English is spoken in every major city in the world, especially tourist destinations. Terry Dip thinks there’s a problem with that.
Photo by BingBing
Paris. At a cafe outside the Pantheon, I see a group of Japanese tourists, all women between their 20’s and 50’s, telling a waiter in broken English, “Something to drink, please… non-alcoholic.”
Costa Rica. Far away from any major city, I get an ear infection and go to the doctor, who asks me if I speak Spanish. I can chat in the language, but I couldn’t discuss my medical status in necessary detail. The doctor speaks to me in English.
Ho Chi Minh City. I go out with a friend who is bilingual in Cantonese and Vietnamese. I speak neither language. We stay at his friend’s house who speaks only Vietnamese. The friend tries to communicate with me in English.
These scenarios happen the world over.
English is spoken in every major city in the world, especially tourist destinations. You might think that means it has the most speakers. Not true – Mandarin is spoken by more people, but Mandarin is not spoken much outside China.
Mandarin was never a colonial language on a global scale. English claimed the title from French, which was a colonial language but has been losing power ever since America became the dominant world power.
If there’s a world language, it is English.
A Lack Of Colour
I find myself annoyed when Americans tour the world expecting to be understood whenever they speak in English.
I find myself annoyed when Americans tour the world expecting to be understood whenever they speak in English.
I am even more irritated when I hear travelers from outside the English-speaking world visiting another foreign country where English is not the official language and trying to get around by speaking English.
To be fair, there’s nothing linguistically wrong with the English language, and I admit it’s very convenient (for Americans, Brits, and Aussies).
But I strongly believe the prevalence of English is one of the biggest reasons the majority of America’s youth know next to nothing about the outside world. And the ignorance is not limited to just that age group. FDR ended American’s “age of isolationism” more than half a century ago.
It’s time Americans did some serious footwork to catch up.
Studying Abroad
Studying abroad has become more popular over the years for cultural immersion – yet the most common destinations for Americans are still Britain and Australia, followed by Italy, France, and Spain.
You couldn’t live in Rome without speaking Italian, Paris without speaking French, or Seville without speaking Spanish, but English could arguably get you through a summer or semester, which is typically the amount of time college undergrads spend abroad before they get back to the U.S. in the fall.
Even if American college students stay abroad long enough to understand the language and culture to a modest degree, most are still studying in the West.
In comparison, India and China send more students to America for higher education than any other countries in the world. This is a severe global cultural imbalance (not unlike the import-export gap America has with China, and look where that’s gotten the US economy).
Pop Culture USA
Photo by Terry Dip
American movies and TV rule the world. That’s a fact. When was the last time you saw a TV ad or a billboard for a foreign film? Yes, we all know Bollywood, but the Indian actor/character Americans are most familiar with is undoubtedly Apu.
Advertisements for Hero, House of Flying Daggers, and Fearless have gotten some airtime, but any publicity is minuscule compared to what any standard American movie gets. Furthermore, even big foreign films have only limited releases.
During my time own study abroad term in Sweden, Pirates of the Caribbean II and Superman Returns were playing in major movie theaters whereas domestic Swedish films had posters in alleyways and were played in small movie houses.
Friends is insanely popular in France. I know friends who stay up watching 24 in Hong Kong and Japan.
I myself spent many weeknights watching Family Guy, in the original English (Swedes never dub their imported American TV shows), with fellow international students when we could’ve been exploring the nooks and crannies of Lund, the local town.
In Sweden, I had the privilege of taking an academic trip to Brussels with a number of colleagues. While at a mini-conference with some representatives from the EU Commission, an American student raised her hand and asked, “Is the EU thinking about having a single official language?”
The EU now has over 20 official languages, and annual translation costs are over $1 billion USD – so if if her question was thoroughly impractical, it did show some concern for the cost.
But then she added, “Maybe English?”
War Of Confusion
While it’s possible that miscommunication due to ignorance of each other’s languages has been a driving force of ethnic wars, I don’t think having an international language is the solution.
Our entire concept of everyday reality is shaped around language. Language, more than anything else, I think, defines a people.
If English is the world language, it could burn away the cultural differences that make our world so interesting, reducing our vibrant global inheritance of culture to ashes (does anyone remember The Giver?)
Our entire concept of everyday reality is shaped around language. If you speak multiple languages, you start to see things in many more shades because some concepts just cannot be translated, directly or indirectly.
Language, more than anything else, I think, defines a people. You can’t fully understand a culture without first learning the language. Forgive me for mentioning pop culture, which some might find vapid, but you can’t deny the influence it has on the members of our society, especially the young.
Have you ever tried to call someone a chicken in Spanish by directly translating the word? Didn’t make much sense, did it?
Did you know that the famous Japanese phrase itadakimasu, said before every meal, simply means “to receive with gratitude” in formal speech? Imagine saying “Receive!” right before dinner.
Even “Let’s eat,” which is the typical translation in anime and Japanese dramas and movies doesn’t quite have the same effect.
Our different languages have shaped who we are, our history, our heritage, our culture, our identity. Why should the world have one language when it can have many?
The Power Of Words
In the end, it is unclear whether our global America-dominated media culture is an advantage to Americans or not.
When I was in Sweden, most Swedes knew more about American politics than I did. The reason is simple: economically and politically, it is more important for them to know about America than it is for Americans to know about Sweden.
If you’re an American, are you comfortable with the rest of the world knowing more about you than you do about them?
English shouldn’t be the international language. Neither should Spanish, French, Mandarin, or Esperanto. The world doesn’t need an international language. What it needs is more cultural exchange and less cultural imperialism.
What do you think about English as the world’s international language? Share your thoughts in the comments!
About the Author
Related Posts
175 Comments... join the discussion!
-
-
Hi Brian,
Regarding your comments of my post above, I think you missed my points.
Hi Siu Yee I hope that the following comments will answer some of your questions
There should be no “Esperanto movement” Quite simply, it is just a language. Secondly. To have a truly international language, should we choose 5 words from the 6,700 existing languages, and start from scratch again, in order to create another new language ! Thirdly, and lastly, Esperanto does exist. See http://www.esperanto.net.I am completely lost with your comments in relation to mine. I know Esperanto does exist and it is a language… I don’t have a clue why you stated the obvious!
If advocating to learn and use Esperanto is not a movement, why did the committee bother to lobby it as one of the many foreign languages to learn at schools in the United States? Why did they bother to be recognised as a practicing language in the United Nation?↵ -
Dear all,
Why was it so hard for my points to be heard and understood? What I was asking from the Esperanto speakers in my first posting was:
1) Be open minded and listen attentively to others first especially if you want to befriend with others. Other people may have some very good points. Dear Henry, no one asked for a perfect language before we use it. It is not possible to have a perfect language especially for all. Let’s not to be naive and again, please don’t state the obvious except for kids. Please don’t overuse ” ” around words as it appears to be sarcastic and unfriendly remarks. Overdoing it does give people impression of being upset or over-reacting and there is no reason to be so here.
Also, I found your comment “the “Big Picture” that Esperanto, as it exists, already does a far better job of serving as an international language than any other language, natural of constructed.” and “Why have so many other constructed languages failed to attract the following that Esperanto has”? very arrogant like the Americans! Excuse my ignorance, what are ‘other constructed languages’ and how many of them in the world? I am not being unfriendly here, but I am just expressing my feelings and thoughts.2) The focus of my discuss was about the discrepancy between the claims about learning and using Esperanto and the reality of it. Why is it such a resistance to change and even only raising the point?
3) Resentment?? Don’t start with this please or you will beg a pardon. You may interpreted it as one, but you haven’t seen or hear it one yet on his blog. For a French speaker who does find Esperanto easy to pick up, but it is a completely different story to others. An experienced driver does find driving a second nature whereas the inexperienced drivers/learners struggle so much to drive. The experienced driver may think that the inexperienced ones simply find excuses to complain. Mind you, everyone has a different learning path, depending on the resources one has, the background they are from and the situations they are in.
4) “brotherhood of man” that Zamenhof stressed… Well said! I wonder if Zamenhof would shake his head and cry his eyes out if he was alive and read what some Esperanto speakers had had said on this blog or other’s.
