Those who teach Esperanto to English-speaking students often find
themselves called upon to _explain_ certain generally-accepted modes of
expression in the international language. There is no doubt that a
student is perfectly justified in expecting, and should be encouraged to
ask for, a logical explanation and a justification of anything which his
teacher tells him is "good Esperanto." The principles and rules which
Dr. Zamenhof has given us in the _Fundamento de Esperanto_ form the
whole of the _essentials of the language_. No one is entitled to call
himself an Esperantist until he has carefully studied those few
grammatical rules and exercises, and has resolved never wilfully to
disobey them. The excellent _Sintakso_ of Dr. Paul Fruictier and the
widely read _Commentaire_ of the Marquis de Beaufront are _aprobitaj_ by
Dr. Zamenhof, and are now generally accepted as standard works in the
Esperanto Language. There are others, of course; but he who _knows_ the
three books named knows Esperanto well.
But the _Commentaire_ is in French, and useful only to those who can
read French easily; the _Sintakso_ is in Esperanto, and does not treat
of Esperanto from an English point of view; and the _Fundamento_ is
merely "law-giving" and not explanatory. We need a good Commentary very
badly in England, for a very large number of our students know too
little of French to derive full advantage from the _Commentaire_.
To write and speak Esperanto really well one should have a knowledge of
French, or, failing that, should be ever on the alert for the occasional
contributions to the magazines of English commentators. Doubtless a time
will come when the English student will be as well off as the French one
for really reliable and well-written commentaries and dictionaries; at
present he must do the best he can.
No student need suppose, then, that if he comes across some Esperanto
construction, even in a book which is _aprobita_, that he is compelled
to accept it, if it appear to him to be either illogical, insufficient,
or idiomatic. He must study the books mentioned above, and then use his
critical judgment. This doctrine is not the writer's own; it emanates
from Dr. Zamenhof himself.
The English student may find, for example, the clumsy expression
_li rompis al si la kruron_, which means to most foreigners "he broke
his leg," but which to the young English student means "he broke to him
the leg," and which is, after all, _idiomatic_. No foreign Esperantist
could misunderstand _li rompis sian kruron_, and there is no reason
whatever why that form of expression should not be good, nay excellent,
Esperanto. _It is clear, and it is logical, and the best Esperanto style
is that which best fulfils these requirements._ The phrase _kiel eble
plej baldaŭ_ (or _plej baldaŭ kiel eble_) at first sight looks
idiomatic, but is in reality not so. It does require explanation,
however.
We are accustomed, in English, to say "as soon as possible" when we mean
"the soonest possible." Careful thought will enable anyone to arrive at
the slight difference in meaning between the two expressions. In "_as_
soon _as_ possible" we use the same form of words as in an ordinary
comparison--_e.g._, "she is _as_ good _as_ she is beautiful"--but we are
speaking of something in the superlative, and not in the comparative,
degree all the time. Thus "_tiel_ baldaŭ _kiel_ eble" is not bad
Esperanto; it means literally "_as_ soon _as_ possible"; but whenever we
really mean "the soonest possible" we ought to write "_plej_ baldaŭ
_kiel_ eble."
Martyn Westcott, F.B.E.A.