Cover not available
Article published In:
Language Problems and Language Planning
Vol. 41:2 (2017) ► pp.168–191

Esperanto linguistics

State of the art

| Esperantic Studies Foundation

Esperanto is an unusual language in many ways. First, it was originally created artificially, in a highly multilingual environment. Secondly, it was designed with the express purpose of becoming a language of interlingual communication, a language easy to learn for people from the widest range of linguistic backgrounds. Although it never became a universal lingua franca, Esperanto now has up to 2 million users and a sizeable number of native speakers. Yet even for such native speakers, Esperanto is never their only language. Its use is limited to certain domains, and for the overwhelming majority of its speakers, including native ones, Esperanto is not their dominant language. These facts may make Esperanto and Esperanto speakers useful in tests of the robustness of generalizations about linguistic typology, Universal Grammar, first and second language acquisition, language contact and creolization, variation and change. This article provides an overview of work that has been done to date on these topics.

Keywords: Esperanto, linguistic typology, language acquisition, native speakers, creoles, bilingualism
Article outline
  • 1.Linguistic descriptions of Esperanto
  • 2.Esperanto and linguistic typology
  • 3.Esperanto as a native language
  • 4.Esperanto, creole studies and contact linguistics
  • 5.Esperanto and bilingualism
  • 6.Esperanto and the Hebrew “revival”
  • 7.Standardization of Esperanto
  • 8.Esperanto humor
  • 9.Esperanto and second language acquisition
  • 10.Areas for future research
  • References
Published online: 27 October 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.41.2.06per
References
Allerton, D. J.
(2002) C. K. Ogden’s “Basic English”: A critical assessment. In D. J. Allerton, P. Skandera and C. Tschichold (Eds.), Perspectives on English as a world language (pp. 149–158). Basel: Schwabe & Co Verlag.Google Scholar
Baker, M.
(2010) Formal generative typology. In B. Heine and H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp. 285–312). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benczik, V.
(2011) La esperanta literaturo tra la lupeo de kelkaj lingvoteorioj kaj literaturkonceptoj [The English literature through the lens of some linguistic theories and literature concepts]. Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 51, 37–59.Google Scholar
Berdichevsky, N.
(1986) Zamenhof and Esperanto. Ariel: A Review of Arts and Sciences in Israel, 641, 58–71.Google Scholar
(2007) Why Esperanto is Different. New English Review. Available online: [URL]
(2014) Modern Hebrew: The past and future of a revitalized language. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.Google Scholar
Bergen, B.
(2001) Nativization processes in L1 Esperanto. Journal of Child Language, 281, 575–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, D.
(1983) Creole languages. Scientific American, 249(8), 116–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D.
(1989) Metalinguistic performance and interlinguistic competence. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning, 56(S1): 9–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biró, T.
(2004) Weak interactions: Yiddish influences in Hungarian, Esperanto and Modern Hebrew. In D. Gilbers, M. Schreuder and N. Knevel (Eds.) On the boundaries of phonology and phonetics: A Festschrift presented to Tjeerd de Graaf (pp. 123–145). Groningen: University of Groningen Press.Google Scholar
Blanke, D.
(1985) Internationale Plansprachen. Eine Einführung. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
(2014) Kompetent urteilen? Wege zur Fachinformation über Plansprachen. In C. Brosch and S. Fiedler (Eds.), Interlinguistik im 21. Jahrhundert (pp. 9–28). Beiträge der 23. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Interlinguistik e.V., 291. November – 1. Dezember 2013 in Berlin. Berlin: GIL.Google Scholar
(2015) How not to reinvent the wheel… The essential scholarly literature in interlinguistics and Esperantology. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 13(2), 200–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanke, W.
(1989) Terminological standardization: Its roots and fruits in planned languages. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned language (pp. 277–292). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broch, I., & Jahr, E.