5) There are nationals who can speak beautiful French, German or Russian and yet whose first language does not share any similarities with these foreign languages. Surely they have their reason why they choose to speak a foreign language so well and have their effective ways to achieve it.
6) Let’s consider this proposition: other ways to be linguistically equal amongst speakers of different languages. I know this is not practical and the followings are just some thoughts.
Amongst travellers, they may choose a language only spoken by a small, sparely populated country. One may hardly run into these national in other parts of the world and not many people have a dominant linguistic advantage over others.
Amongst businessmen and foreign workers, having a registered standard plain English is not a bad idea either. (I can hear all the unresisting noises already!). This is just another idea and I am not saying that it is better than Esperanto, phew!
This registered standard plain English should also be followed by the native speakers of different varieties of English. Plain English should be taken out all the cultural components in the English language and narrowed the use of widely varied vocabulary of the similar meanings. English does have a relatively simpler morphological structures and rules than the Latin originated or Germanic languages.I must stress that I have nothing to go against learning or using Esperanto in any settings as I was prepared to attend its intensive course in January. I believe the best way to attract more people to like the language so that they will use it is the people who speak Esperanto. Open mindedness, accepting and welcoming of different opinions/ideas are more attractive than ambiguous/inaccurate claims.
↵ -
Siu Yee. I tried to make the point that Esperanto, though artificially designed, is not at all UN-natural. So the better way to distinguish it from other languages is NOT to call it “constructed” while calling the others “natural”. Better to call the others “ethnic”, thus to include not only the “national” languages, but also regional languages and any others that are not tied to or based upon any formal “country”. enough on that.
No, Esperanto is not ‘perfect’, but its ‘imperfections’ are trivia, compared to its overall merits. If a world body, such as the UN ever went into formal deliberations about making Esperanto its own, it would be well advised to take up a bit of clean-up in those deliberations, such as letting “vir-” serve both as the prefix for “male” and the word-root for “man”, which results in the anomally, “virino” for woman. Again, this item is only trivia. A much bigger refinement is suggested by the mistaken comment by the linguist, McWhorter of Manhatten Institute. After a very interesting and informative commentary on Esperanto, he disparaged about its imperfections, citing as an example its use of the accusative ending, ‘n’ for a noun when it functions as object of the verb, He said that this was redundant, “because”, he said, “we do very well without it in English.” That could not have been a greater mistake for a linguiist to make. This ending is important because other languages do not all have the same prevailing syntax as English has. Mc Whorter’s comment suggests another ending for nouns which is indeed redundant and useless. That is the ending for plurality, ‘j’ in Esperanto, equivalent to the USUAL ’s’ in English. It is redudant, in English, as also in Esperanto, because in all cases where the plurality is important, the noun involved is associated with a number, and that number establishes the plurality without any need for the letter ’s’. For instance, “I have 10 oranges.” Let’’s try another example, “I have 10 sheep.” (This one PROVES that the ’s’ is not needed and serves no useful purpose.) We don’t have any special ending to indicate ‘more than 2′, nor for ‘more than 10′, etc. So why for ‘more than 1′?
Another refinement I would suggest, if a body such as the UN, or EU, wanted to get the ultimate for its “official language” would be to design a new set of letters which would reflect the relationships among its letters, rather than having the current alphabet, an arbitrary set of symbols. such as Esperanto now has. This would remove the one important factor in its being closer to European languages than to others, and would make it just a sliver easier to learn for anybody who does not already know a Latin-type alphabet.
Allan C. Boschen.
↵ -
Siu Yee
1) I agree with you that we do not need a perfect language before we use it. But why are so many people suggesting reforms for Esperanto now before they will use it? One of the reasons why Esperanto has been the most successful constructed language to date is that Dr. Zamenhof realized at an early date that he must provide a standard form of Esperanto in his Fundamento to prevent continuous suggestions for change, rather than using the language as he presented it. A vote was taken by the Esperanto speakers at that time and the vote was in favor of this decision. But Zamenhof said that if a responsible government agency wanted to make necessary changes that had been suggested over time, they could do so prior to its official adoption by that government. Zamenhof gave up all his rights to the language he invented, giving it freely to all humanity for their use. In the meantime, the Akademio de Esperanto is the arbitrator of the purity of the Esperanto language and decides what new words are to be accepted as they are submitted for new ideas, inventions, etc. as they occur. All this was done in response to the creation of Ido by one of his followers, which tried to immediately replace Esperanto in 1907. For a list of auxiliary languages that have also tried unsuccessfully to do this see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_constructed_languages .
I am sorry that you misinterpreted my use of quotation marks as being sarcastic and unfriendly — I thought I was simply using them for better clarity! Perhaps I should have used brackets or some other device to make the specific word examples and their translations stand out. And I am sorry that you seem to view me as “very arrogant like the Americans!” Are you prejudiced against Americans?
2) Perhaps some Esperantists overly exaggerate how simple it is to learn Esperanto. But it does appear to be much easier than learning other languages! And you will notice that in some of the constructed languages listed above, there are people who think Esperanto should look MORE like the Western European languages, just as there are people who think that Esperanto should include MORE root-words from other world languages to make it more democratic. Zamenhof tried to choose root-words that were already in the international realm, like telefono. (In deferrence to you I shall not put quotations marks around telefono, which I would normally do as good writing style.) However, it is a fact of history that many of the ideas and inventions in world history occurred by people who spoke Western European languages such as Latin and French, or Classsical Greek.
3) You are correct, of course, that everyone has a different ability in learning another language, and here, too, some Esperantists may get carried away in saying how simple it is to learn Esperanto. But the fact remains that Esperanto is a lot easier to learn than a language that has five conjugations of verbs, like Latin, or seven declensions of nouns, like Russian, or the superfluous use of words like up in look up, think up, gather up, etc. in English. (Once again I defer to you in leaving off the quotation marks that would make this easier to read.)
4) I apologize for any of my fellow Esperantists who may have said or written anything that could be interpreted as putting down (what does down mean here?) the brotherhood of man.
5) I agree.
6) Amen! Most Esperantists are probably amateurs when it comes to selling the language to others. But they mean well. In many cases they may be so excited at the results they have had in being able to speak with others in the world, that they get carried away. By the way, have you looked into Basic English by Ogen? It has a vocabulary of only 850 words. But of course the spelling is still a problem. I would be interested to learn why you might think this has not caught on! (There we go again, that little word on.)
Mi volas al vi sukceson en via lernadon de Esperanto!↵ -
I didn’t come back during a lot of time, and I tried to read what was written during the last days. But I must confess, that it’s too difficult for me to read in english. I can do it, but I need to make more efforts than in my mother tongue (french) or in italian (and obviously in esperanto).
It is rather diffiicult to understand what are Esperanto language and esperanto movement, without being “in” them.
Siu Yee, I understand what you mean when you wish more “internationalization” of it.
A lot of people think in the same manner, and this reaction seems “logical”. Nevetheless, as said Henry “Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien”… esperanto is not a “perfect” language (and we all know that NO language is perfect!!!). If we want to obtain a “perfect one” adding words and making reforms, we never will get it, or it will become less efficient.
We just can say that nowadays, it is the one wich has the higher “internationality” and is the easiest to learn for any people.↵ -
English the World’s International Language?
Of course it is! And that’s how it will stay.
↵ -
If, as you say, English is [already] the world’s international language, and that is how it will stay, why is the USA having the problem of so many Spanish-speakers, both citizens and illegals, not wanting to learn English?
↵ -
May Igo back briefly to 12th Dec.? I rashly wrote : “Pediatro, veterinaro : are not acceptable The rule remains : use existing components to form a word…”,
Although i do prefer the “above rule”, i must confess : Reading VIVO DE ZAMENHOF by EDMOND PRIVAT on page 23 end of third paragraph we find: ” Veterinara Instituto kaj Reala Gimnazio”.
To create a tool for international communication, should humans go back to grunts, squeals and gestures ? Those would probably take a different form in different parts of the earth. Is there a deaf-mute language expressing not letters nor words, but concepts ? but then that would exclude blind people, no good.
