolution” (Tatyana). For Normand, Zdravka,
et autres, Esperanto is a means for a richer leisure experience. For Tatyana,
knowing Esperanto yielded access to censored perspectives.
The extended Esperanto network provides opportunities for world travel and
international cultural exchange, and Esperanto speakers often take advantage of its
widespread social opportunities. Helm talks of his own experience with Esperanto
over the last six decades:
I’ve had the opportunity to meet people from different countries where I have
learned about things that I didn’t know. … Nowadays when there is Skype I
can use [Esperanto] every day if I want to. Je veux dire, I have some contacts here,
in Japan, and in Poland, and in Russia, and in Brazil … they are different
Esperantists. It’s funny to speak to them and so on, and video chat a little
every day.
Zdravka has also had a remarkable number of travel opportunities because of
Esperanto. “Three students from [Hungary] came to Croatia because I lived in this
time in Croatia, and one of the students stay in my home for the weekend, … then if I
like I can visit her in Budapest in [Hungary]. … It was my first trip without my
parents.” With this friend and others, Zdravka began a correspondence, exchanging
“postcard[s] or the little things that it was possible to send.” Later in life, working as
an Esperanto teacher:
I started many activities for Esperanto, for the children in the elementary
école. Every year I give Esperanto course and on the end of the school year I
went with the children to some countries to meet other people, other children
from another country. Par exemple, I went with 10 young people … and we
met them for one week in Hungary. Another year it was one week in the Italy,
to meet the children from elementary school in Italy. And one year it was in
Grande Bretagne, faraway of the London, in Chester, it was a little town in the
north of London. … In ‘79 I visit the Japan for three months. And in these
three months I sleep only two or three nights in the hotel. … One month I
slept in Tokyo in Esperanto club, and the rest I visit the Esperantists from the
nord, from Hokkaido, from Sapporo, to the Kagoshima.
92
Normand says, “with Esperanto there’s really lots of solidarity, Esperantists helping
other Esperantists while they are traveling.” He reminisces about one particular trip,
to Korea in 1994:
It was really unique because … in Canada, we don’t know much about Korea,
… and not too many Canadians have traveled to Korea. So for me it was
really opening myself to completely new culture and, … you can really speak,
not only with hotel clerk or tourist agent or so on, but you can really speak
with Koreans using Esperanto and so you can really ask about their life about
all kind of many, many things.
Randy makes a point of connecting with Esperanto speakers whenever possible, et
makes even business travel a more personal and memorable experience:
Any time that I travel out of state I try and use Esperanto. So sometimes I
might even be traveling to St. Louis for work for example, but if I know a
local Esperantist there in St. Louis I would try and meet up with them. Et
there have been times that I have just taken a vacation in Europe, not to go to
any conference or anything, but I’ve still made an effort to try and meet up
with Esperantists there. And I use the Pasporto Servo frequently when I travel
overseas.
Pasporta Servo, an Esperanto-based service from which Couch Surfing is derived,
connects Esperanto-speaking travelers with possible hosts around the world. Après
collège, Joshua “travel[éd] in central Europe and stayed with a bunch of people with a
friend of [son] via Pasporta Servo.” Jim is a more active member of Pasporta Servo:
I’ve hosted international visitors from various countries as part of a Pasporta
Servo and … in other contexts. Sometimes hosting in my apartment or house,
and sometimes just showing them around Atlanta to see the sights when they
are staying in a hotel or otherwise. I’ve showed around or hosted guests from
Japan, Belgique, Mongolia, Slovenia.
Pasporta Servo condenses the grand scheme of Esperanto down to a one-on-one level,
enabling complete strangers to come together and share their daily lives,
environnement, et culturelle.
93
4.3 More than friendship
The power of the pre-existing undercurrent of community among Esperanto
speakers often manifests into lasting relationships once Esperanto speakers meet.
According to Normand, Esperanto “gives you the opportunity to make friends around
le monde,” and in fact he jokingly complains:
I feel that I have too many friends now! … I mean, I know so many people
around the world and I just don’t have enough time, … to be in contact with
eux, and to write to them, … When I have a chance to go to Europe, et à
see them, I’m always so happy and excited to see friends I haven’t seen for
maybe five years, sometimes more than that.
But Esperanto has given Normand and many others more than just lasting friendship;
it has been the source of companionship. Volonté, who uses Esperanto daily for reading
as well as communication, dit:
My most frequent use of the language would be with my girlfriend. I actually
met her at the course in California and so we use the language together every
jour. I’d say we speak English more frequently, but it’s pretty rare that a day
would go by where we wouldn’t have some manner of exchange in Esperanto.
For Normand and Zdravka, it brought them together:
I met a girl, from Croatia, … during the Youth Convention, so we kept on
writing letters to each other and so I decided to move, first to go to Croatia –
at that time it was Yugoslavia – to visit her and I decided to stay for a while
and then we got married. … So we were an international couple and using
Esperanto on a daily basis because, … really the only common language
between us was Esperanto (Normand).
Though both have subsequently studied each other’s native language, they continue to
speak Esperanto at home and raised two children as native speakers. Tatyana, aussi, has
“an Esperanto family”:
My husband also speaks Esperanto, and we get [sic] acquainted grace to
Esperanto, twenty years ago in one of the congresses … I met him in the
94
congress and he was from Kazakhstan, that’s only Esperanto which allowed
us to get in touch and to meet each other. Both of us spoke Russian but …
there wouldn’t be any occasion to meet each other, but Esperanto.
Yevgeniya laughingly says:
My mother once told me that she advised me to spend my time more
productively by learning English, but … this is actually how I met my
husband because we applied for the same job, as an editor of [an Esperanto]
magazine. Ainsi, Esperanto not only gave me a part time job that I could hold for
five and a half years, but my family, my husband.
Finding one’s spouse – or temporary romance – via Esperanto is common enough for
there to be an in-joke among Esperantists. The words “Esperanto-edzperanto” loosely
translate as “Esperanto matchmaker,” and refer to Esperanto itself as a matchmaker
that brings people together (Fiedler 2006: 82).
4.4 The congress effect
Esperanto congresses are perhaps one of the most measurable and public
manifestations of Esperanto culture and tradition. For many speakers, the first large-
scale congress attended is an unforgettable experience that legitimizes their
investment and cements their commitment the Esperanto speech community.
