Advocating Esperanto

[Eddi]

This is what I think and what I'd like to discuss/debate:

Basically, I believe Esperanto should be adopted as the official world language...

Esperanto is an artificial, constructed language created by amateur linguist and polyglot LL Zamenhof (1859-1917) who was a Polish Jewish medical doctor.

Zamenhof grew up in Białystok in Poland, which was then part of the Russian Empire. In Bialystok Yiddish, Polish, German, and Russian were all spoken. Zamenhof observed that people there having different languages confounded social divisions and served to distance individual members of the various communities

He saw the situation in Bialystok as a microcosm of the wider world and thought that were people able to share a common language they would come together, and see themselves and each other as fellows in a common community.

To this end, he came to believe that an international auxiliary language could do the job. And so (in 1887) he created Esperanto and advocated its use as an international auxiliary language.

He published it under the pseudonym “Doctor Esperanto”, Esperanto meaning “one who hopes” in Esperanto. That's why it's called "Esperanto".

The idea is that everyone on Earth studies their own native tongue and any other language/s they were interested in (if any) in addition to Esperanto.

He believed that Esperanto should be the international auxiliary language on two counts:

First, it is highly regular and very easy to learn, much easier than any naturally occurring language.

And second, it is culturally neutral. No one group has the advantage for knowing it better than other groups. It belongs to the whole world, not just to certain people. All speakers are equal.

When the League of Nations was founded in the aftermath of the first world war Esperanto nearly became its official language, but the French vetoed this, under the delusion that French would become the international language if Esperanto didn’t.

Both Hitler and Stalin hated Esperanto and persecuted both it and those who advocated and/or understood it

A lot of people rubbish the idea of Esperanto, saying that English is now the international language and that Esperanto is a no-hoper.

Well, I say Esperanto is a better candidate. It is much easier to understand and belongs to all humankind.

And I think that if enough people bothered to learn it (and plenty of people do actually speak it, over 2 million by some counts, there are many speakers online too) and promote it then it could realistically become more and more important, over time.

I am an Esperantist in that I am studying - am trying to learn - Esperanto. But I am also an Esperantist in that I think it could unite all humankind with a common language and think that such a vision is noble and worthy.

What am I going to do about it? Well, I'm going to learn it, and I'm going to make it more well known, as I'm doing in this thread

I am currently learning it online, there is a good free course of study available on: www.duolingo.com

And I encourage others to do so, too

So..... what do others think of Esperanto and Zamenhof's vision?

Dankon por legas

 

[Altfish]

They tried to push for this 40/50 years ago but it failed miserably.
It appears that English is becoming the default language in most cases with Spanish close behind.
Although I believe that Mandarine is the most spoken language

 

[danieldemol]

This is what I think and what I'd like to discuss/debate:

Basically, I believe Esperanto should be adopted as the official world language...

Esperanto is an artificial, constructed language created by amateur linguist and polyglot LL Zamenhof (1859-1917) who was a Polish Jewish medical doctor.

Zamenhof grew up in Białystok in Poland, which was then part of the Russian Empire. In Bialystok Yiddish, Polish, German, and Russian were all spoken. Zamenhof observed that people there having different languages confounded social divisions and served to distance individual members of the various communities

He saw the situation in Bialystok as a microcosm of the wider world and thought that were people able to share a common language they would come together, and see themselves and each other as fellows in a common community.

To this end, he came to believe that an international auxiliary language could do the job. And so (in 1887) he created Esperanto and advocated its use as an international auxiliary language.

He published it under the pseudonym “Doctor Esperanto”, Esperanto meaning “one who hopes” in Esperanto. That's why it's called "Esperanto".

The idea is that everyone on Earth studies their own native tongue and any other language/s they were interested in (if any) in addition to Esperanto.

He believed that Esperanto should be the international auxiliary language on two counts:

First, it is highly regular and very easy to learn, much easier than any naturally occurring language.

And second, it is culturally neutral. No one group has the advantage for knowing it better than other groups. It belongs to the whole world, not just to certain people. All speakers are equal.

When the League of Nations was founded in the aftermath of the first world war Esperanto nearly became its official language, but the French vetoed this, under the delusion that French would become the international language if Esperanto didn’t.

Both Hitler and Stalin hated Esperanto and persecuted both it and those who advocated and/or understood it

A lot of people rubbish the idea of Esperanto, saying that English is now the international language and that Esperanto is a no-hoper.

Well, I say Esperanto is a better candidate. It is much easier to understand and belongs to all humankind.

And I think that if enough people bothered to learn it (and plenty of people do actually speak it, over 2 million by some counts, there are many speakers online too) and promote it then it could realistically become more and more important, over time.

I am an Esperantist in that I am studying - am trying to learn - Esperanto. But I am also an Esperantist in that I think it could unite all humankind with a common language and think that such a vision is noble and worthy.

What am I going to do about it? Well, I'm going to learn it, and I'm going to make it more well known, as I'm doing in this thread

I am currently learning it online, there is a good free course of study available on: www.duolingo.com

And I encourage others to do so, too

So..... what do others think of Esperanto and Zamenhof's vision?