Does it not remain that English, already splintering into englishes, is not the ideal vehicle for our aim of a neutral, auxiliary tool for understanding each others?
↵ -
Rory B said: English allows visitors to strike up a conversation immediately and get to know the country much better than having no common language.
Neil (me) says: As a representative in the United Nations of a NGO I was recently at a meeting with a French-speaking African, who is the highest ranking diplomat (Executrive-Director) for Unicef, the educational division of the United Nations. HE FREQUENTLY APPOLOGISED FOR HIS ENGLISH (which was prepared and read) AND I DIDN’T UNDERSTAND HALF OF WHAT HE SAID. DURING A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD HE APPOLOGISED AGAIN AND THEN GAVE A SHORT TALK IN FRENCH WITH A TRANSLATOR.
MORE REALITY:
I recently rented the award winning movie “:The Constant Gardener” spoken in several fluent English accents. After the half-way point i returned the beginning and added on the subtitles in English and found I couldn’t really grasp more than 75 percent of what was being said in the first listening.
I recently listened to the most famous Australian environmentalist for an hour and couldn’t repeat mor than 75 percent of anything he said, but sat there pretending to understand with a group of American environmentists.
I don’t have this problem when listening to Esperanto speakers, thank God. I wish to share the pleasure of basic communication with others.↵ -
That’s interesting, Neil!
As an Australian born in England, I get to hear lots of US accents and some British ones on TV. It hadn’t really occurred to me that you listen to us a lot less and so find us more foreign and incomprehensible. The accent situation reflects the asymmetry of the language station in miniature: Those who are most understood, understand least!↵ -
Allan, you raise some interesting points.
There is an argument for retaining some redundancy in language to allow for “lossy” communication. Sometimes people don’t hear every word, due to inattention or noise, and redundancy can help reconstruct the communication. On the other hand, learning Esperanto would be a good 20% quicker without “n” and “j” and you can usually ask for clarification if you miss something.
Did you know that English once had accusative endings but dropped them?
I think that it is likely that as Esperanto becomes more mainstream and incorporates more people interested in using it than mastering it, that the same forces will have the same effect, for the same reasons. Maybe not though, because the Esperanto “-n” is already a lot simpler than the irregular (middle?) English accusative forms.Re-ordering the alphabet makes sense to be fair to non-Europeans but it would make all dictionaries and encyclopedias obsolete, which would be inconvenient during the transition. What proportion of the world’s people do not know, and will not want to know, an alphabet where “A” is near the beginning and “z” near the end? (Of course the unborn ones don’t know).
I think that the “vir” problem is much worse than the “mal” because “mal” only bothers French and English speakers, and only really on entry to the language. The inequitable treatment of gender affects everyone, doesn’t go away, and is inappropriate in a language for a more fair future. The regularity of Esperanto makes it easy to fix, using -i?o as a male ending to reflect -ino as the female one, and considering all root words neutral. Other modern languages evolve away from 19th century gender presumptions in language and Esperanto should too.
↵ -
Penelope. Redundancy comes into play in many ways. I was speaking about structural redundancy, and I am saying that the “N” ending, as the accusative declension for nouns, is NOT structurally redundant. But the “J”, to indicate plurality of nouns, IS a structural redundancy and serves no useful purpose. As for making sure that a point is understood, one can always rephrase a passage where understanding of a thought appears to be unclear. This is useful redundancy. As to the ‘letters’, my thought was not to mix them up, but rather to develop a new set that reflected some logical structure. For instance, the vowel sounds are made by having the tongue at varous levels in the tongue, among other factors. These factors might be reflected in the shape of its symbol (the ‘letter’). Another example, the ‘B’ sound has the same relation to the ‘P’ sound as has the ‘D’ to the ‘T’, ‘V’ to ‘F’, ‘hard G’ to ‘K’, the ‘TH’ in ‘the’ to the ‘TH’ in ‘thin’, and more. I would suggest as a first thought that the aspirated member of each of most of such pairs be retained as a basic letter, but the vocalized member of each pair be the same as its aspirated ‘partner’ with another special mark to indicate its being vocal, i.e. P & P+, F & F+, K & K+, etc. Close study might indicate some other relationships that could be reflected in the shapes of the letters and where each ought to appear in the sequence.
I put these ideas forth ONLY as suggestions, to be THOUGHT ABOUT, and DISCUSSED by interested persons, who may like to TOY WITH such ideas, but with no idea nor intent to try to implement them, until such time as an int’l gov’l organization makes a formal commitment to implement a universal second language (as prescribed by Zamenhof). I imagine that the Esperanto Academy has a vast list of such items all logged in quite neatly, ready to be put forth for debate when such date arrives.Allan Boschen.
↵ -
@Allan: Since the -j ending is the only indicator of plurality in the language, I’m guessing you didn’t really mean to claim that it’s a structural redundancy which serves no useful purpose.
What you might have meant — and what others often assert — is that noun/adjective agreement in Esperanto is a useless redundancy. For example, why say ru?aj pomoj (”red apples”) with the -j on both adjective and noun, when *ru?a pomoj should theoretically contain enough information?
In a language with fixed word order, such a feature would indeed be unnecessary. But Esperanto word order is flexible: adjectives can follow their nouns.
It turns out that Zamenhof’s linguistic intuitions were more finely attuned than many give him credit for. Many years after his death, the famous linguist Joseph H. Greenberg compiled a list of “universals” of human language — common rules that languages rarely violate, if ever. Whether or not we like these universals, they do reflect the basic features of the innate human capacity for language. A language creator violating these universals risks creating a truly alien tongue. Luckily, Zamenhof intuitively understood this fact, even without the benefit of future scholarship. One of Greenberg’s universals (#40) notes an interesting feature of adjective inflection in human languages:
“When the adjective follows the noun, the adjective expresses all the inflectional categories of the noun.”
http://angli02.kgw.tu-berlin.de/Korean/Artikel02/morphology.html↵ -
Henry, I thought that was a great letter.
You say Zamenhof took a vote on language management, showing that you share my democratic ideals (are we right, or just in the same cultural clique?) but seem to suggest that democracy ends there. That seems arbitrary.
Wouldn’t it be more consistently democratic (if democracy is an appropriate ethical basis for deciding what “should” be) to conclude:
Esperanto should be the World’s International Language, because it best suits the majority of present and future world citizens, and all users of the language should participate in its evolution, by usage and persuasion, to the extent that they care to do so?
↵ -
Dropping the accusative case ending -n in Esperanto may not be such a good idea. Zamenhof realized that not all languages express the object of the verb by position in the sentence, as in English. Thus, we say “Henriko vidis Johanon” to mean “Henry saw John.” But we can also say “Johanon vidis Henriko” and this still means that Henry did the seeing and John was the object of his seeing. This sentence might be used to emphasize that it was John who was seen. But if we say “John saw Henry” now John did the seeing and Henry is who was seen. So, Esperanto is a more precise language! Someone who ordinarilly speaks in an inflected language, and uses a different word order from that of English, will still be understood easily when he speaks in Esperanto but perhaps not in English.
So, should we simply put it to a vote to decide whether or not to keep the -n?↵ -
Voting is the epitome of democracy only if all interested parties have access to the ballot. In this case it is not possible as 1. many Esperanto speakers are isolated by poverty and politics and a host of other obstacles, and 2. future Esperanto-speakers are not yet identified or born and yet often have a greater stake in terms of years of future use than many current Esperantists. (I, for instance, won’t be able to use it much beyond 2060 but many a baby will).
Therefore, the best we can do is to reserve empty seats for rightful but absent voters and make the best-informed guess possible about the choices that benefit them, act on the result and explain it to others.↵ -
The accusative is unnecessary, and generally a pain for learners of Esperanto. It would be much simpler to stick to a subject-verb-object word order, which is in fact the usual order in the vast majority of Esperanto sentences.
In the famous Sixteen Rules, every sentence is V-S-O.
The accusative does not make Esperanto more precise.
Who is beating whom when I say “Multe da virinoj batas multe da viroj”?