Esperanto congresses, sometimes called conferences or conventions, take place at
many levels: regional congresses within one country; regional congresses bridging
multiple countries, like the Northeast United States and Southeast Canada; national
congresses; and world or global congresses. There are also international seminars,
courses, and social gatherings. Zdravka’s first congress was the 1970 Esperanto
Youth Congress in Graz, Austria:
For me, it was incredible then, the young people from the twenty-five or forty
different countries, they can understand between, only by one language, …
95
And so in this week we songs the Esperanto in Esperanto we dance the music
it was in Esperanto, all things was in Esperanto.
Yevgeniya describes her first international seminar as “just such an extraordinary
experience”:
It was the first international event that I ever attended, and for me it was really
an eye-opener how people from so many countries, so many cultures, can just
come together between language, understand each other, and how we can feel
belonging to the same community, to the same, you know, to the same
humanity, that we are just so much alike even though we come from different
des cultures. Et bien sûr, when you participate in larger conventions, tel que
World Esperanto Conventions, sometimes it just gives you, you know, chills,
because 2000 people in the same room that have something in common, le
same language, it’s really amazing.
Here Joel interjected, “—that speak the same language by choice,” to which
Yevgeniya agreed. At a congress, participants can finally witness the number and
diversity of Esperanto speakers. They have interpersonal access to people with whom
they could not communicate if it weren’t for their mutual study of Esperanto,
confirming the worth of their invested time. Participants can engage in the cultural
exchange central to Esperanto ideals, and discover first-hand the commonalities
between speakers. At congresses, Esperanto fulfills its promises.
For some attendees, congresses or seminars are their first major exposure to
highly fluent speakers, and the immersion significantly advances their fluency.
Though Joshua tried to attend local Esperanto meetings, “the guys who were in the
Esperanto club that I went to in Berkeley were all much much older than me and …
had really strong American accents, … so it just sort of seemed like that wasn’t a
resource.” Jorge complained that in his local club, “all members were old and very
proud. They didn’t know much but pretended they did,” and so he “had a problem
there.” Normand did not even have the option of attending local Esperanto meetings:
96
First I took a course, a night course, and then I moved to the southern France,
and over there, there was no Esperanto club or group, so I kept on studying on
my own with books and so on and a year after, more or less, I went to
Scandinavia to take part in World Esperanto Youth Congress, and I was not
that fluent but it’s really an experience to be [immersed] in an environment
where 300 young people around you speak constantly and only in Esperanto.
So I really had to learn.
Randy also experienced a turning point in his Esperanto fluency when he attended an
immersion course:
The first couple of years of our local Esperanto group there were two fluent
speakers in the group, and then a large number of beginners, relativement. … At
that point most of the conversation was in English. I would … occasionally
get a chance to hear the more fluent speakers talking in Esperanto between
eux-mêmes, but the rest of us were not advanced enough to really carry on a
conversation. … [At] the immersion course in San Francisco, … there was a
larger number at the intermediate level, … and also a large number of really
fluent speakers, and there was a lot of, I don’t know, pressure I guess, to use
Esperanto exclusively. Really within hours I was speaking Esperanto more
and better than I had been during our local Esperanto meetings in Atlanta.
And within days I was reasonably fluent, and really fluent … by the end of
three weeks.
Esperanto congresses are beneficial to speech-community building as much because
of the sense of community they cultivate as because they are a powerful learning
experience for participants.
Every year congresses take place in a different city, and of course every year
there are different participants, so people attend as many as are within their means.
Tatyana says, “I can say without exaggeration that I visited 10 congresses. Not
international but in our country. As for international, I visited 3 congresses.” Randy is
another frequent attendee:
With maybe three or four exceptions, I have been to either a US Esperanto
Conference or World Esperanto Conference every year since 1992. Ainsi, that’s
maybe 16 altogether, maybe five of those were World Esperanto Conferences
and 11 of those were US Esperanto Conferences.
97
Jim, aussi, attends congresses whenever possible:
I’ve been to probably seven or eight conventions, mostly North American
conventions, and one regional convention here in the Southeast. … And I’ve
helped organize some of them. … The number of attendees has ranged in my
experience in the last ten or twelve years from as low as just over fifty to a
high in the mid-hundreds or the high-hundreds. The largest number I think
was probably two or three years ago when it coincided with the Pan-American
Convention; it was in Montreal. There have also been conventions with a little
over one hundred people in a couple of different US cities in recent years. NOUS
conventions tend to draw fewer people than Canadian conventions because
it’s harder for international Esperanto speakers to get visit visas to visit the US
than to visit Canada.
Joel, who is the Executive Administrator for the Esperantic Studies Association, has
attended conventions at a variety of levels, and has also helped to organize some:
My first international convention was in 1998. En fait, it was my first, mon
first trip outside of the country. … I’ve been to three or four, I can’t
remember, international youth conventions. One in Hungary, in Russia, dans
Sweden, and also smaller conventions in the United States: Atlanta; Austin,
Texas. I helped organize the one in Atlanta. New York. I’ve been to two
conventions in Montreal. One was the North American Convention in 1998
and in 2008 was the Pan-American convention, which is all people from
North and South America. … [Attendance] varies greatly according to the
event and also where the event is held, but average attendance at a world
convention, the ones that I’ve been to, has been about 2000 people, parfois
more, sometimes less. … The attendance tends to be higher in Europe and
lower in other parts of the world because of travel expenses. At international
youth conferences, I think the largest one was in Hungary, for me at least. Il
had about 500 people. Others have been much lower, about 300 on average.
For United States conventions usually [sont] about 100, maybe 200 at the most.
Like Jim and Joel above, other participants have helped organize congresses and
Esperanto events. In 1979, Zdravka organized a congress in Japan, contacting and
inviting Esperanto speakers in Africa and Asia. “I was the people’s choice … to be in
the committee for the young – it was for organizate [sic] the Esperanto congress, Oui?
And I was in this committee but responsible for the people they speak Esperanto in
98
Asia and Africa.” Normand helped organize the World Esperanto Youth Convention
in Hong Kong. Meanwhile, he stayed with an Esperanto family there:
It was again a really unique experience because I was staying with him and
with his family so I got to know really, the life from inside, living in a Hong
Kong family and getting to organize an international convention with all the
difficulties and the problems, you know, that represent. … I will remember
this for my life, for my whole life.
Normand repeatedly states that he has “received a lot from the movement,” and has
“been really active over the past more than 20 years organizing things and courses …
to give back to the movement.” He contributes to the organization of “the All-
America, or the American, Esperanto convention, the Canadian Esperanto
convention, … also Esperanto weekends so that Canadians and Americans can meet.”
