>Is it, in point of fact, a living language?
> Are people teaching it to their children as a primary language?

Yes. While an accurate number is nigh-impossible to find, the number most commonly quoted as native Esperanto speakers ranges from 1,000 to 5,000. Possibly more, but nobody can say for sure.

> Are the meanings and pronunciations of the words changing?
> Are the grammatical structures changing? Does it have slang?

If any of the grammar, meanings, or pronunciations changed, it would negate the purpose of Esperanto. However, alternate conventions have arisen in use, particularly on the 'net. And, yes, there is slang.

>Esperanto
>doesn't have an associated culture, and unless it gets one, will never
>become
>a "real" language.

The point of Esperanto is that it doesn't have an associated culture. And I beg to differ; it is a "real" language, just not a natural one. It's as expressive as most other languages (not as capable of fine shades of meaning as English, which English achieves by virtue of an enormous vocabulary, although as English's grammar moves towards a purely positional structure with little to no inflection, some of that will be lost -- a good deal of it has already been lost in the changes between Shakespearean English and modern English), and there are a number of works of literature that have been written expressly in Esperanto. It's the only artificial international language that continues to thrive and grow, and even partially succeeds at its given intent, and remains as something more than a curiousity of another time.

And if all this seems a little odd, remember that the name of the language means "one who hopes".

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process