↵ -
Bai Ren
You have indeed pointed out what I consider one of the weaknesses of Esperanto in your sentence “Multe da virinioj batas multe da viroj.” Using an adverb and preposition as both a subject and an object does not make sense to me. I would prefer to write it as “Multaj virinoj batas multajn virojn.” or “Multo da virinoj batas multon da viroj.” In this way it is clear that the women are the ones who are hitting the men.
English almost always uses the SVO order in positioning words and this can lead to monotony. WhenThomas Gray tried to liven things up in his “Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard” he wrote:
The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,
And all the beauty, all that wealth e’er gave,
Awaits alike th’inevitable hour:
The paths of glory lead but to the grave.Sure enough, his editors tried to change “awaits” to “await” and would have changed the sense intended!
Another weakness that I find in Esperanto is the lack of apposition, as found in Latin, for example. “Inteligenta persono lernas la lingvon Esperanto rapide kaj facile.” Why is “Esperanto” not written in the accusative with an -n in apposition with “lingvon”? Or why can we write “Mi lernas la Esperanto-lingvon: as well as “Mi lernas la Esperantan lingvon”? I opt for the second one. I think we should simply stick to the early rules about using the accusative in -n. But all this, too, is just nitpicking. I still think Esperanto is more precise than English because of the -n case
Henriko
↵ -
Bai Ren, are the 16 rules a quirky exception like the twice quantified domestic violence sentence, or is the s-v-o pattern similarly prevalent in other works?
↵ -
Good Cheer To All,
May I suggest that in leiu of a universal language maybe we could be a little more sensitive to others feelings and attempt to understand the meanings of their words, however forgien, before extracting a belief and/or definition about their meaning. I think it would require us to slow down a bit. Would this be good or bad? Tell me what you think.
The Radical One↵ -
There are more fluent speakers of Mandarin Chinese than English.
Can we therefore claim that “everyone speaks Chinese” … ?
↵ -
Dr. Albert Einstein, in the aftermath of WW II, thinking about his part in opening the way for the invention of the A-bomb, did an extended anti-war lecture series. His most essential basic message was that the root of our greatest problem(s) lay in the fact that the evolution of our social institutions has not kept pace with technological evolution. The latter had produced ever more complex and sophisticated devices, for every imaginable application for bettering the pleasures of life – and for making war. And here at last is this ultimate weapon with the capacity to wipe us all out, friend and erstwhile enemy alike. Why had our systems of law not evolved in step? They had produced peacefully organized society at local and national levels, and even international federations and other empires. Why not also for the whole world? We had produced the League of Nations, in our efforts to avert war, but it was not enough. So we moved on, to the UN, a further step in sophistication, toward the desired goal, but still not enough. For in the very midst of its development sprang the Cold War, ever threatening to turn hot and wipe us out. Now we have lucked out of the Cold War, avoiding the wanton destruction normally associated with war – but for the monstrous wastes of vast missile systems, and associated military armies and supplies, built up for no good purpose!
Unable so far to take that final step in making the UN effective toward its ultimate goal(s), perhaps we could look at lower levels with Einstein’s theme. –
Here, communication is the first step, and is fundamental, in everything that we do. You can cite all the wondrous devices, radio, TV, computers, the internet … , asking what more can we do. Still, the UN is burdened by translation services that eat up 10% of its operating budget. Worse still, this mode of operation leaves it open to serious misunderstandings, while also slowing down operations when time may be critical. The Language Barrier, hard at work! However marvelous may be the so-called Simultaneous Translation, it still is a poor second to direct communication in a language which is mutually well understood by all concerned. Einstein’s theme comes in quite strong, here!
The solution is quite simple, a universal second language (USL), as postulated some 400 years ago by the great philosophers Descartes and Liebnitz.
This idea has been acted upon by many intellectual giants in many countries, down thru the years, thus to have developed an ideal working model, along with all the necessary material peripherals. That model is Esperanto, with its world-wide community of adherents and the extensive and elegant literature that this community, in turn, has developed thru the years.
————————————————————-
So now let me ask, how long — how many times can we go on “lucking out”, not to blast ourselves and this whole beautiful planet into eternity? Is there no way that we can get REALLY SERIOUS on these matters? Zamenhof made the very best first-step in that direction. So many among us have seen the light of his vision, and have tried in so many ways to help, as best we can. It seems that the next logical BIG step is to get Esperanto into the schools, as a choice among languages to be studied and learned — and APPLIED in the various ways that it can provide general ENHANCEMENTS to education, especially in this country (USA). How do we reach the EDUCATORS, with this as a REVELATION?Allan.
↵ -
Allan:
Thank you for that brilliant summary of the need for Esperanto! I fervently hope that more people pay heed to it.
May I also add to it the “Concluding words” of the English-speaking Swedish medical doctor to his article “A world where everyone understands one another is a better world,” which can be found at http://www.2-2.se/en/31.html .He, too, does an excellent job of answering questions about the need for Esperanto.
He writes:
I believe in the importance of communication, not solely between countrymen. Unfortunately I cannot afford an advertising campaign to spread out the message in this document. If you think I am right, spread out the message to your friends; write to a paper, politician, celebrity, or think of other ways in which to help me create a public opinion in favour of Esperanto. I believe that we all have a responsibility for the world we live in.
If you do not agree with me, what do you believe? That we should continue with language barriers, communication difficulties, poor international understanding and a cultural levelling of the world? Nobody stands to gain from that.
Now, it is time for you to act. “Nobody has made a greater mistake than he who did nothing, since he thought he could only do so little.” — Edmund Burke, politician and philosopher.
Do not forget the words of Andrew Jackson: “One man with courage makes a majority.” Are you brave? It is your decision.
Albert Camus said: “Those who lack courage will always find a philosophy to justify it.”
Henriko quoting Dr. Hans Malv
↵ -
I absolutely agree, Allan, when you say: It seems that the next logical BIG step is to get Esperanto into the schools, as a choice among languages to be studied and learned — and APPLIED in the various ways that it can provide general ENHANCEMENTS to education, especially in this country (USA). How do we reach the EDUCATORS, with this as a REVELATION?
…so much so that I have spent the last three years writing policy proposals and resources to enable other generalist teachers like me to teach Esperanto in primary schools as an introduction to the world of languages and culture and the first step to further language learning.(Before that I spent 10 years teaching Esperanto in schools).
There has always been a bottle-neck in the supply of Esperanto education to children in that people think languages have to be taught by specialists, language specialists teach what they know and they don’t know Esperanto.
I’ve worked to remove the bottle-neck by designing teaching materials that can be used by teachers with no second-language background at all. They can learn with their class, providing an inspiring example of life-long learning and the valuing of languages, as well as a much more effective learning experience based on frequent, short, integrated lessons and practice than a weekly specialist can provide.
Australia is writing its first ever national curriculum for languages and this new strategy of giving all children a second language, from their own class teacher, in primary school, and then a third language in high school is under consideration.
I’m looking for collaborators interested in promoting the same strategy in the states.
↵ -
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=englishes+around+the+world&meta=&aq=5&oq=englishes
Of course, English is the world language ! A travelling friend of mine brought back the proof : Signs she encountered in hotels :
In case of fire, do your utmost to alarm the porter.
The manager has personally passed all the water served at this hotel.
We highly recommend the hotel tart.
In order to prevent shoes from mislaying, please don’t corridor them. The management cannot be held.
Please hang your order before retiring on the door knob.
We serve 5 o’clock tea at all hours.
As for the tripe served to you at the Hotel Monopol, you will be singing its praises to your grandchildren on your deathbed
To call Room Service, please open the door and call Room Service.
To stop the drip, turn cock to the right.
We sorry to advise you that be a electric disperfect in the generator master of the elevator we have the necessity that don’t give servicxe at our distinguishable guests.
Ladies are requested not to have children in the bar.
Swimming is forbidden in the absence of a saviour.
If your wish breakfast, lift the telephone and our waitress will arrive. This will be enough to bring up your food.
Special cocktail served for ladies with nuts.
Cooles and heates. If you want condition of warm air in your room, control yourself.
↵ -
During the Esperanto Conference in 2004 (Beijing), I went to the “business center” to read my mails.
The attendant (a young chinese girl) said to me “Your doctor is beautifull”. Durind a few seconds, I wondered what she meant!