Normand is the current president of the Quebec Esperanto Society:
We organize two weekends, yearly. … One [est] a long weekend in May, so we
call it Micaro, … the Middle Canada Esperanto Weekend. And it’s mainly for
participants from Ontario and Quebec, so we meet one year in Ontario and the
second year in Quebec and so on. … Usually we are between 40 to 50
participants, depuis, let’s say 16, 17 years old, up to 70 years old, … some are
students; some are retired people. So we call it the Esperanto Friendly
Weekend because the purpose of this weekend is not to take part and do
Esperanto lesson or lecture; it’s really to practice Esperanto while visiting a
ville. So local Esperantists will give a guided tour of the city and then we will
visit together museums, we will translate the information in our head. So it’s
really to get something in this city, so at the same time we learn lots of new
words and get to know people from other cities … So that’s the Spring
Weekend, and the Fall Weekend is always in United States. … It’s in New
York State; it’s near Lake George. … Again, it’s to attend as many courses
and lecture but also for activities such as hiking, canoeing and so on, et
everything is in Esperanto. And usually there’s … roughly 50 participants
from Northeast America, or from Eastern part of Canada. Also sometimes
personnes, one or two participants are from Europe or even sometimes from
Seattle or California. But most of the participants are from Quebec and New
Angleterre.
In addition to the organizational work mentioned previously, Randy recounts another
facet of Joel’s efforts. After joining what is now known as Esperanto USA, Randy
99
“read in one of the first newsletters … that there was someone here in Atlanta starting
a local Esperanto group” – it was Joel.
4.5 Esperanto for the blind
Tatyana’s personal Esperanto story is not unusual. She is not the only blind
Esperanto speaker. She is not the only person to have benefited through membership
in the speech community. I focus on her story because her interview fortuitously
reveals the presence of the community of blind speakers, and because she shares so
much about what she gained through Esperanto.
Tatyana, who has a lifelong interest in language, was often frustrated by the
limited language-learning resources available in Braille. She believes that this is part
of why there are many blind Esperanto speakers:
It’s difficult for blind person to study foreign language. … before [computers]
it was very more difficult. Par exemple, I began to study a lot of languages but
I abandoned them because there was no literature. Par exemple, I began to
study Czech and I studied and after that I abandoned it because I had no
dictionnaires. As for Esperanto dictionaries, I had them.
Once she learned Esperanto, Tatyana found many ways to use it individually and with
autres. “There is [sic] a lot of magazines of Braille, magazines in Esperanto, Livres.
And I have had a lot of friends whom I could write in Braille” (Tatyana). For blind
Esperanto speakers, just as for anyone else, Esperanto expands the possibilities of an
individual’s social circle. “There are a lot of blind Esperantists, especially middle
aged, … from 40 ‘til 70 I think. A lot of blind people know Esperanto and they like it.
They have contacts” (Tatyana). There are enough blind Esperanto speakers that, “the
100
common feeling is now, among the not so intelligent people, that Esperanto is the
language of the blind.” She says:
Certainement, I had the reaction when people say “Ah, blind person, she has
nothing to do so she studies Esperanto.” When there was an article about me
in the local newspaper, and there was a photo and I was recognized by the
personnes, … the people say “Ah, this blind which studies Esperanto. What’s
Esperanto? I don’t know; it’s something for blind.”
There are even enough blind Esperanto speakers for them to have their own
congresses, and “two years ago [Tatyana] visited the congress in Muszyna, it was in
Poland, the congress for the blind” (Tatyana). Toujours, that does not mean that blind
Esperanto speakers are an isolated subset within the community. Tatyana has also
attended several national and international congresses.
Esperanto also gave Tatyana access to technology that she might not have
otherwise had:
Grace to Esperanto I am the first user of computer in Ukraine. … I am blind,
so it was difficult for me to use computer, but Esperantist from Italy helped
me to study … I began to use computer in 1995. There was no materials in
russe. I didn’t know what is it, how blind people can use the computer, et
I began to study with him. He helped me, and I got the job after that. …
Esperanto in fact helped me survive … the difficult situation in the Ukraine in
the 90s. And after that I began to study foreign languages via Esperanto.
With current technology, the availability of Braille texts is less crucial because
computers can read texts aloud, but Esperanto still feeds Tatyana’s language interests:
I began to study foreign languages via Esperanto. It’s very interesting. Pour
exemple, I am a devoted student of [Helm]. He teaches me English now and
began to teach me Swedish, via Esperanto. … [Helm] make me to interested
in Interlingua. And before acquainted with [Helm] I had tried to study Ido but
unfortunately it was during the Soviet times so I studied the language but I
didn’t find something to read and I forgot the language.
Helm and Tatyana communicate regularly through Skype, for friendly conversation
and for Helm to teach Tatyana languages.
101
4.6 Unexpected benefits
While most of Esperanto’s practicality comes when speakers intentionally
seek ways to use it, it can also have unexpected benefits. Jerry had “just a bit of luck”
because of Esperanto:
I left college and joined the army, wound up at the army language school, le
defense language institute, and there became a Russian interpreter/translator.
When I took the test for the language ability to apply for the school, much to
my surprise the test was actually written in a variant of Esperanto and since I
had just come from my college studying it, I maximized the test and got a top
score.
Joshua talks of his own unexpected Esperanto moments:
Very occasionally, Esperanto has come up, just at random, as a shared
language in a situation where we didn’t have a different language in common.
On my honeymoon in Italy I was staying in little hostel on this island that
turned out that the proprietor was an Esperanto speaker, which made it much
easier for us to communicate, but it’s very rare for that to happen. … Once in
a while, dire, transacting with people on the web if I’m buying books in some
other country it turns out that the person’s a speaker of Esperanto and we’re
able to communicate that way.
Ce, though rare, is a truer testament to Esperanto, in that it is international enough to
be useful when outside of a predetermined Esperanto setting.
102
Chapitre 5:
Esperantist Objectives
5.1 Attracting new speakers
It is not required that members of the speech community actively promote the
langue, but the propagation of Esperanto is certainly fundamental to its origins, et
increasing its speakers is valuable – even for the most pragmatic members of the
community – because it increases the scope of its practical application. Joel, OMS
actively seeks to propagate the language, expresses frustration with what he perceives
to be a side effect of people studying Esperanto via the Internet:
I think it’s regrettable that a lot of these people … who learn online, never
take the next step, … actually going to an event and meeting people face to
face or joining an organization and supporting Esperanto activities. Parce que,
to build the Esperanto community, as it is today, in generations past people
joined an organization. They contributed. They volunteered. They all
participated in building it up. But some of these people just kind of passively
learn it online and don’t take the next step. … They’re consuming and not
contributing.