(1984) Russenorsk – et pidginspråk i Norge [Russenorsk – A pidgin language in Norway] (2nd ed.). Tromsø studier i språkvitenskap [Tromsø Studies in Linguistics] 31. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Brosch, C.
(2014) Kelkaj pensoj pri la Esperanta verbosistemo (la ĉiama -ata/-ita). Lingva Kritiko: Studoj kaj notoj pri la Internacia Lingvo. Esperantologio Interreta. Available at [URL]
Burkina, O. V.
(2009) Proiznositel’naja norma v esperanto. Doctoral dissertation. Saint-Petersburg University.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J.
(2003) The influence of age on the acquisition of English: General proficiency, attitudes and code-mixing. In M. del Pilar García Mayo and M. L. García Lecumberri (Eds.), Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language (pp. 77–93). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charters, D.
(2015) The teaching and learning of Esperanto. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 13(2), 288–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1996) Natural and artificial international languages: A typologist’s assessment. Journal of Universal Language, 31, 35–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corsetti, R.
(1996) A mother tongue spoken mainly by fathers. Language Problems & Language Planning, 20(3), 263–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corsetti, R., & La Torre, M.
(1995) Quale lingua prima? Per un esperimento CEE che utilizzi l’esperanto. Language Problems and Language Planning, 19(1), 25–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corsetti, R., Pinto, M., & Tolomeo, M.
(2004) Regularizing the regular: The phenomenon of overregularization in Esperanto-speaking children. Language Problems & Language Planning, 28(3), 261–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dankova, N.
(1997) Temporalité en Esperanto. Etude du transfert. Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris 8.Google Scholar
(2009) Temporality in spoken Esperanto. Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 41, 43–60.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, P.
(1987) Adverboj en Esperanto. [Adverbs in Esperanto] In Serta gratulatoria in honorem Juan Regulo, vol. II1: Esperantismo (pp. 119–130). La Laguna: Universidad de la Laguna.Google Scholar
(1989) Degree words in Esperanto and categories in Universal Grammar. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages (pp. 231–248). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993) Idiomaticity and Esperanto texts: An empirical study. Linguistics, 31(2), 367–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeGraff, M.
(2009) Language acquisition in creolization and, thus, language change: Some Cartesian-uniformitarian boundary conditions. Language and Linguistic Compass, 3–4, 888–971.Google Scholar
del Pilar García Mayo, M.
(2003) Age, length of exposure and grammaticality judgments in the acquisition of English as a foreign language. In M. del Pilar García Mayo and Maria Luisa García Lecumberri (Eds.), Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language (pp. 94–114). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duc Goninaz, M.
(1984) La problem de la normo en Esperanto. [The problem of the norm in Esperanto] In R. Rokocki (Ed.), Acta Interlinguistica. 12-a Scienca Intelingvistika Simpozio. (pp. 57–65). Varsovio, April-May 1984.Google Scholar
(2002) La nova plena ilustrita vortaro de Esperanto. [The New Full Illustrated Dictionary of Esperanto]. Paris: Sennacieca Asocio Tutmonda.Google Scholar
Duličenko, A. D.
(1989) Ethnic language and planned language. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages (pp. 47–62). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eaton, H.
(1928) General language course. New York: International Auxiliary Language Association.Google Scholar
Edwards, J.
(1994) Multilingualism. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fantini, A., & Reagan, T.
(1992) Esperanto and education: Toward a research agenda. Available online: [URL]
Fettes, M.
(1996) The Esperanto community: A quasi-ethnic linguistic minority? Language Problems & Language Planning, 20(1), 53–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, S.