But I understood quickly that she spoke about my daughter (!!!) who went at the business center just before!↵ -
N or no N ?
Mary loves George more than John. ambiguous ?
Mary loves George more than she loves John Mario amas Georgeon pli ol Johanon
Mary loves George more than John loves George. . Mario amas Georgeon pli ol Johano.
“N” is useful (but please correct my sentences if i became confused !)↵ -
Henriette:
These are excellent examples of how using the accusative ending -n helps to make Esperanto more precise than English. But I already believe in the value of using -n. It would perhaps be more interesting to hear from those who do not.
How many people think that Dr. Zamenhof came up with the Esperanto language in a comparatively short period of time? He actually worked on it from 1878, when he was 19 years old, till 1887, when he first published this language. During that time, he translated many works into Esperanto to see what problems he would run into in using this language. He made several changes along the way and had good reasons for why the language ended up as it did. And he translated the Old Testament in its entirety into this new language. All those who want to make changes NOW should keep this in mind. That is not to say that new changes will not occur in the future, evolving as accepted usage over time. Some are already underway, as the names of countries, for example. Original Esperanto usually uses -ujo added to a nationality to form a country name, as “Slovakujo” or “Polujo” ( -ujo refers to a container, so we have a “container of Slovaks” for “Slovakia” and a “container of Poles” for “Poland”), But in recent years, some people began to use -io and -lando, so we have “Slovakio” and “Pollando,” alongside the use of the -ujo names. I, myself, prefer “Slovakio” and “Pollando,” but I cringe when I hear “Polio.”
So, the feminists, for example, should not give up in their quest for more equal treatment of gender in Esperanto. A first step would simply be to use a name of a profession in one form only: aktoro (drop aktorino) or advokato (no need for advokatino). My older daughter is in law school to become a lawyer. Period. No need to specify gender here. Zamenhof lived in a time when it was common to do so. But I think he would look at it differently if he were alive today. Like him, I speak Polish, where gender distinctions are very common. The Poles use “Pan,” “Pani” and “Panna” (Mr., Mrs., Miss), for example, perhaps because unmarried girls wanted it to be known that they were available for marriage. But when I was in Poland in recent years, I heard a middle-aged store manager address a 7-yeal old female customer as “Pani.” This is more and more common. But please don’t go all the way and try to eliminate natural gender distinctions. There is still a natural difference between a man and a woman. ( I am married to a woman, have two daughters and two female dogs. I do not think I am a male chauvinist). I like to distinguish between “vir” and “virino” but I am glad that I do not have to learn two separate root words to do this. This is one of the ways to keep the learning of new words to a minimum.
Henriko
↵ -
Terry Dip’s excellent, thought-provoking article seems to suggest something similar to the current “official” language policy of the European Union, where 23 languages are now official and more will soon be added. The EU suggests that each citizen speak his own language and learn two others. This is simply maintaining the status quo. Terry says that English should NOT become an official international language. But since most of the non-English-speaking inhabitants of the EU opt for English as one of the two new languages, or perhaps only language, to learn, this could further the cultural imperialism of English that Terry rightly deplores.
I am an English speaker and also speak French and Polish. But I am at a loss when it comes to speaking German, Italian, etc. Terry correctly points out that the best way to learn German, Italian, etc. “cultures” is to learn their languages. But who has the time and money to learn all these other languages?
However, I AM able to communicate with Germans, Italians, etc. who share with me Esperanto, which is the third language that I learned. Esperanto is NOT intended to REPLACE any national language and is NOT a threat to other languages like English is!
Since much of the world’s national literatures have been, or are being, translated into Esperanto, this gives me access to the German, Italian, etc. cultures that I would otherwise not have. Yes, it is true that some of these literatures may be available in English translation, and I welcome that, but it is not the same. The translations that I come across in Esperanto are usually not available in English because they may be from obscure writers, from an English-speaking point of view, and not profitable for English-language publishers to consider. Also, much of the translations into Esperanto, and even original writings, are done directly by people whose languages I do not speak. This gets me closer to the source.
So, I agree with Terry that English should NOT be the world’s international language and agree with him that we should try to learn as many foreigh languages as we can. But I also think that Esperanto should be adopted as a common “second” language by all people. The world is shrinking and there is a need for all of the world’s inhabitants to be able to talk to one another.
Henriko
↵ -
Terry’s article is excellent. In a future blog, he might consider in a little more detail just how English has come to have such a dominant position.
Zamenhof expected the main opposition to Esperanto to come from the big language powers, which would have meant the French-speaking powers and the English-speaking powers of his time. Instead, the opposition came from undermining within the Esperanto community. Initially, this was coming primarily from French-speaking Esperantistist, then later from English-speaking Esperantists. What would that suggest?
Zamenhof pointed out that attacks from within are much more powerful than attacks from outside. So, if you were a power freak wanting to make French or English the world’s language, how would you do it?
Gordon Brown has made it known that it is government policy to make English the world’s language. Here in the UK we had suspected that for decades, since Esperantist Harold Wilson went silent on Esperanto on becoming Prime Minister. Now we know. Nowadays, UK prime ministers are believed to be puppets; Harold Wilson tried to stand up to this and eventually resigned.
The Grin Report gives sufficient reason to think that the financial oligarchy behind the US and UK governments may be behind this.
What do power freaks do when they want to push their own agenda? Openly pushing their own language at too early a stage would merely create a back-lash. The EU in earlier days wouldn’t have stood for it.
I would be surprised if there had not been an operation of undermining of the opposition in the case of language politics. Just look at the history of Esperanto.
Yes, English is a language of imperial design, being pushed by the military-industrial complex. When people recognise this, they will look for a fairer and more peaceful world.
When the 9/11 wars are over, and people come to the realisation of what it’s all been about, they will be more receptive to the idea of Esperanto.
↵ -
Excellent analysis by Ian Fantom
↵ -
Bai Ren Dec.14 2009
“One of Esperanto’s great problems is its “eternal beginners”, who acquire a smattering and never progress, , but feel good about themselves because they are supporting this wonderful project to bring peace and mutual understanding to humanity.”
As one of those wicked-great-problem-causing-smatterers… and on behalf of others… T’was 1942, I was 11yrs old. Choice had to be made : Latin plus either German or English. My father told the head-mistress : ESPERANTO, the only way to prevent such frequent wars. – NO ! In german-occupied France teaching Esperanto was not permitted.
After a heated argument, my (french) father decided i should study german. His argument : France and Germany are at war every 20 years, it is about time we learnt to understand each other. What a difficult three years for us “children of collaborators”, Boches lovers, finding swastikas on our clothes, desks, etc., being tripped and harassed. I certainly wished we had all been studying Esperanto…
A few years later, as an immigrant in Australia, i sure wished for Esperanto as a universal second language. ..Work, children… Swiftly went the years. Much later, in retirement, i had the joy of meeting Esperantists. After much wear and tear, and a light stroke, i enjoy reading and writing Esperanto, but speak it, indeed, as an eternal beginner. But i would feel good if i could hope that it will help the following generations.
Mankso Dec. 13 That is NEAT ! Concise but precise . May I print it for showing to non-esperantists ? please ?
Siu Yee Dec. 25 Dear Siu Yee You said : “It would certainly be easier for someone to pick up Esperanto if that person had already known some English and European languages” Sure. However, being phonetic is a great time-saver. What language would you suggest as better suited for global direct communication ?
Siu Yee Dec 27 what are ‘other constructed languages’ and how many of them in the world? I am not being unfriendly here, but I am just expressing my feelings and thoughts
Here are a few http://www2.cmp.uea.ac.uk/~jrk/conlang.html and there are more .