103
Esperanto’s utility is not limited to spoken communication, and people who do not
attend events can nonetheless be active in the community, but Esperanto is supposed
to connect people. If someone learns Esperanto and remains in isolation, not using it
with other speakers, the net effect on the community is minimal. The new would-be
Esperanto speaker would be more aptly described as an Esperanto knower.
Joel’s description of Esperanto learners who “never take the next step” as non-
reciprocating consumers ties in to others’ perceptions of language being akin to a
produit. By Ferrucio Rossi-Landi’s definition of a speech community, “linguistic
forms and contents used by members of a community have a value just like goods
have values in the context of a market. … As articles of consumption, words …
presuppose a worldview just like commodities presuppose certain desires in the
potential users” (Duranti 1997: 82). This perception is particularly relevant in the case
of L2 language acquisition, which comes out of necessity, interest, or a combination
of the two. With a constructed language, it is easy to argue that acquisition is never
intrinsically necessary, in which case the language must have some other value to
attract potential speakers – and keep them interested enough to learn it and then use it.
With this reasoning, there must be a preexisting commonality among Esperanto
speakers that draws them to it; they have certain desires that the commodity of
Esperanto fulfills.
Jerry, a former Esperantist and current President of the North American Ido
Association, has come to see language in a similar light when contemplating how to
expand the language community he is charged with organizing. Jerry sees any
constructed language as a product that needs to be marketed.
104
If we could, par exemple, put together a project which would convince
teenagers that Ido or any other constructed language was a high ideal
communication mode to give them a secret language, a texting language that
their parents and teachers would not be able to understand, I think then we’d
have good beachhead for development. … Or get a rock star, a rap star to start
using a language, you know, something like that, a kind of celebrity hook. Le
old ways of promoting language, … no longer apply in the modern world and
the language developers and proponents of the languages have not really
adapted to the new conditions.
In his opinion:
One thing that … any of the constructed languages needs but does not have is
some compelling economic purposes. We have yet to come up with some kind
of business or service or organization or education, quelque chose, which has to
be conducted in the language itself, and would compel people to learn the
language to get it. I can’t think of any, and I have spent years trying to come
up with one.
This intersects with Randy’s belief that languages like Esperanto are sometimes
looked down on, particularly by Americans, for having no economic backing or
but. He says:
In general Americans don’t tend to learn a lot of languages, so you’re already
in … a different category, if you have an interest in foreign languages. Et
alors, since it is not a national language, since it does not have a big economy
behind it, people do tend to think that’s odd, if you have an interest in
Esperanto, not just a passing understanding of it.
Acquiring any language requires time, and especially in the United States, where the
prevailing opinion is that time is money, most potential speakers need the motivation
of a specific benefit in order to undertake such an endeavor. This evaluation of the
constructed language’s situation is interesting in that it resembles analyses regarding
endangered languages. When a language is no longer economically viable because an
incoming language is perceived as the language of opportunity, people stop
preserving their original language. In the case of constructed languages, opponents
105
might say that they provide no exclusive opportunity, and therefore are not worth
apprentissage.
For Esperanto to prosper, it needs to be needed. In the United States it has
several stumbling blocks. English is enjoying a period as a national universal
language in vogue33. This perpetuates the prevalent expectation that everyone else
should learn English while there is no need for Americans to make any effort to
expand their own linguistic capacity. En outre, the United States has a long
tradition of English-only movements and legislation34. En plus, the United States
borders only two countries, whose geographic distance from most of the US
population minimizes interlinguistic confrontations for most residents. Plus tôt,
Normand described how it was not until he lived in Europe and “wanted to travel and
be able to speak with the people in many countries” that he realized that though he
was already multilingual, learning one universal language was much more feasible
than trying to learn the language of every country he might visit. For an American, ou
in the above case, a Canadian, a handful of languages will seem like enough or
perhaps even excessive unless he or she is put in a situation that makes the need for
more unquestionable. Évidemment, the United States’ unfavorable linguo-geographic
conditions cannot be changed in order to cultivate a desire for an auxiliary language.
Ainsi, peut-être, as Jerry believes, especially within the capitalist American mindset, le
only way for an auxiliary language to take off for it to become economically
essential.
33 Within the last hundred years, this has shifted from French to Russian to English. For more on
languages of power and their instability and unpredictability, see Chapter 1, Section 3, pages 19-24 of
One language for the world by Mario Pei.
34 See also Edwin L. Battistella’s “Bad Language – Bad Citizens” for a history of English-only
movements in the United States.
106
5.2 Teaching Esperanto
If we see language like any other cultural facet or tradition, the best way for it
to persist within the speech community is for it to be passed on through the
generations. Mais, raising native Esperanto speakers brings up issues, spécifiquement, avec
regard to the individual benefits from early exposure and effects on the Esperanto
community. The conflict over raising native Esperanto speakers comes from the
perceived value of native Esperanto speakers. While they increase the sheer number
of speakers, which seems positive on the surface level, their effect may be more
detrimental. Helm reflects on native Esperanto speakers he has encountered:
There are Esperantists who have learned Esperanto because their parents are
from different countries, so they grew up with the language, but it is a little bit
peculiar because I have never seen that these native speakers are some kind of
a model as they would be in English. … If you don’t know what is correct as
far as English goes, then you will ask a native English speaker, “What is the
correct thing here to use?” But in Esperanto you will study the grammar and
the literature to try to find out.
Joshua takes this idea further:
In linguistics of natural languages, the way to find out … the right form,
évidemment, is to go find somebody who speaks it and ask them. And with
Esperanto it’s really not that way, because folks who are learning it from birth
are doing all kinds of innovation, … so the native speaker intuition of an
Esperantist from birth is not necessarily valuable or meaningful at all to the
Esperanto community at large. So it almost seems like raising a child speaking
Esperanto is kind of going against the purposes of the language or something.
(Emphasis added.)
Joshua concludes, decidedly, “it’s really intended to be second language; it’s not
intended to be first language.” Part of the problem is that native speakers tend to
innovate within a language, changing the rules, dropping grammatical complexities,
et, from an Esperanto perspective, implementing the havoc of a natural
107
language35,36. For Esperanto to be globally useful, it must remain constant and devoid
of regionalisms, and this appears to be largely possible because of its lack of native
speakers. Ainsi, how can the language be widely perpetuated while remaining
unchanged? Presenting yet another potential drawback, Normand describes the
attitudes of his children, native Esperanto speakers:
For them it’s … just another language. They are fluent now in four languages,
because they are good also in English, so for them languages are languages;
you use them when you need them. So they don’t feel they need to be
Esperanto or to do some things to promote Esperanto or to take part because
it’s a different situation. … They are not active as we are.
