Page:Ido Exhaustive Textbook Talmey 1919.pdf/16

 been most clearly expounded by Dr. L. Couturat in his lucid monograph: Etude sur la Dérivation en Esperanto.

These linguistic defects, however, could and would have been remedied but for the chief cause of Esperanto’s decline. It consists in the most influential leaders of Esperanto having endeavored and succeeded to make Esperanto the medium of a sort of new religion called Esperantism or Homaranism and proclaiming that a common language of the nations in general and of Esperanto in particular would bring about universal brotherhood of men. As the medium of a religion Esperanto became inviolable, was not to be subjected to criticism, much less to change or reform. The fallacy of this new religion has been pointed out by the author (Progreso, I, p. 83). To still further strengthen the inviolability of the medium of the new religion the ridiculous assertion was put forward that Esperanto was the living language of a living people—vivanta lingvo de vivanta popolo. Here every argument had to stop, for a living language must indeed not be touched.

Entirely different was the policy of the Permanent Commission of the Delegation which undertook to develop the project of Ido. It founded in its behalf an official organ, Progreso, and an academy and invited criticism from all sides to be either published in this magazine or presented directly to the academy which was then to introduce the change in the language necessary to correct the imperfect feature criticised.

Ido is the pseudonym under which the foremost Esperantist Marquis L. de Beaufort presented to the Committee of the Delegation for examination several documents, a complete grammar, Grammaire Complète, an elementary grammar, and a short dictionary. They completely outlined a new language devoid of the defects of Esperanto while preserving its good features. It is actually this language that the Committee adopted after rejecting all others examined. But the decision to this effect was evidently drafted with the view to gain the adherence to the new language of the great number of those who favored original Esperanto. The decision reads: "Le Comité a decidé 4