Henry V. Janoski Dec 28” Dr. Zamenhof realized at an early date that he must provide a standard form of Esperanto in his Fundamento to prevent continuous suggestions for change, rather than using “the ‘language as he presented it. A vote was taken by the Esperanto speakers at that time and the vote was in favor of this decision. But Zamenhof said that if a responsible “government ‘agency wanted to make necessary changes that had been suggested over time, they could do so prior to its official adoption by that government. Zamenhof gave up all “his rights to ‘the language he invented, giving it freely to all humanity for their use. In the meantime, the Akademio de Esperanto is the arbitrator of the purity of the Esperanto “language and ‘decides what new words are to be accepted as they are submitted for new ideas, inventions, etc. as they occur. All this was done in response to the creation of Ido “by one of his ‘followers, which tried to immediately replace Esperanto in 1907. For a list of auxiliary languages that have also tried unsuccessfully to do this see “‘http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_constructed_languages .”
The above reminded me of recently reading the following : from VIVO DE ZAMENHOF de Edmond Privat – “Granda estas la diferenco inter homo-infano kaj homo-viro, granda eble estos la diferenco inter la nuna Esperanto kaj la evoluinta Esperanto de post multaj jarcentoj… Iom post iom konstante aperas novaj vortoj kaj formoj, unuj fortigxas, aliaj cxesas esti uzataj. Cxio farigxas kviete, senskue, kaj ecx nerimarkeble. Nenie montrigxas ia diferencigxado de nia lingvo laù la diversay landoj… Nenie rompigxas aù difektigxas la kontinueco inter la linfvo malnova kaj la nova. Malgraù la fakto ke nia lingvo forte disvolvigxas, cxiu nova Esperantisto legas la verkojn de antaù dudek jaroj kun tia sama facileco, kiel Esperantisto tiutempa.”
En Ameriko Zamenhof klarigis pli detale sian penson. Se iam aùtorita delegitaro de diversay regnoj volus iom sxangxi Esperanton, antaù ol gxin oficialigi, kiel gxi agus ? Por akcepti kelkajn utilajn vortojn, por limigi l’akuzativon aù cxesigi l’akordigxon de l’adjektivoj en multnombro, cxu taùgus subfosi la tutan laboron de duoncentjaro kaj rekomenci cxiun sperton per alia vojo ? Suficxus, ke la Lingva Komitato rekomendu la forlasojn aù aldonajojn en uzado cxiutaga. Post kelka tempo, kutimo ja farigxus sen ia rompo, se gxi montrigxus tre praktika. Se ne, ecx decido la plej alta falus morte. Efektive la sperto baldaù montrus cxu tio, kio sendube estas pli facika en u z a d o, ne igas tiom pli malfacila la komprenadon.
Therefore, although esperantists are occasionally considered “inflexible”, L. Zamenhof himself was open-minded to future needs.
Hoss Dec 29
To accord or not accord noun and adjective ? http://angli02.kgw.tu-berlin.de/Korean/Artikel02/morphology.html Saluton !
↵ -
DEJA VU ——– BUT APPEARS TO BE FORGOTTEN !!!!!
David Rothkopf, “In Praise of Cultural Imperialism?” Foreign Policy, Number 107, Summer 1997, pp. 38-53
DAVID ROTHKOPF is managing director of Kissinger Associates QUOTE :TOWARD A GLOBAL CULTURE
It is in the general interest of the United States to encourage the development of a world in which the fault lines separating nations are bridged by shared interests.
And it is in the economic and political interests of the United States to ensure that if the world is moving toward a common language, it be English; that if the world is moving toward common telecommunications, safety, and quality standards, they be American; that if the world is becoming linked by television, , radio, and music, the programming be American; and that if common values are being developed, they be values with which Americans are comfortable.
Americans should not deny the fact that of all the nations in the history of the world, theirs is the most just, the most tolerant, the most willing to constantly reassess and improve itself, and the best model for the future. End of quote.
Dans son rapport de 1987/88, le directeur du British Council écrit « Le véritable or noir de la Grande-Bretagne n’est pas le pétrole de la Mer du Nord mais la langue anglaise . Le défi que nous affrontons est de l’exploiter à fond. » end of quote
↵ -
And don’t forget this from just last year too, if you really don’t believe that World English is being actively promoted to benefit – guess who? – the native speakers themselves!:
>GORDON Brown will today pledge to export the English language to the world – and boost our economy by billions.↵ -
My link was erased for some reason:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article701093.ece↵ -
Dear Allan,
In regards to using Esperanto at the UN, the establishment at the UN is pretending that translation to 5 or 6 official languages will suffice to allow full debate on all subjects. In fact, in my 2 year experience at the UN 90 percent of all speakers are opting to speak in English, even when they have the speaking or reading ability of a second grader of a native speaker (I will refrain from being personal but this is the reality I see). South American indigenous opt to talk in Spanish, even as they fight for indigxenous linguistic rights. Even in various rooms with translator booths, I hear various excuses: social and technical, for translation not to be available in French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese or Arabic. (For those who know me and others I consider this generally a failed sistem that denies the majority the full right to participate.)Dear Henry,
In regards to Basic English, I am taking note of more and more “simplified” or “light” forms of English being used by popular media, including the Jerusalem Post and the Voice of America. They pretend to be making these as tools to master “Real English” or “Native English” but in fact won’t these simplified versions replace native versions in the long run at many international meetings where people have accepted Anglo-US dominance (without verbalizing that).↵ -
Mi ne parolas la anglan lingvon kiu estas tro malfacila por la homoj kiuj ne estas anglaj ; la angla lingvo, lingvo de la mondo, ne tute ne ; la angla lingvo ne taùgas por la internacia komunikado, estas nacia lingvo kaj ne internacia kaj unu nacia lingvo ne devas regi la mondon ; unu lando kiu devigas lian lingvon al la aliaj estas diktaturo, totalitarismo do la angla ne devas esti la lingvon de la mondo ; Esperanto estas plej bona cxar estas plej facila ol la angla do pli taùgas por cxiuj
↵ -
Après avoir mis un commentaire en Esperanto, je dis en Français que l’anglais langue du monde, non, on n’en veut pas, ceux qui acceptent l’anglais, c’est parce qu’ils ne connaissent pas autre chose, on leur a jamais appris l’Esperanto qui est plus facile que l’anglais pour tous donc l’esperanto est plus convenable que l’anglais qui est très difficile pour ceux qui ne sont pas natifs, tellement difficile d’où les accidents d’avions entre autre. Il ne faut pas accepter l’anglais, sinon c’est le totalitarisme et la dictature.
.E LAMBERT France
↵ -
You demean the suffering inflicted by totalitarianism and dictatorships by invoking those terms here. Just goes to show, whether speaking in English, Esperanto or French, it’s still what you say that counts. (And yes, I could say this to you in French if I chose. Since I choose not to, I suppose that makes me a Nazi?)
↵ -
For the benefit of those of you who do not understand Esperanto and/or French, I have translated the Esperanto message of E. Lambert, who writes:
I do not speak the English language, which is too difficult for people who are not English; the English language as a language of the world, no, definitely no; the English language is not fit for international communication; it is a national language not international, and one national language must not rule the world; one land that imposes its language on the others is a dictator, it is totalitarianism so English must not be the language of the world; Esperanto is the best because it is easier than English, thus fit for everyone.
The French message is very similar.
Henriko
↵ -
Eva, you could speak in French if you chose to, so you can afford to be indifferent. What if you had no access to the powerful languages of the World’s rich majority? How nonchalant would you be then? Would you feel heard? Would you feel informed?
We privileged ones could make World news and science available in Esperanto, which can be learned from a text worth a dollar, if we cared to include those whom we currently ignore.↵ -
Where did I say I was indifferent? I said I think the comparison to totalitarianism and dictatorship is inappropriate – and it is. Comparing the global dominance of the English language to, say, Auschwitz is quite frankly disgusting and insensitive. Really, I think most people would choose an inability to speak “the powerful languages of the World’s rich majority” over a violent death. I know I would.
↵ -
@Eva writes: “Comparing the global dominance of the English language to, say, Auschwitz is quite frankly disgusting and insensitive.”
Perhaps, but you’re the only one making the comparison, Eva. (And in doing so, incidentally, you’ve lent yet more support to Godwin’s law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le%C4%9Do_de_Godwin↵ -
I’m the only one making the comparison? So when Lambert mentioned totalitarianism and dictatorship, he meant the friendly kind, without concentration camps or purges or death squads?