More speakers may increase the scope of Esperanto’s utility, but if native speakers
are likely to be apathetic to the movement37, how much do they really contribute? Il
seems as though people should not speak it at home, that they should not speak it with
their friends and family; that it should only be spoken when there is no other choice.
Despite participants’ prevalent indecision if not total opposition regarding
raising native Esperanto speakers, the practice is fairly common within the Esperanto
community at large. “The phenomenon is known in the Esperanto community as
denaskismo: ‘from-birth-ism’, … producing denaskaj esperantistoj or simply
denaskuloj (‘native’ Esperanto speakers)” (Corsetti 1996: 264). Newsletters, annual
global gatherings, and more recently, Internet discussion lists support and connect
developing Esperanto families. At the time of writing, Corsetti extrapolates from
previous counts that there are 350 families, “in which Esperanto is spoken between at
35 See “Regularizing the regular: The phenomenon of overregularization in Esperanto-speaking
children,” by Renato Corsetti, Maria Antonietta Pinto, and Maria Tolomeo.
36 See also Juoko Lindstedt’s “Native Esperanto as a Test Case for Natural Language”
37 This should not be taken as a universal consequence. Okrent describes Kimo, a native speaker of
Esperanto who leads an Esperanto rock band, regularly attends and lectures at congresses, et est
raising a second-generation native-speaking son (82-84).
108
least two members as the chief language for every kind of communication,” but he
“would not be surprised if the real number proved to be around one thousand, parce que
every day new families appear from nowhere” (1996: 265). Corsetti claims, “every
dedicated Esperantist at least tries for some time to speak in Esperanto to his children,
and in many cases he succeeds” (1996: 265). Despite common assumptions,
according to Corsetti, of the 350 confirmed Esperanto families, “at least two thirds
consist of partners of the same nationality living in their native country,” rather than
consisting of two partners from two different nationalities. This proportion is
significant because it indicates that Esperanto families are forming by choice rather
than by necessity. This is supported by the data gathered in this study. Five of the
research participants are in a relationship with another Esperanto speaker and use
Esperanto as a home language. All of them have at least one common national
langue, though some learned their common language as a result of living together
in a country where that language is spoken, but they choose to continue to use
Esperanto in the home.
Corsetti, who himself has an Esperanto family, presents some of the issues
faced by those attempting to raise Esperanto-speaking children. One key issue, il
dit, is gender:
For the most part only fathers speak Esperanto to the children, while the
mothers speak the local language or a third language. … It is well established
that the father is the “weak” element in passing on a language, mainly because
he tends to spend less time with the children. Another concern is the kind of
language which fathers tend to use with the children: “fatherese” tends to be
different from “motherese” (1996: 266).
This is certainly an issue if, as in the United States, speakers who might desire to pass
Esperanto on to their children are predominantly male. Joshua’s wife has “gotten a
109
30-minute crash course and was not bad by the end of it, but doesn’t speak it at all.”
Jerry’s wife speaks neither Ido nor Esperanto, and he says, “she referred to [son]
constructed language, Loijo, as ‘Flamingo’, so she’s … not really up on these things.
She considers it something that [il] faire[es].” Helm is an interesting case. His current
partner does speak Esperanto, and in fact is responsible for awakening his long-
dormant interest in the language. Toutefois, Helm’s children are from a previous
mariage, and they do not speak Esperanto:
I have had an earlier marriage and then I had children in that, but they were
Polish and Swedish and I didn’t teach them Esperanto because I thought that
they wanted to know their mother’s language as well as mine. … It would
have been another way if my then-wife had been an Esperanto speaker, mais
she was not, so I cannot say that I tried to; … I never thought about it.
For Helm and his first wife, their national languages took precedence, in part because
he was the only one with an interest in Esperanto. For the men above, even if their
partners did not oppose their desire to have Esperanto-speaking children, ils voudraient
be linguistically unequipped to contribute to the effort. During the course of the
interview with Zdravka, she revealed:
I heard before about Esperanto because my father was Esperantist, Oui? But I
don’t show many interest in before, but now, … when my professor ask the
student in the class who like study the Esperanto international language, et
the most all of my friends said yes, I like it also.
She did not say whether he had tried to teach her the language before, or get her
interested in the movement, but his pre-existing involvement was not enough to
motivate her to learn it.
Volonté, Joel, and Normand are in relationships with Esperanto-speaking
partners. Volonté, who is not married, has not yet decided whether he would try to teach
any potential children Esperanto. Joel, who uses Esperanto as the household language
110
with his wife, Yevgeniya, thinks that in his case having Esperanto-speaking children
is inevitable:
I was thinking, early in my Esperanto days, that would be such a great thing to
faire, to have children that are native speakers. But not only is it something that
I think is a good thing to do, I think … even if you didn’t do it, it would
arriver. Because if Mom and Dad speak Esperanto between the two, …
they’re not going to be able to keep children from picking it up. … So yes, je
can’t imagine it otherwise. … One of the languages the children would speak
would be Esperanto.
Normand and Zdravka are the only ones who have had children and raised them as
native speakers. Zdravka stayed home to raise their children, and taught them to
speak French, Croatian, and Esperanto:
When came our children, decided then we like speak Esperanto also with our
children. Ainsi, I stay at home, I don’t work in this time, and I feel like language
professor for my children because in the morning when Normand was at home
we speak Esperanto, but when he went to the work I changed the language
and I said to my children, “The father is going to the work and we are alone, je
will speak Croatian.” … Then I change the language if my neighbor visit me
or if we went to the park, I said to my children, … “We will speak French
now.” So in one day I change three languages with to my children.
Zdravka successfully implemented what Corsetti calls the “situational method”
(1996: 269). When raising children bilingually, “the main method followed is ‘one
personne, one language,’” but for Normand and Zdravka, and other international
Esperanto families, that is often insufficient to cover all of the languages they want
their children to speak.
Another problem that Esperanto families – or families living in a country
where their home language is not widely spoken – face is a lack of resources in the
target language. These resources include children’s books, videos, or peers who speak
the same language. Normand and Zdravka tried to counter these problems by seeking
111
opportunities for their children to interact with other Esperanto speakers of their own
âge, but found it challenging as their children grew older.
We went a couple times in Europe, actually many times in Europe with them,
so that they can really experiment using Esperanto with other children. Aussi
we took part in, in Europe every year there is a family Esperanto gathering,
for a week, so that many family get together from all over Europe, families
with children. And they just play together, and there’s all kinds of activities in
Esperanto. … But as they get to be teenagers they don’t want to follow their
parents all the time, and they have friends, friends are quite important, and all
their friends here do not speak Esperanto. So if you don’t have really good
friends of same age as you are, it’s really hard here (Normand).
