Talk:Adjuvilo

Actually, the whole book written by Colas is online in an Esperanto translation. But you need to be a member of the Yahoo! group in question for that, and that's why I didn't want to add it to the external links section. Anyway, here it is: Adjuvilo. —IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 16:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Date of creation

In the article it is stated that the language was created in the year 1908, but the central dokument was published in the year 1910. According to the Esperanto-Wikipedia Adjuvilo was created in 1910. Valodnieks (talk) 21:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Excellent point. The thing with this kind of info is that various sources keep copying it from each other without ever questioning it. Year of creation is a pretty fuzzy concept in the case of constructed language. Does it refer to the moment when the autor scribbled down a few sketches of what would later become a language? Or to the moment when he first published his idea on the Internet or hold a lecture about it? Is the the moment when the first book was published? Or the moment when the language reached its ultimate, stable form (when it was "ready"). The year when a language was first published is at least an objective and easily verifiable criterion, so I agree with you. I'm still curious where the year 1908 comes from, though. —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 10:52, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Link to Yahoo-Group

The Adjuvilo Yahoo-Group should be added as a link because in its archieves there is an online version of a translation of the original document of Adjuvilo in Esperanto. This document is the central reference for any people interested in Adjuvilo and the main resource of any research on the subject. There is still no other online version of this document according to my knowlegde Valodnieks (talk) 21:33, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I think it would be best to add it as an inline quotation. Mailing lists, fora etc. themselves should rather not be in the external links section, but there's nothing wrong with using them in footnotes.

BTW, the main reason why Adjuvilo is interesting is that supposedly it was not meant by its author to be spoken or used at all, but that it was merely meant to undermine the Ido movement. Do you have any idea where that assertion comes from? —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 10:56, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I accept that policy. As far as I know the doubtful assertion comes from some Esperantists sources. I identified with Claus Dilling Günkel and Detlev Blanke, both German Esperantists, as sources of this idea. I will try to contact them. Of course, the author of Adjuvilo wanted that his language is spoken. Here is a quotation from his book: "Algunas dagos da studado ed exercado plene sufican ne sole por komprendi, lekti e skripti perfekte la nova linguo, ma ankore por paroli it kun facileso." (In English: Some days of studying and exercise is fully enough, not only for understand, read and write the new language perfectly, but also for speaking it with ease.") Valodnieks (talk) 19:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)