I’m not anti-Esperanto. What I am against is the abuse of some very serious, hurtful history for rhetorical purposes. I’m sorry, but I just don’t see the global language situation as stacking up to the great dictatorships of the 20th century – the ones most people think of when they hear the term “totalitarian.”
↵ -
Dear Eva,
I find your comments interesting. I recently (summer, 2009) returned from a turistic program in northern Poland (the former Prussia) and I was a little surprised when the leader made it clear: he and the majority of Poles dislike equally the the fascism of Hitler and the communist dictatorship (largely because many poles were killed by Russians and for a time denied it). (He said it all in Esperanto.) I don’t think any Esperantists will intend to compare English domination with Hitler’s dictatorship. In contrast, a very high percentage–nearly every esperantist knows that Hitler sought out Jewish Esperantists (many founding members) and socialist Esperantists (also a large group) for extermination. We ended our tour at Stuthoff, where Hitler killed 100,000 women and children, mostly Jewish. Most of the 5 day tour had individuals from 40 countries. Prior to this small event we were almost 2,000 strong from over 60 countries in Bialystok, Poland where 90 percent of the Jewish majority was killed by Hitler and 90 percent of Esperanto speakers were annihilated. On the other hand a (small) percentage of Esperantists advocated the former communist regimes in Eastern Europe.↵ -
Neil – That sounds like a fascinating tour. I had never heard about the persecution/extermination of Esperantists in the Nazi era before. Thanks for sharing!
↵ -
Eva, everyone would, and no-one mentioned Auschwitz but you.
The fact that some thefts are bigger than others does not make a small one no theft at all, does it?
Cultural Imperialism is the same. Rejecting it in all degrees in no way equates all of its expressions.↵ -
Penelope – see my reply to Hoss. I really don’t think it’s unreasonable to object to a comparison to “totalitarianism and dictatorship.” English is not mass murder. Seriously.
↵ -
Eva:
If you can manage to stumble your way through a page of Esperanto, there is some more info here about documented persecutions against Esperanto and Esperanto-speakers, especially under Hitler and Stalin:
http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_dan?era_lingvo
The book “The Dangerous Language” by Ulrich Lins originally appeared in Esperanto in 1973 – it hasn’t been translated into English yet, but there are (helpfully?!) also versions in German, Russian, Italian, Japanese and Lithuanian. Not everything worth knowing is available in English yet, despite what some might have us believe!↵ -
Thanks! And: “Not everything worth knowing is available in English yet, despite what some might have us believe!” Hee hee. True.
↵ -
Thanks to Henriette, who cited David Rothkopf, “In Praise of Cultural Imperialism?”. Did somebody quoted Churchill (1943): “« The power to control language offers far better prizes than taking away people’s provinces or lands or grinding them down in exploitation. The empires of the future are the empires of the mind. »
I’d like to let you know some anecdotes, wich can show how the hudge use of english leads the world to an uniformization of cultures and weakening of all other languages. Obviously, it cannot be compared with the crimes of fascism or stalinism, but it shows clearly that the “optimistic” assertions “The use of english does not, and will not damage other languages and cultures” is an illusion… or… a lie.
1996: I drive through Germany to Czech republic. I stop and take two youngsters. After a while, we stop to drink and eat something. They even don’t know what’s the meaning of “Mit Senf” or “Ohne Senf” (->”with mustard”, “without mustard”). I do not really speak german, but as an esperantist, I like to learn the basis of the language when I travel in a country. Long time ago, german was one of the most studied languages in Czech republic (with russian, obsviously!). Now, I guess it’s english.
1997: My teen-aged daughters are studying spanish at school. I go to Madrid with them during some days. On “La puerta del Sol” (a main square in Madrid), we sit down at a (I’m not sure how it’s said in english) cafe terrace. We want to order “churros” (we order in spanish) but they are not sold there. A very well dressed woman (of the middle or upper class) attending the scene, overheard our disappointement (my daughters and I speak together in french). She notice we are speaking french, and immediately speaks to us… in english: “I think it’s abnormal not to find churros in a cafe at one o’clock”. I answer (in spanish): “Dear madame, I wonder why your’e speaking to us in english, since we’re French, and my daughters and I want to improve our spanish speaking.” She is very disappointed, even a little picked! (I guess that for her, every stranger travelling Spain has to speak english as an “international language”?). 30 years ago, one of the main foreign languages learned in Spain was french. It no longer is! (the same in Italy).
2006: I am in Florence (Italy) in the youth hostel (wich is also a camp site. I am accomodated in a camper-van). There are a lot of foreigners there, because of the esperanto conference. The eve of the end of our departure, I find a paper (in english) on my van (wich have a french license plate): “Please, come at the reception and let us know if you want to stay one more night”. As I like teasing, I go to the reception with the sheet, and say (in italian): “Can you please translate? I am French…” The girl replies: “Oh, you, French people, your’e duffers with languages!” (I was speaking to her in italian!!!!!!!!!”). I ask: “Would you say the same to and English people, who couldn’t speak only english?”. Did she think, that my speaking italian was not knowing a foreign language? And in the hostel, they apparently don’t use THEIR own language, and no longer use french, even with French people…
2008: I am at a friends’home (in Toulouse, the south-west of France, near Spain), for a lunch. After the liunch, my friend (the father) tries to convince his 15 years old daughter to go to her room and study her spanish lesson. He says: “It will be usefull to you when we will travel to Spain”. She replies: “Of, never mind! I will speak english!”
2009: I am in a camp site in Rotterdam. In the washing place, two young people ask me in english: “Do you know how it’s possible to use the washing machine?” I beging to explain, and suddenly (because I notice an accent) I add: “But, can’t you speak french?” (It happens sometime that travelers speak in english, having the same mother tonge!). No, they don’t. “Italian?” – Yes, they ARE italians. Since I speak italian better than english, I began to speak italian. But, eerily, they seem upset with this switching to italian.
I want add an information. We (french people) ARE CONSTANTY TOLD that we are the “not good” for learning and speaking “foreign languages” (wich means “not good in english”).
But if you examine an european survey (2000, cited by Grin) about the knowledge of english, we find that in: Belgium, Austria, Greece: there are about 29% of people speaking english, France: 24%, Italy, Portugal : 21%, eastern part of Germany 18%, Spain 15%. (western part of Germany 34%, Finland 36%).
I wonder what is the origin of this “urban legend” about our “bad english”. Perhaps, as France is a place where people defend their cultural identity, it was necessary to make them feel guilty? Furthermore, I had some occasions to notice that Southern people from europe are said the same, but scarcely they verify that the our situations are very similar. So, everybody asume that they are “dummies”, and feel ashamed!!! This is a very sickening manner to push peole to learn the english “international language”, isn’t it?
So, speaking english shows to some people that your’e a part of a kind of “elite”, while if you don’t, your’e not an interesting person. And sometimes (like the Spannish lady in Madrid or the young Italians in Rotterdam), they feel angry if you refuse that manner to communicate.So, although a comparison beetween totalitarisms like Stalinism and fascism is inappropriate, there’s something to examine about the pressure of english as an “international” language, and it’s consequences. There is a difference of degree, but a similar aim: get the power, favor a single “order” and eradicate the different voices.
↵ -
PS: The two young hitchhikers in Gerlany were Czechs (I didn’t said it clearly)
↵ -
PPS: In Florence:
“Would you say the same to an English people, who COULD speak ONLY english?”
…
…
(My mistakes show, that it’s not easy to use english, for somebody wich didn’t got it as a mother tongue!!!)↵ -
M. Couturier: Vous ecrivez tres bien en anglais! Ne vous inquietez pas de vos petites fautes de grammaire en cette langue. Mais vous avez raison quand vous dites que l’anglais n’est pas facile a apprendre.
With regard to your statement ” ‘The use of English does not, and will not, damage other languages and cultures’ is an illusion…or…a lie.” Je suis d’accord. It would be interesting if someone from Ireland would be willing to comment on this. I understand that only a tiny minority of the Irish people, perhaps 50,000 out of more than 4,000,000, use the Irish language as their daily language. This is due to the long-term presence of the English conquerors in Ireland over the centuries. Unfortunately, the spelling of Irish is as bad as that of English, making it difficult, even for Irishmen, to learn the Irish language.
