Jagg

Any particular reason for your answer?

I'm having a hard time traking down the data for the number of articles by language. Can anybody send me in the right direction or simply list the top 20 languages data for me? Thanks!

Okay, what are your first impressions when you see a Bratz doll?

For me it's 'What street corner can they be found on?' and otherwise 'How do they make the money they need for all those nice things they have and wear?'

Even if you watch their shows it shows them as nice girls, if a little empty headed sometimes, but still doesn't answer the second question.

What does it add to the language, other than complexity, by insisting that speech use this word over that word, even if the meaning is clear? To demonstrate...

"For whom the bell tolls." or "For who the bell tolls." and other similar sentences. Is there a difference in meaning when it is said either way, or just considered incorrect regardless of the fact the meaning is clear?

Another approach might be the language use of children. Where one might say "I break my toys." and then later say "You breaked my toys." What purpose does it serve to insist it be said "You broke my toys", if the meaning and logic are clear?

When a word changes the intended meaning of a sentence is obvious, but if it doesn't, what's the harm?

Keep in mind that I'm asking about the harm inflicted to the language and not the simple effect of having people correct you all the time.

What does it add to the language, other than complexity, by insisting that speech use this word over that word, even if the meaning is clear? To demonstrate...

"For whom the bell tolls." or "For who the bell tolls." and other similar sentences.

Is there a difference in meaning when it is said either way, or just considered incorrect regardless of the fact the meaning is clear?

Another approach might be the language use of children. Where one might say "I break my toys." and then later say "You breaked my toys." What purpose does it serve to insist it be said "You broke my toys", if the meaning and logic are clear?

When a word changes the intended meaning of a sentence is obvious, but if it doesn't, what's the harm?

Keep in mind that I'm asking about the harm inflicted to the language and not the simple effect of having people correct you all the time.

Mi devas tradukas la nomojn de ĉi tiu klaso por leciono En Esperanto. Povus ĉiuj parolantoj de Esperanto revuas la listo kaj fari sugestojn?

Mi estas nova Esperantisto.

Nomo En la Angla, tiame Esperanto, tiame Kromnomo.

Amber (Knabino), Ambro, Anjo

Amber-Lynn (Knabino), Ambro-Lin, Anbro-Linjo

Brennon (Knabo), Brenon, Brecxjo

Chelsea (Knabino), Cxelsia, Cxenjo

Dallas (Knabo), Dalaso, Dalanjo

Graylen (Knabino), Grizlin, Grinjo

Hannah (Knabino), Hanno, Hanjo

Jaimie (Knabino), Jakobino, Janjo

Jamie (Knabo), Jakobo, Jakocxjo

Janelle (Knabino), Janelo, Janela, Janjo

Jessica (Knabino), Jesika, Jesicxjo

John (Knabo), Johano, Johacxjo

Joshua (Knabo), Josxuo, Josxucxjo

Lewis (Knabo), Leuxiso, Leuxicxjo

Liam (Knabo), Liamo, Liacxjo

Nickolas (Knabo), Nikalo, Nikacxjo

Olivia (Knabino), Olivio, Olinjo

Riley (Knabo), Rilaj, Rilecxjo

Stephen (Knabo), Stefano, Stefanjo

Victoria (Knabino), Viktorio, Viktoria, Viktinjo

This is just the cats a s s of questions since it evokes such a string of answers, that I can't resist asking it myself.

The best argument of course is that if it is left up, they fall in. Well hell, I'd pay good money to see that. That falls under the category of "if you're stupid enough not to check, you get what you deserve".

The best answer is obviously that seat and lid go down after each use. For some reason this isn't exceptable. Something about not wanting to touch it at all, which means we have to each time.

Humm, seems fair to me! Yeah, right!

Okay, so you think that Esperanto has no culture. You think that Esperanto is a dead language or a failed experiment. You think it doesn't have enough speakers to make it worthwhile.

These are the bulk of the reasons given for not wanting to learn the language, and that's fine. It means you haven't done your homework on the subject, but fine none-the-less.

Having said this, what other reasons can you think of to not want to learn Esperanto. I honestly want to see if there are any reasonable reasons out there.

If you need to find out more about Esperanto before you answer, try these sites.

http://www.lernu.net/

http://www.esperanto.org/

Others can be found by plugging it into your search engine.

The Irish site has an excellent expose here.

http://www.esperanto.ie/english/zaft/zaft.htm

Now tell me what you think.

In other words, if you were to remove the gift giving as part of the holiday, would the children still get as exceted about it?

Personally I doubt it, but what do you think?

Do any of the points made on these sites ring true?

"http://esperantic.org/ced/psyres.htm%22

"http://esperanto.org/us/USEJ/world/kontraux.html%2...

"http://www.esperanto.ie/english/zaft/zaft(23).htm%...

"http://www.uea.org/info/angle/an_ghisdatigo.html%2...

Twice before, esperanto was suggested as an official language in the UN. The first time the french killed it because at the time they were considered the international language of diplomacy. The second time the Americans killed it because english was starting to assume that role. Since Esperanto holds observer status, it must happen eventually, so how long? Or will it ever?