(1999a) Pri Esperanto-frazeologio. [On Esperanto phraseology] Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 11, 48–51.Google Scholar
(1999b) Plansprache und Phraseologie. Empirische Untersuchungen zu reproduziertem Sprachmaterial im Esperanto. [Planned language and phraseology. Empirical studies on reproduced language material in Esperanto]. Frankfurt/M.: Lang.Google Scholar
(2006) Standardization and self-regulation in an international speech community: The case of Esperanto. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 1771, 67–90.Google Scholar
(2007) Phraseology in planned languages. In H. Burger (Ed.) Phraseologie / Phraseology: Ein internationals Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung / An international handbook of contemporary research, vol. 21 (pp. 779–787). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Geschlecht im Esperanto. Eine sprachwissenschaftliche Betrachtung zu gender-spezifischen Bezeichnungen in einer Plansprache. Interlinguistische Informationen, 211, 85–106.Google Scholar
(2015a) Esperanto phraseology. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 13(2), 250–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015b) Esperanto. Gender in a planned language. In M. Hellinger and H. d Motschenbacher (Eds.) Gender across languages, vol. 41 (pp. 97–123). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fischer, R-J.
(2014) Die Bedeutung der Vokale -a-, -i- und -o- in finiten Verbformen und Partizipien des Esperanto. In C. Brosch and S. Fiedler (Eds.), Interlinguistik im 21. Jahrhundert (pp. 69–84). Beiträge der 23. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Interlinguistik e.V., 29. November – 1. Dezember 2013 in Berlin. Berlin: GIL.Google Scholar
Fonseca-Greber, B., & Reagan, T.
(2008) Developing K-16 Student Standards for Language Learning: A critical examination of the case of Esperanto. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 5(1), 44–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forster, P.
(1982) The Esperanto movement. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gledhill, C.
(2000) The grammar of Esperanto. A corpus-based description. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
(2008) Les constructions verbo-nominales en français et en espéranto: un cas spécifique de glissement phraséologique. Zeitschrift für Französische Sprache und Literatur, 361, 71–84.Google Scholar
(2010) Frazeologio, kunokazemo kai leksiko-gramatiko. In D. Blanke and U. Lins (Eds.), La arto labori kune. Festlibro por Humphrey Tonkin (pp. 323–338). Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar
(2014) Phraseology as a measure of emergent norm: The case of Esperanto. In J. C. Herreras (Ed.), Politiques linguistiques et langues autochtones d’enseignement dans l’Europe des vingt-sept (pp. 317–348). Valenciennes: Presses Universitaires de Valenciennes.Google Scholar
Greatrex, G.
(2013)  Review of Angela Tellier (Ed.) Esperanto as a Starter Language for Child Second-Language Learners in the Primary School. Language Problems & Language Planning, 37(1), 97–99.Google Scholar
Hall, R. A.
(1966) Pidgin and creole languages. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Hammer, M. F., Redd, A. J., Wood, E. T., Bonner, M. R., Jarjanazi, H., Karafet, T. M., Santachiara-Benerecetti, S., Oppenheim, A., Jobling, M. A., Jenkins, H. T., Ostrer, H., & Bonné-Tamir, B.
(2000) Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(12), 6769–6774. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harley, B., & Hart, D.
(1997) Language aptitude and second language proficiency in classroom learners of different starting ages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 191, 379–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heil, A.
(1999) Grammatische Reduktion in Frankokreolsprachen und Plansprachen. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N.
(2003) Maturational constraints in SLA. In C. J. Doughty and M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jansen, W. H.