The Irish have a saying: “Tir gan teanga, tir gan anam (A country without (its) language is a country without a soul).”
The Germans tried to do the same thing in Poland. But fortunately Poland was under German rule for only about 125 years, whereas the English have been in Ireland for many centuries.
Henriko
↵ -
One more mistake:
“but scarcely they verify that _—our—_ situations are very similar.”More details about that: I already met people from Spain or Italy, who said to me (in their language: “Oh! Do y really listen that YOU, Frenchs, are bad in speaking english??? I though we (italians, Spannish) were the most incompetent in Europe!!!)
↵ -
Mi volas respondi al Eva. Mi volas klarigi ke la angla lingvo estas lingva kolonialismo; la diktaturoj kiuj persekutis la esperantistojn ne volis ke la homoj interkomprenigxu, Esperanto estas la lingvo de la paco kaj de la amikeco inter la popoloj ; mi forveturas en Cxinio kaj mi uzos Esperanton kun multaj Cxinoj sen esti malsupera ; la landoj kiuj ne estas anglalingvanaj estas malsuperaj al la angloj, kaj Gordon Brown volas ke lia lingvo estu supera al la aliaj, tio estas lingva diktaturo, Esperanto ne estas lingva diktaturo nek kolonialismo, nek dangxera lingvo, gxi protektas cxujn lingvojn kaj kulturojn ; la angla faras la kontraùo, l
↵ -
Translation of Lambert (I try to respect what he said):
“I want answer to Eva. I want make clear that english language is a linguistic colonialism; the dictatorships wich persecuted esperantists didn’t want people to understand each other. Esperanto is the language for peace and friendship;
I’m going to fly China, and I will use esperanto with a lot of Chinese, not being inferior; the countries wich don’t have english as their language are inferior to Brits, and Gordon Brown wants his language to be superiour to others, this is dictatorship, esperanto is not dictatorship nor colonialism, nor dangerous language, it protects every language and culture: english do the contrary.”↵ -
Well, now I reply to Lambert
I think Eva understood WHAT is your point of view. But (I didn’t really read the whole thread…), I think she (like to many people) is a little uncertain about the effectiveness of it…
Actually, the dominance of english took such a manner to succeed, that very few people have awareness of it.It’s very difficult to plead for an alternative, because our point of view seems “exagerated”.
It’s almost the same process than neoliberalism… Do you know the “frog’s fable (parable)”?
If a frog is put into hot water, it tries to escape, and jumps out of the water.But if you put it into cold water, and warm it gently… the frog don’t realize the danger, after a while the water becomes more and more hot, and when water becomes really hot, the frog is boiled.
The linguistic situation is similar.
↵ -
To the Moderator : I attempted earlier to send this; did i push the wrong button ? was it rejected ? This is amended.
Replying to
Bai Ren Dec.14 2009“One of Esperanto’s great problems is its “eternal beginners”, who acquire a smattering and never progress, , but feel good about themselves because they are supporting this wonderful project to bring peace and mutual understanding to humanity.”
As one of those wicked-great-problem-causing-smatterers… and on behalf of others… T’was 1942, I was 11yrs old. Choice had to be made : Latin plus either German or English. My father told the head-mistress : ESPERANTO, the only way to prevent such frequent wars. – NO ! In german-occupied France teaching Esperanto was not permitted.
After a heated argument, my (french) father decided i should study german. His argument : France and Germany are at war every 20 years, it is about time we learnt to understand each other. What a difficult three years for us “children of collaborators”, Boches lovers, finding swastikas on our clothes, desks, etc., being tripped and harassed. I certainly wished we had all been studying Esperanto…
A few years later, as an immigrant in Australia, i sure wished for Esperanto as a universal second language. ..Work, children… Swiftly went the years. Much later, in retirement, i had the joy of meeting Esperantists. After much wear and tear, and a light stroke, i enjoy reading and writing Esperanto, but speak it, indeed, as an eternal beginner. But i would feel good if i could hope that it will help the following generations.
Replying to Mankso Dec. 13 That is NEAT ! Concise but precise . May I print it for showing to non-esperantists ? please ?
Replying to Siu Yee Dec. 25 Dear Siu Yee You said : “It would certainly be easier for someone to pick up Esperanto if that person had already known some English and European languages” Sure. However, being phonetic is a great time-saver. What language would you suggest as better suited for global direct communication ?
Replying to Siu Yee Dec 27 what are ‘other constructed languages’ and how many of them in the world? I am not being unfriendly here, but I am just expressing my feelings and thoughts
Here are a few http://www2.cmp.uea.ac.uk/~jrk/conlang.html and there are more .Agreeing with Henry V. Janoski Dec 28
” Dr. Zamenhof realized at an early date that he must provide a standard form of Esperanto in his Fundamento to prevent continuous suggestions for change, rather than using the language as he presented it. A vote was taken by the Esperanto speakers at that time and the vote was in favor of this decision. But Zamenhof said that if a responsible “government ‘agency wanted to make necessary changes that had been suggested over time, they could do so prior to its official adoption by that government. Zamenhof gave up all “his rights to ‘the language he invented, giving it freely to all humanity for their use. In the meantime, the Akademio de Esperanto is the arbitrator of the purity of the Esperanto “language and ‘decides what new words are to be accepted as they are submitted for new ideas, inventions, etc. as they occur. All this was done in response to the creation of Ido “by one of his ‘followers, which tried to immediately replace Esperanto in 1907. For a list of auxiliary languages that have also tried unsuccessfully to do this see “‘http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_constructed_languages .”
The above reminded me of recently reading the following : from VIVO DE ZAMENHOF de Edmond Privat – which i am inserting for non-english speakers (practically similar to the above from Mr. Janoski)
“Granda estas la diferenco inter homo-infano kaj homo-viro, granda eble estos la diferenco inter la nuna Esperanto kaj la evoluinta Esperanto de post multaj jarcentoj… Iom post iom konstante aperas novaj vortoj kaj formoj, unuj fortigxas, aliaj cxesas esti uzataj. Cxio farigxas kviete, senskue, kaj ecx nerimarkeble. Nenie montrigxas ia diferencigxado de nia lingvo laù la diversay landoj… Nenie rompigxas aù difektigxas la kontinueco inter la linfvo malnova kaj la nova. Malgraù la fakto ke nia lingvo forte disvolvigxas, cxiu nova Esperantisto legas la verkojn de antaù dudek jaroj kun tia sama facileco, kiel Esperantisto tiutempa.”En Ameriko Zamenhof klarigis pli detale sian penson. Se iam aùtorita delegitaro de diversay regnoj volus iom sxangxi Esperanton, antaù ol gxin oficialigi, kiel gxi agus ? Por akcepti kelkajn utilajn vortojn, por limigi l’akuzativon aù cxesigi l’akordigxon de l’adjektivoj en multnombro, cxu taùgus subfosi la tutan laboron de duoncentjaro kaj rekomenci cxiun sperton per alia vojo ? Suficxus, ke la Lingva Komitato rekomendu la forlasojn aù aldonajojn en uzado cxiutaga. Post kelka tempo, kutimo ja farigxus sen ia rompo, se gxi montrigxus tre praktika. Se ne, ecx decido la plej alta falus morte. Efektive la sperto baldaù montrus cxu tio, kio sendube estas pli facila en u z a d o, ne igas tiom pli malfacila la komprenadon.
Therefore, although esperantists are occasionally considered “inflexible”, L. Zamenhof himself was open-minded to future needs. Bai Ren may wish to join and/or partake in the Akademio (if not already there???) I’ll admit that i find difficulty in learning the verbs which are not a priori obviously transitive or intransitive. naski = to give birth – naskigxi = to come into the world -
“naskigi” i cannot find in the PIV, could it be used to describe the function of the midwife ? – akvo bolas = water is boiling, would not “boligxas” be easier,since “boligas” = to cause to boil ?↵ -
Is this to be inflicted on all the children of the world ?
http://www.spellingsociety.org/media/items/cost_of_spelling
↵ -
Thank you a lot for your link, Henriette! Very interesting indeed.
↵