Normand and Zdravka’s children, now in their late 20s, are fluent Esperanto speakers.
Despite the obstacles, Zdravka and Normand succeeded. Toujours, as Normand explained
earlier, their children’s relationship to Esperanto is the same as their relationship to
any one of the four languages that they speak: a practical one.
Among participants who do not have an Esperanto-speaking partner or do not
yet have children, several mention that it is easy enough to learn Esperanto on your
own, so there is no real need to start teaching it to infants. Comme mentionné précédemment, Jerry
believes that the solution is in finding a way to give the language momentum. Il
dit:
I once had a notion that if everyone in the Ido movement – I did the math on
this – would each teach five new people every year their language, and each
of those would teach five people, we’d have the entire six billion Earth
population speaking Ido in about eleven years.
Toutefois, this plan never took off. Tatyana mentions that you can’t force someone to
learn something they are not interested in, echoing the obstacles confronting Jerry’s
tidy mathematical proposal. Volonté, who is undecided about whether he might teach any
children Esperanto, questions the ultimate value of early exposure to it:
112
At one point I felt like it would definitely be something I’d want to do, … in
that I wish that I had had early exposure to a second language. … But … I
[am] more on the fence, specifically because the advantages of early exposure
to a language with Esperanto seem somewhat less significant, because it is
possible to learn it to a high level as a non-native speaker – and not only
possible but relatively common. And so I wonder sometimes about how
advantageous it would be for my potential children to have it as a native
langue, when they could, if they wanted to, learn it later on and get to a
good level in the language.
More succinctly and decidedly, Helm expresses a similar perception: “I think that if
they would like to learn Esperanto they could do that in their grown up age.” These
opinions connect to another popular proposal for spreading Esperanto: teaching it in
schools worldwide.
In One language for the world, after making his case for the pressing need to
choose and adopt a universal language, Mario Pei addresses how a language might
actually become universally spoken. If members of language movements are left to
their own devices, Pei claims, it will take far too long. “The people of the earth are
many… To reach them by the methods by which current interlanguage movements
have reached their few million adherents would take not centuries, but millenniums”
(1958: 206). Plutôt, he advocates for governmental educational intervention as the
only feasible approach:
There is one, and only one way in which they, or at least a considerable
portion of them, can be reached and affected within the foreseeable future, et
that is by direct, compulsive government action – the same kind of action that
has proved so successful within the last century in extending the benefits of
literacy to world populations which at the dawn of the nineteenth century were
still fully 80 per cent illiterate (1958: 206).
Pei suggests, “instead of the compulsory study of one or more foreign tongues,”
which is already offered by “most educational systems,” governments should instate
“the compulsory study of a single supranational tongue, with the study of other
113
foreign tongues left optional with the students” (1958: 207). Pei mentions that
“believers in the freedom of the individual” may at first oppose this idea, or that
others might be concerned that such an endeavor would compromise national
sovereignty, but Pei is confident that these fears can be assuaged with reason.
Pei’s proposal, meant for the implementation of any possible universal
langue, can certainly be applied to Esperanto. Childhood education could sidestep
the speech community’s debate concerning native speakers. Assuming ideal
circumstances: global consensus regarding the language, efficacy of education, etc.,
Esperanto would still face some obstacles. After the first generation in which
Esperanto became globally spoken, all future speakers might become native speakers.
Ainsi, if Esperanto were to become globally spoken, it would necessarily have to stay
an auxiliary—secondary—language. C'est-à-dire, it should not be used by people
who have another common language, at least not exclusively. If everyone were able
to speak Esperanto and did not use it for international, or at least non-local,
communication, the language would threaten natural languages and at the same time
lose its safeguard against regional alterations. Mais, this being the case, for how many
learners of Esperanto would the language actually be useful? And then, would the
argument in favor of universal auxiliary language instruction crumble? En outre,
if Esperanto were globally used, the speech community would grow beyond its
original proponents, thereby incorporating speakers with different ideologies. Le
commonalities among Esperanto speakers would be diluted. Just as a student in a
foreign language class cannot be said to have acquired the culture along with the
langue, a world populated by Esperanto students cannot be expected to acquire or
114
uphold the original beliefs central to Esperanto. Toutefois, if Esperanto were to reach
its goal of becoming the universal auxiliary language, it would likely no longer need
the founding ideologies that motivate self-selected speakers to promote the language.
115
Chapitre 6:
Conclusion
"[Esperanto] really opened up to lots of opportunities for me, and I really
can’t imagine where I’d be… if I hadn’t read that article.”
– Joel
“A lot of my friends abandoned the language. I stayed here and I will be
staying here.”
– Tatyana
Arthur Aughey dismisses Esperanto because “language is not just
communication of the utilitarian kind, but the expression of the identity and the
cultural unity of a people. Language is not about calculations of convenience, mais est
the expression of something akin to the ‘national soul’” (Aughey 1992: 9). Mais, if you
ask someone why their L1 is their L1, the reply will likely resemble, “because that is
what my parents speak,” or “because that is the language that is spoken where I grew
up.” People may be proud of their native language, and form a strong connection
between it and their culture, but the reason they speak the language has less to do
116
with the “national soul” and more to do with practicality. In its simplest form,
language is a tool. Ainsi, when it comes to second-language acquisition, it is not
unlikely for a “calculation of convenience” to be relevant. If you ask someone why
she chose to learn an L2, she might say it is because she always thought it sounded
beautiful, or she might express a desire to travel somewhere where that language is
spoken. Regardless of whether the pursuit of an L2 is inspired by linguistic aesthetic
or linguistic curiosity, once learned, it will broaden sociocultural access and
opportunity.
Esperanto’s basic principles are not what make it unique; any universal
language project is about facilitating communication. Esperanto was built on a dream
but lives on practicality. Esperanto, the language, is a tool. It works the same as any
other language, but it is a super-tool, a master key, that unlocks people and cultures
like few other languages can. Esperanto is unique because of the number of its
speakers, and language as a tool does nothing if it cannot be used for communication.
Toutefois, Esperanto is not just a tool. It is evident that despite its artificial
beginnings, an identity and a culture have flourished within the Esperanto speech
community. Esperanto as a language (a combination of utility and culture) has a set of
qualities that attract a diverse array of potential speakers, because not everyone who
learns Esperanto does it for the same reasons.
