While I can't express myself in Esperanto, I find it really interesting.
It's a very regular language as far as I've learned so far, but I find the pronouns funny. All nouns end in -o, except personal pronouns, which are nouns
Esperanto has plural marker -j but it isn't used for "they", "we", "you" Bonus: why is there no plural you?
Something I find silly about the language though is that the pronouns are mi, vi, li, ŝi, ni, ili, ĝi, oni, and si. The language argues for rigid rules, but it breaks them when introducing pronouns. I feel if it really wanted to get this idea of rigidity of rules the pronouns should have had an "o" to conform with all other nouns. One thing I could say that pronouns are consistent within itself, so that makes sense. I feel replacing I with an o would be not as ideal as the language would be less familiar to language learners.
If they are subjects: mio (I), vio (you), lio (he), ŝio (she), nio (we), ilio (they), ĝio (it), onio (one, "Singular they", "generic you" ), and sio (self).
If they are direct objects: mion (me), vion (you), lion (him), ŝion (her), nion (us), ilion (them), ĝion (it), onion (one ), and sion (self).
Adjectival form: mia (my), via (your), lia (his), ŝia (her), nia (our), ilia (their), ĝia(its), onia (one's) , and sia (self's)
Adjective modifying a direct object: mian, vian, lian, ŝian, nian, ilian, ĝian, onian, and sian
Also, I feel it's kinda odd ni and ili don't have plural marker. This might be less intuitive, but I feel that it would be more logically consistent if it was mioj represented the plural first person and third lioj, ŝioj, and ĝioj.The bonus of this is not only being consistent, it allows the Esperanto translator to preserve gender-specific coding from other languages when translating and persevere that element of the culture. While I think excluding the formal "you" although common in European languages was a good idea, I think it's silly that Zamenhof made it "vi" both plural and singular. If I were to redesign Esperanto pronouns, I think vio and vioj would make sense.
Would be kinda cool also if Esperanto had inclusive and exclusive "we", but European languages don't have this feature, so it makes sense that Zamenhof wouldn't include it.
What are your thoughts on this? Is there a reason it was designed this way?