Lunedi, le 18me augusto 1997, Ensjo scribeva:

> Io ha visitate le addresse
>
>         http://www.interlingua.com/compara2.htm
>
> que presenta un comparation inter parolas de Interlingua e Esperanto.
>
> In illo, le litteras accentuate de Esperanto es in le forma de digrapho con
> x, o sia:
>
>         cx, gx, hx, jx, sx, ux
>
> Ma viste que le texto que es directionate a un publico laic, que
> discognosce le problema de translitteration del litteras especial de
> Esperanto, e que habe nulle idea de que "cx" debe esser legite como "tch",
> io pensa que le forma con circumflexo postponite es le plus adequate:
>
>         c^, g^, h^, j^, s^, u`´
>
> Illo da un idea plus proxime del real forma del parolas esperantista, e non
> lassa le lector tentar leger un "x" como "ks" que non existe in le parola.
> In vice, ille pensara: "c con circunflexo?" e sapera que ille debe studiar
> un libretto de Esperanto pro saper lo que illo significa.

    I apologize that I am just not up to translating this into
Interlingua this evening.  Here are some relevant remarks I made
a few days ago on the AUXLANG list:

       At present, for personal reasons my primary forum for the use of any
   IAL is the Internet, and there, in line with my personal prejudices, I
   think Interlingua has an edge for one simple reason: Esperanto's
   accented letters.  I have no problem whatever with them in my personal
   setup using ISO-8859-3/Latin-3.  I can read email and WWW pages
   correctly in Latin-3.  I can enter the letters correctly without major
   difficulty.  I can send email straight in Latin-3.  I can print off
   texts on my printer with the accented letters.  Many more people could
   do these things if they were willing to go to the trouble to do what I
   did, even if it cost them a little money, as it did for me.  (I had to
   pay a couple of shareware fees.)  Mechanisms exist for handling Latin-3.
   They are out there.  Use them.

       Unfortunately, too many Esperantistoj or would-be Esperantistoj are
   unable or, more likely, unwilling to conform to standards, so they use
   the digraphs, of which I consider the x-digraphs to be especially ugly.
   This is my undoubtedly my personal prejudice speaking here, but I think
   the digraphs (except, to some extent ch, gh, hh, jh, sh, and
   w-substitution) are _so_ ugly that, rightly or wrongly, they very
   strongly turn me off.  No matter how much Esperantistoj protest, the
   accented letters (even though I personally can handle them on the
   Internet) have been a bugaboo almost from the beginning.  Interlingua,
   of course, has no such problem.

    In another recent AUXLANG post, I remarked that some of the very
people who prattle on about how wonderful the accented letters are for
the "agglutinating" nature of Esperanto do not themselves use those
letters on the Internet.

    However, an Esperantista complaint is that Interlinguanos do little
more than bash Esperanto (untrue, of course), but I think we need to be
wary that we do not come across that way.

Paul                             <[log in to unmask]>
----------------------------------------------------------
Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA
Finger, keyserver, or WWW for PGP 2.6.2 public key
Home Page:  http://www.access.digex.net/~pobart