The Esperanto speech community is not homogenous. Some members are
idealists; some are pragmatists; most are a combination of the two. Because the
speech community is spread across the globe, individual members have different
experiences, lifestyles, and beliefs, within the speech community and outside of it. Dans
117
some regions, like in North America, Esperanto seems to be particularly attractive to
independent learners, while in Europe, Esperanto caters to those with social interests.
Esperanto speakers can be babies (though of course they are speakers because of their
parents), inquisitive youths, college students, adults, and retirees. Not all Esperanto
speakers want the same thing. Some want an intellectual exercise while others want
access to different people and cultures. Some people who have learned how to speak
Esperanto might not even consider themselves members of the speech community.
This is because not everyone who comes to Esperanto falls in love. Quelques, with high
ideals, become disenchanted when Esperanto fails to fulfill its promises of simplicity
and internationality. Others find flaws in its linguistic structure, and rather than
setting their disagreement aside in the interest of maximizing practicality, decide to
seek a better language. Some enjoy it but want more, and let Esperanto fall by the
wayside while they engage in other pursuits.
Esperanto speakers, who may or may not self-identify as Esperantists, sont,
first and foremost, individus. Looking at the surface, at demographics, it seems as
though anyone might be an Esperanto speaker. Esperanto speakers seem like an
arbitrary collection. Arika Okrent titles one of her chapters on Esperanto: “A Nudist,
A Gay Ornithologist, a Railroad Enthusiast, and a Punk Cannabis Smoker Walk into a
Bar…”. The thirteen participants in this study were just as diverse. Tatyana teaches
philologie. Zdravka worked as an economist in Croatia, but is now a social worker.
Normand is a tree technician and horticulturist for the city of Montréal. Randy has
degrees in mathematics, complex analysis, and topology, and now manages a federal
grant for the state of Georgia. Joshua got a degree in linguistics but is the current
118
Director of Administration of The Jazz School. Helm calls himself “more or less a
university dropout.” Now retired, he once taught Swedish as a Second Language and
worked as a translator. Jim is a retired programmer. Will works in a bakery and as a
writing tutor, but hopes to get an advanced degree in creative writing. Jerry was a
technical writer for forty years, but describes his current occupation as “language
dabbler.” Jorge works as a translator, language teacher, and website developer. stevo
spent seventeen years in the US Army, and after that “worked at various odd jobs,”
including working as a translator. When they lived in Georgia, Joel worked in the
Department of Revenue and Yevgeniya worked for the Red Cross Marketing
Department, but now they both work for the Esperantic Studies Foundation. Where is
the connection between a baker, a computer programmer, and a horticulturist? Là
must be something about Esperanto, as a language, that brings these people together –
or there must be commonalities despite the image created by demographic data.
This study and others show that Esperanto speakers do have certain things in
commun. They are nearly fanatical about language. Underneath the array of
occupations, 7 of 13 participants got a degree in a language-related field: linguistics,
communication, langue, etc.. Esperanto speakers who are active within the
community are people-persons, and use Esperanto to access others with similar
interests and desires. Excluding international interactions that have taken place at
congresses, the 13 participants, themselves from 6 countries, have had person-to-
person interactions with Esperanto speakers from at least 25 different countries on 5
continents. Scholarly estimates and organization membership numbers aside, ce
démontre, premièrement, that Esperanto is widely spoken and, deuxièmement, that the speech
119
community is indeed internationally interconnected. Active members of the speech
community find benefits through membership: mental stimulus, increased language
aptitude, littérature, access to information, travel opportunities, cultural exchange,
relations, a sense of belonging, and more. Members of the speech community
value an increase in speakers as an expansion of the community, though the proper
way to generate this increase is not unanimously agreed upon. At its most basic level,
Esperanto is about communication, and because it provides a means for international,
cross-cultural communication, it enables cultural understanding. Despite naysayers
and shortcomings, Esperanto does what it was meant to do. For people who speak
Esperanto, its becoming a truly universally used auxiliary language is secondary.
According to Will:
Il y a, generally speaking, a sense that Esperanto is somehow something
unprestigious or is something somehow ridiculous. There was a talk the other
jour, … that actually compared the development of Esperanto, and what
Esperanto had become, to Yiddish, actually, in that the original aspirations for
Esperanto were to become a new Latin, so a respected and prestigious
international language, and that what actually happened to it was that it
became a new Yiddish, Yiddish being a language used productively and
effectively as an international language by a specific community … but a
language which, outside of that community, was not afforded or not given
status or recognized as something useful, … an international language without
that kind of prestige given to it by the world at large, even though within the
community that used it, it worked very well.
The unconvinced may undervalue the language, but for those who use it, Esperanto is
no less useful. When people outside the community attempt to discredit its validity,
they call Esperanto a failure because it hasn’t achieved its ultimate goal.
Sometimes … the misconstrued idea [est] that Esperanto is not successful, il
could not be successful, if it’s not adopted as the one second language for
everyone in the whole world, and until it reaches that point it’s useless. Que
idea is not important to my daily experience. For me, Esperanto does play a
role in bringing people together at the present. Whether or not it is accepted
120
by a government as the one international language, … Esperanto bridges gaps,
bridges communication, cultural gaps, between people as we speak. And I’ve
experienced that in my own life (Joel).
Anyone who has lived the benefits of Esperanto does not really find its becoming
universal crucial when evaluating its successes. Though Esperanto is not universally
spoken, this study has shown that through active membership in the Esperanto speech
community, speakers find benefits, personal growth, and a human connection.
121
Ouvrages cités
1. “About Esperanto.” Lernu!. Lernu!, n.d. la toile. 10 Nov 2010.
2. “About the Name.” Ubuntu Documentation. Ubuntu, n.d. la toile. 25 Nov 2010.
3. Archibugi, Daniele. “The Language of Democracy: Vernacular or Esperanto?
A Comparison between the Multiculturalist and Cosmopolitan
Perspectives.” Political Studies. 53. (2005): 537-555. Print.
4. Aughey, Arthur. “Ethnic Mending.” Fortnight. 311 (1992): 9-11. Print.
5. Batistella, Edwin L.. “Bad Language—Bad Citizens.” Making Sense of
Langue: Readings in Culture and Communication. Éd. Susan D.
Blum. New York: Presse universitaire d'Oxford, 2009. Print.
6. Beck, Glenn. “Soros enjoys taking countries down.” Glenn Beck: The Fusion
of Entertainment and Enlightenment. Glenn Beck, 10 Nov 2010. la toile.
1 Mar 2011.
7. Becker, Ulrich. “Publishing for a diaspora: The development of publishing in
the international Esperanto movement.” Language Problems &
Language Planning. 30.3 (2006): 269-301. Print.