(1999) Esperanto, Van taalproject tot levende taal. Amsterdam: Vereniging Esperanto Nederland.Google Scholar
(2007a) Wortstellungsmodelle im ursprünglichen und im heutigen Esperanto – Zeugen einer natürlichen Entwicklung der Syntax? In D. Blanke (Ed.) Esperanto heute. Wie aus einem Projekt eine Sprache wurde (pp. 15–26). Berlin: Gesellschaft für Interlinguistik.Google Scholar
(2007b) Woordvolgorde in het Esperanto. PhD thesis, LOT, Utrecht.Google Scholar
(2008) Naturaj vortordoj en Esperanto. Rotterdam. Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar
(2009) Pri la natureco de vortordoj en Esperanto. In A. S. Mel’nikov (Ed.), Current problems in linguistics (pp. 106–111). Rostov-on-the-Don: Federal Agency for Public Education.Google Scholar
(2012) The learnability of the reflexive in Esperanto. Linguistics in Amsterdam, 51, 57–80.Google Scholar
(2013a) Radikoj kaj vortoj en Esperanto. Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 61, 9–43.Google Scholar
(2013b) The learnability of the reflexive in Esperanto. Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 61, 71–96.Google Scholar
(2013c) Esperanto parts of speech in functional discourse grammar. Linguistics, 51(3), 611–652. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Grammar: A complex structure. A linguistic description of Esperanto in functional discourse grammar. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 13(2), 275–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jordan, D. K.
(1987) Esperanto and Esperantism: Symbols and motivations in a movement for linguistic equality. Language Problems and Language Planning, 11(1), 104–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988) Esperanto: The international language of humor; or, What’s funny about Esperanto? Humor, 1–2, 143–157.Google Scholar
Kachru, B.
(1985) Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the Outer Circle. In R. Quirk, H. G. Widdowson, and Yolande Cantù (Eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp. 11–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kachru, B., Kachru, Y., & Nelson, C.
(2009) The handbook of world Englishes. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kagan, O., & Dillon, K.
(2001) A new perspective on teaching Russian: Focus on the heritage learner. Slavic and East European Journal, 451, 507–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalocsay, K., & Waringhien, G.
(1985) Plena analiza gramatiko de Esperanto (5a eldono). Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar
Karmiloff, K., & Karmiloff-Smith, A.
(2002) Pathways to language: From fetus to adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Koutny, I.
(2015) Can complexity be planned? Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 13(2), 236–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krägeloh, C. U.
(2009) Lingva fono kaj uzado de frazstrukturoj en skribita Esperanto. Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 41, 31–42.Google Scholar
Laleko, O. V.
(2008) Compositional telicity and Heritage Russian aspect. In M. Grosvald and D. Soares (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Western Conference on Linguistics (pp. 150–160). Davis, CA: Department of Linguistics, University of California Davis.Google Scholar
(2010) The syntax-pragmatics interface in language loss: Covert restructuring of aspect in Heritage Russian. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Larson-Hall, J.
(2008) Weighing the benefits of studying a foreign language at a younger starting age in a minimal input situation. Second Language Research, 24(1), 35–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H.
(1957) A probabilistic approach to language learning. Behavioral Science, 21, 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Wei
(1996) Esperanto inflection and its interface in HPSG. Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle, 131, 71–81.Google Scholar
Lindstedt, J.
(2006) Native Esperanto as a test case for natural language. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 191, 47–55.Google Scholar
(2009) Esperanto: An East European contact language? In C. Voß and A. Nagórko (Eds.), Die Europäizität der Slawia oder dies Slawizität Europas [pages?]. München / Berlin: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Liu, Haitao
(2001) Creoles or planned languages: Which have the simpler grammar? Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 21, 53–57.Google Scholar
Maxwell, D.
(1989) English-Esperanto Metataxis. In D. Maxwell and K. Schubert (Eds.), Metataxis in practice. Dependency syntax for multilingual machine translation (pp. 267–297). Dordrecht/Providence: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, J.
(2009) Our magnificent bastard tongue: The untold history of English. New York: Gotham Books.Google Scholar
(2014a) A response to Mufwene. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 29(1), 172–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b) The language hoax: Why the world looks the same in any language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Milton, J., & Alexiou, T.
(2006) Language aptitude development in young learners. In C. Abello-Contesse, R. Chacón-Beltrán, M. D. López-Chiménez, and M. Mar Torreblanca-López (Eds.), Age in L2 acquisition and teaching (pp. 177–192). Oxford: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S.
