Delegation For The Adoption of An International Auxiliary Language - Aftermath

Aftermath

The commission delivered an ultimatum to the Esperanto Language Committee, the nearest approximate to a governing body of the Esperanto movement at the time. A response was demanded in one month, but this was logistically impossible as members of the Language Committee spread out all over Europe and beyond. After a month passed with no response, the commission broke relations with the Esperantists.

A number of Esperantists did migrate to the movement, including a number of influential leaders of the movement, but most ordinary speakers did not support the Ido reforms. This prompted the observation from outsiders that the Idists were generals without an army, and the Esperantists were an army with no generals. Less than a year later, the Universala Esperanto-Asocio was created to provide stronger leadership within the Esperanto movement, which had not received organizational guidance from its inventor, Dr. Zamenhof. While Esperantists have little regard for the Delegation and its decisions, partisans of Ido continue to insist that the Delegation Committee was legitimate. The Ido language even today still has a following.

The Encyclopedia of Esperanto summarizes the Esperantists' position as follows:

La "Delegitaro" estis unu-homa afero, sen kunvenoj aŭ difinita regularo. La unu klara regulo, ke aŭtoroj de lingvoprojekto ne rajtas partopreni, estis rompita. El la 12 membroj de la komitato nur du estis lingvistoj, kaj nur 4 partoprenis; oni aldonis nomojn de anstataŭantoj aŭ novaj membroj sen rajtigo. La fina rezolucio estis voĉdonita de nur tri el la 12 plus 4 anstataŭantaj kaj la sekretarioj. Oni sendis al la L. K. 25 kopiojn de la projekto, por disdoni ilin inter 100 membroj de la L. K. (loĝantaj ankaŭ ekster Eŭropo) kaj postulis respondon post unu monato.

The "Delegation" was a one-man enterprise, without meetings or a definitive set of rules. The one clear rule, that authors of language projects have no right to participate, was broken. Of the 12 members of the committee, only two were linguists, and only four participated; they added names of substitutes or new members without permission. The final resolution was voted upon by only three of the twelve plus four substitutes and the secretaries. They sent to the L.K. (Esperanto Language Committee) 25 copies of the project, to distribute among its 100 members (some of whom were living outside of Europe) and demanded a response in one month.