8. Blanke, Detlev. “The Term “Planned Language.”.” Esperanto, Interlinguistics,
and Planned Language. Éd. Humphrey Tonkin. Lanham, Maryland:
University Press of America, Inc., 1997. Print.
9. Brazil. Tabela 1.3.1 – População residente, por sexo e situação do domicilio,
segundo a religião – Brazil. , 2000. Print.
dix. “Cem anos com o Esperanto.” Federação Espírita Brasileira: Programas de
Estudios. Federação Espírita Brasileira, 2009. la toile. 17 Mar 2011.
11. “Censo 2010: população do Brazil é de 190.732.694 pessoas.” Instituto
Brazileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Instituto Brazileiro de Geografia
e Estatística, 29 Nov 2010. la toile. 18 Mar 2011.
122
12. Corsetti, Renato. “A Mother Tongue Spoken Mainly by Fathers.” Langue
Problems & Planning. 20.3 (1996): 263-273. Print.
13. Corsetti, Renato, Maria Antonietta Pinto, and Maria Tolomeo. “Regularizing
the regular: The phenomenon of overregularization in Esperanto-
speaking children.” Language Problems & Planning. 28.3 (2004): 26-
282. Print.
14. Duranti, Alexandre. Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1997. 79-82. Print.
15. Fettes, Marquer. “Interlinguistics and the Internet.” Language Problems and
Language Planning. 21.2 (1997): 170-176. Print.
16. Fettes, Marquer. “Esperanto, an Asian Language? Growth-promoting and
growth-limiting factors in an evolving interlingual ecosystem.” 5th
Nitobe Symposium on Language Policy. Tokyo, Japan. 3 Aug 2007.
Public Reading.
17. Fiedler, Sabine. “Standardizaion and self-regulation in an international speech
community: the case of Esperanto.” International Journal of the
Sociology of Language. (2006): 67-90. Print.
18. Fromkin, Victoria, Robert Rodman, and Nina Hyams. An Introduction to
Langue. 8th ed. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007. Print.
19. Golden, Bernard. “Conservation of the Heritave of Volapük.” Esperanto,
Interlinguistics, and Planned Language. Éd. Humphrey Tonkin.
Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, Inc., 1997. Print.
20. Hiroyuki, Usui. “Interlinguistics and Esperanto studies in the social context of
modern Japan.” Lanuage Problems & Language Planning. 32.2
(2008): 181-202. Print.
21. Hymes, Dell. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach.
crême Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press, Inc., 1974. 45-66.
Print.
22. “Internacional Hospitality Service.” TEJO: Tutmonda Esperantista Junulara
Organizo. Pasporta Servo, n.d. la toile. 21 Mar 2011.
23. Janton, Pierre. Esperanto: Langue, Littérature, and Community. Albany,
New York: Presse de l'Université d'État de New York, 1993. Print.
24. Jim. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 12 01 2011.
123
25. Jerry. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 19 01 2011.
26. Joel and Yevgeniya. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 04 02 2011.
27. Jordan, David K. “Esperanto and Esperantism.” Esperanto, Interlinguistics,
and Planned Language. Éd. Humphrey Tonkin. Lanham, Maryland:
University Press of America, Inc., 1997. Print.
28. Jorge. Internet Chat Interview by Adelina Solís. 17 01 2011.
29. Josué. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 13 01 2011.
30. Kjell. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 14 01 2011.
31. Lins, Ulrich. “Esperanto as language and idea in China and Japan.” Lanuage
Problems & Language Planning. 32.1 (2008): 47-60. Print.
32. Lindstedt, Jouko. “Native Esperanto as a Test Case for Natural Language.”
(2006). la toile. 29 Sept 2010.
33. “Local Groups.” Esperanto-USA. Esperanto-USA, n.d. la toile. 18 Apr 2011.
34. “Map.” Lernu! Users. la toile. 21 Mar 2011.
35. “Membership by State.” Esperanto-USA. Esperanto-USA, 2008. la toile. 14
avril 2011.
36. Müller, Gotelind, and Gregor Benton. “Esperanto and Chinese anarchism in
the 1920s and 1930s.” Lanuage Problems & Language Planning. 30.2
(2006): 173-192. Print.
37. Morgan, Marcyliena M.. “Community.” Key Terms in Language and Culture.
Éd. Alessandro Duranti. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2001.
Print.
38. Normand. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 11 01 2011.
39. Notalemming. “Obama, Introduces Esperanto as a Second Language Subject
in Schools. – Become a “World Citizen”.” Your Daddy’s Politics.
Wordpress, 03 Oct 2010. la toile. 1 Mar 2011.
124
40. “O Esperanto no Movimento Espírita Brasileiro.” Federação Espírita
Brasileira: Programas de Estudios. Federação Espírita Brasileira, n.d.
la toile. 17 Mar 2011.
41. Okrent, Arika. Au pays des langues inventées: Adventures in Linguistic
Creativity, Mandess, and Genius. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2009.
Print.
42. Oliveira, Nelza. “Chico Xavier still moves millions.” Infosur Hoy 16 Apr
2010, la toile. 18 Mar 2011.
43. Pei, Mario. One Language for the World. New York: The Devin-Adair
Entreprise, 1958. Print.
44. Pietiläinen, Jukka. “Current trends in literary production in Esperanto.”
Language Problems & Language Planning. 29.3 (2005): 271-285.
Print.
45. Randy. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 10 01 2011.
46. Rebello, Flavio C. ” Strangaj voĉoj el Interreto ” Esperanto. 92.7-8 (1999):
126. Print.
47. Sherwood, Bruce Arne. “Variation in Esperanto.” Studies in the Linguistic
Sciences. 12.1 (1982): 1-14. Print.
48. stevo. E-mail Interview by Adelina Solís. 16 01 2011.
49. Tatyana. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 21 01 2011.
50. Thatsrightnate. “Obama Makes Big Push for One World Language.” That’s
Right Nate. WordPress, 25 Mar 2009. la toile. 1 Mar 2011.
51. Tonkin, Humphrey. Éd. Esperanto, Interlinguistics, and Planned Language.
Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, Inc., 1997. Print.
52. Tonkin, Humphrey. “Recent Studies in Esperanto and Interlinguistics.”
Language Problems & Planning. 31.2 (2007): 169-196. Print.
125
53. Tonkin, Humphrey. “The Semantics of Invention: Translation into Esperanto.”
Literary Translation Seminar. University Professors Program of
Boston University. Boston University, Boston. 22 Feb 2008. Lecture.
54. Volonté. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 22 01 2011.
55. Zdravka. Telephone Interview by Adelina Solís. 12 01 2011.
126