(2001) The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Genetic linguistics and genetic creolistics. A response to Sally Thomason’s column. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 18(2), 273–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Language evolution: Contact, competition, and change. London: Continuum Press.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C.
(2009) Input and long-term effects of early learning in a formal setting. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), The age factor and early language learning (pp. 141–159). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Nagata, H., & Corsetti, R.
(2005) Influoj de gepatra lingvo sur la lernadon de esperanto: psikolingvistika esploro. Esperantologio / Esperanto Studies, 31, 5–39.Google Scholar
Nebel, A., Filon, D., Brinkmann, B., Majumder, P., Faerman, M., & Oppenheim, A.
(2001) The Y chromosome pool of Jews as part of the genetic landscape of the Middle East. American Journal of Human Genetics, 69(5), 1095–1112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Okrent, A.
(2009) In the land of invented languages. New York: Spiegel & Grau.Google Scholar
Ostler, N.
(2010) The last lingua franca: English until the return of Babel. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Pabst, B.
(2014) Das Fundamento als Maßstab sprachlicher Richtigkeit im Esperanto. In C. Brosch and S. Fiedler (Eds.), Interlinguistik im 21. Jahrhundert (pp. 45–60). Beiträge der 23. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Interlinguistik e.V., 29. November – 1. Dezember 2013 in Berlin. Berlin: GIL.Google Scholar
Parkvall, M.
(2010) How European is Esperanto? A typological study. Language Problems & Language Planning, 34(1), 63–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) The simplicity of creoles in a cross-linguistic perspective. In M. Miestamo, K. Sinnemäki, and F. Karlsson (Eds.), Language complexity. Typology, contact, change (pp. 265–285). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pereltsvaig, A.
(2004a) Aspect lost, aspect regained: Restructuring of aspectual marking in American Russian. In P. Kempchinsky and R. Slabakova (Eds.), Aspectual inquiries (pp. 369–395). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
(2004b) Agreement in the absence of agreement: Gender agreement in American Russian. In D. Stojanović (Ed.), Cahiers Linguistique d’Ottawa, 321, 87–107.Google Scholar
(2004c) Immigrant Russian: Factors in the restructuring of the aspectual system under attrition. The Proceedings of BLS 29S.Google Scholar
(2011) What is the most difficult language to learn – and why? Languages of the World blog. Available online: [URL]
(2012) Languages of the world: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Just how weird are the world’s weirdest – and least weird – languages? Languages of the World blog. Available online: [URL]
Picard, J. -M.
(1911) L’Esperanto à l’école, ou l’Enseignement méthodique de la langue française aux enfants par l’esperanto: Cours élémentaire (entre 7 et 10 ans). Coulommiers: Imprimerie Paul Brodard.Google Scholar
Pinker, S.
(1994) The language instinct: How the mind creates language. Harper Perennial. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piron, C.
(1986) Espéranto: l’image et la réalité. Paris: Université de Paris 8-Vincennes.Google Scholar
(1989) A few notes on the evolution of Esperanto. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages (pp. 129–142). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Pp. 129–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, M.
(2008) Relative clauses in Heritage Russian: Fossilization or divergent grammar. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, 161, 333–358.Google Scholar
Pool, J.
(1991) The world language problem. Rationality and Society, 3(1), 78–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pool, J., & Grofman, B.
(1989) Linguistic artificiality and cognitive competence. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages (pp. 145–156). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K.
(2013) Theoretical foundations. In A. Tellier (Ed.), Esperanto as a starter language for child second-language learners in the primary school (2nd ed.) (pp. 19–22). Barlaston: Esperanto UK.Google Scholar
Savatovsky, D.
(1989) Les linguists et la langue internationale (1880–1920). Histoire Epistémologie Langage, 11(2), 37–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, E. W., & Kortmann, B.
(2004) A handbook of varieties of English: Morphology and syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schnoebelen, T.
(2013) The weirdest languages. The Idibon blog.Google Scholar
Schubert, K.
