Talk:-iĉo

Reforms?

It may be used in «reforms», but it is alive and well in normal every day esperanto. Tuvalkin (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Sourcing

The article says about the "virbovo" etc. thing that «Zamenhof, »(…)« began this usage in the 1920s». Well, he died in 1917. Better delete the whole thing — it doesnt pertain to "iĉ" and even in "vir" it would be irrelevant. Z used lotsa stuff that never took root, it doesnt confer automatic currency. Tuvalkin (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Five years and the obviously retarded part about Zamenhof using something in 1920's while he died in 1917 is still on. Also, the whole "usage note" is ridiculous. "A politically biased (feminist)..." - what is that? Someone's blog entry? Or a dictionary?

"politically biased"

Iĉism may have originated in feminist sophistry / lingosophy, but has outgrown it; and, according to the "Enciklopedio de Esperanot" famous "Reformoj en E." article, it can be argued whether it is a "reform" or an "evolution":

Oni ne devas intermiksi kun R. la pacan evoluigon de la lingvo, kiu volas sen rompo kaj perforto riĉigi la lingvon, ĝin fleksebligi kaj kapab­ligi por fakaj bezonoj kaj literaturaj kaj poeziaj valoroj.

Even amongst its "compatriots", while Riismo certainly is a "reform", Giismo and Hiismo could be classed as "proposed evolutions" as they try to alter the language with as gentle steps as necessary - and have much less impact on the logical structure of Esperanto than, eg. Anti-uj-o, which broke the -uj- afix that marked states and political countries with a special afix (German' root, Germanujo "the state of Germany", germana "german", germanuja "pertaining to the state (not the culture or language)", German-IO new IT standard: German Input-Output-Port). --217.224.142.227 21:13, 24 August 2017 (UTC)