(1989a) An unplanned development in planned languages: A study of word grammar. In K. Schubert (Ed.), Interlinguistics: Aspects of the science of planned languages (pp. 249–274). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989b) A dependency syntax of Esperanto. In D. Maxwell and K. Schubert (Eds.), Metataxis in practice: Dependency syntax for multilingual machine translation (pp. 207–232) (Distributed Language Translation 6.) Dordrecht/Providence: Foris.Google Scholar
(1993) Semantic compositionality: Esperanto word formation for language technology. Linguistics, 311, 311–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Word-formation and planned languages. In P. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, and F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe (pp. 2210–2225). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sherwood, B. A.
(1982) Statistical Analysis of Conversational Esperanto, With Discussion of the Accusative. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 12(1), 165–182.Google Scholar
Stocker, F.
(1996) Wer spricht Esperanto? Kiu parolas Esperanton? Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Symoens, E.
(1992) Al nova internacia lingvopolitiko: la propedeŭtika valoro de Esperanto. (Esperanto-dokumento 28–29E). Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar
Tamis, D.
(1989) Esperanto-French Metataxis. In D. Maxwell and K. Schubert (Eds.), Metataxis in practice. Dependency syntax for multilingual machine translation (Distributed Language Translation 6.) (pp. 247–266). Dordrecht/Providence: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tellier, A.
(2013a) Esperanto as a potential aid to language learning in primary schools. In A. Tellier (Ed.), Esperanto as a starter language for child second-language learners in the primary school (2nd ed.) (pp. 10–18). Barlaston: Esperanto UK.Google Scholar
(2013b) Esperanto as a starter language for child second-language learners in the primary school (2nd ed.). Barlaston: Esperanto UK.Google Scholar
(2013c) Developing a measure of metalinguistic awareness for children aged 8–11. In K. Roehr-Brackin and ‎G. A. Gánem-Gutiérrez (Eds.), The metalinguistic dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 15–43). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Tellier, A., & Roehr-Brackin, K.
(2013a) The development of language learning aptitude and metalinguistic awareness in primary-school children: A classroom study. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics, 621. Available at [URL]
(2013b) Metalinguistic awareness in children with differing language learning experience. EuroSLA Yearbook, 13(1), 81–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tonkin, H.
(2015) Language planning and planned languages: How can planned languages inform language planning? Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 13(2), 193–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Oostendorp, M.
(1999) Syllable structure in Esperanto as an instantiation of universal phonology. Esprantologio / Esperanto Studies, 11, 52–80.Google Scholar
Versteegh, K.
(1993) Esperanto as a first language: Language acquisition with a restricted input. Linguistics, 31(3), 539–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wells, J.
(1989) Lingvistikaj aspektoj de Esperanto. Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto Asocio.Google Scholar
Wennergren, B.
(2005) Plena manlibro de Esperanta gramatiko. El Cerrito: Esperanto-League of North America.Google Scholar
Yaguello, M.
(2006) Les langues imaginaires: mythes, utopies, fantasmes, chimères et finctions linguistiques. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Zuckermann, G.
(2003) Language contact and globalisation: The camouflaged influence of English on the world’s languages, with special attention to Israeli (sic) and Mandarin. Cambridge Review of international Affairs, 16(2), 287–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

ARAY, Başak
2020. ARADİLLER ve ARADİLBİLİM. Trakya Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 10:19 ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Fiedler, Sabine
2018. Linguistic and pragmatic influence of English: Does Esperanto resist it?. Journal of Pragmatics 133 ► pp. 166 ff. DOI logo
Goodall, Grant
2023. Constructed Languages. Annual Review of Linguistics 9:1 ► pp. 419 ff. DOI logo
Pereltsvaig, Asya
2020. Languages of the World, DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Esperanto – Lingua Franca and Language Community [Studies in World Language Problems, 10], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 may 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.