Dankon por legas

I think Zamenhof’s vision of an international auxiliary language is a good one, but I don’t know if Esperanto will be the one or if another will emerge.

 

[PureX]

Why on Earth would we want a "culturally neutral" language??? The whole point of using language is to express ourselves to each other. To that end, we need MORE words, not less. And more complex meanings and nuanced juxtaposition, not less. We should be encouraging people to learn several languages, and pay them to interpret when needed. Over all, it would be the better cultural solution.

 

[Vinayaka]

There are many concepts that exist within particular cultures that are untranslatable into other languages, as that concept is tied to that culture, and often uniquely to that culture. A simple example is the Inuit's 16 words for snow, (my memory may be wrong on the number 16) all having a slightly different meaning. Why would someone in a tropical place have any need for that? So adopting some universal language, not only being nigh impossible, would also result in the loss or words for concepts, resulting is some bland stew, lacking diversity. So much would be lost.

 

[Eddi]

Why on Earth would we want a "culturally neutral" language???

Culturally neutral = belonging to everyone on Earth rather than just one Earthly culture

By being culturally neutral Esperanto could (in time) cultivate a new global culture, indeed such a culture is beginning to emerge, if you look into it...

There would be no distinction between native speakers and people who have it as a second language as it would be neither a native tongue nor a second language: it would be an international auxiliary language

Therefore natives of certain countries whose language is widely spoken would not have a linguistic advantage over those who have to learn it as a second language

I would imagine everyone learning Esperanto would facilitate a certain international culture/sense of being and truly bring the world together - Without privileging any one body of native speakers over non-native speakers by giving them an advantage

The whole point of using language is to express ourselves to each other.

Exactly, and Esperanto can do that

To that end, we need MORE words, not less. And more complex meanings and nuanced juxtaposition, not less

It's not baby talk, it's a proper language, it can do anything any other language can do but has a more efficient, logical, and regular system

Natural languages are amazing and I agree that it is good to study them

But we're talking about an international auxiliary language, which is something else entirely

I'm all for people learning different languages but think it would be a better place were Esperanto to be adopted as an international auxiliary language

 

[Eddi]

There are many concepts that exist within particular cultures that are untranslatable into other languages, as that concept is tied to that culture, and often uniquely to that culture. A simple example is the Inuit's 16 words for snow, (my memory may be wrong on the number 16) all having a slightly different meaning. Why would someone in a tropical place have any need for that? So adopting some universal language, not only being nigh impossible, would also result in the loss or words for concepts, resulting is some bland stew, lacking diversity. So much would be lost.

But with a universal language people in the tropics could communicate with people in the Arctic (to use your examples) and by being able to do this would be able to share each other's culture, given time

It would open a channel of communication, which would facilitate a further cultural exchange, given time

 

[Vinayaka]

But with a universal language people in the tropics could communicate with people in the Arctic (to use your examples) and by being able to do this would be able to share each other's culture, given time

It would open a channel of communication, which would facilitate a further cultural exchange, given time

You're free to have those views, but as others have said, any attempt to implement it has failed miserably. The 'snow' example is just a miniscule amount of the troubles it would cause. Heck, many people can't explain stuff to each other when they use the same language, let lone both having learned a new one.

Take the word 'God' for example. You and I probably wouldn't agree on that word, let alone all of humanity.

 

[Eddi]

any attempt to implement it has failed miserably

Only because of English

Which is the world's lingua franca purely due to American capitalism, rather than for any other, more worthy or rational reason

But the USA is not going to be top dog forever...

Take the word 'God' for example. You and I probably wouldn't agree on that word, let alone all of humanity.

The thing is, though, that we are all aware there is a controversy, and that the same word can relate to different concepts

I'm sure you and I could come up with a dictionary definition of "God" that would take into account how it is understood, if we really wanted to and even if we probably have different understandings of it

It's not as though we don't know all this

 

[Stevicus]

This is what I think and what I'd like to discuss/debate:

Basically, I believe Esperanto should be adopted as the official world language...

Esperanto is an artificial, constructed language created by amateur linguist and polyglot LL Zamenhof (1859-1917) who was a Polish Jewish medical doctor.

Zamenhof grew up in Białystok in Poland, which was then part of the Russian Empire. In Bialystok Yiddish, Polish, German, and Russian were all spoken. Zamenhof observed that people there having different languages confounded social divisions and served to distance individual members of the various communities

He saw the situation in Bialystok as a microcosm of the wider world and thought that were people able to share a common language they would come together, and see themselves and each other as fellows in a common community.

To this end, he came to believe that an international auxiliary language could do the job. And so (in 1887) he created Esperanto and advocated its use as an international auxiliary language.

He published it under the pseudonym “Doctor Esperanto”, Esperanto meaning “one who hopes” in Esperanto. That's why it's called "Esperanto".

The idea is that everyone on Earth studies their own native tongue and any other language/s they were interested in (if any) in addition to Esperanto.

He believed that Esperanto should be the international auxiliary language on two counts:

First, it is highly regular and very easy to learn, much easier than any naturally occurring language.

And second, it is culturally neutral. No one group has the advantage for knowing it better than other groups. It belongs to the whole world, not just to certain people. All speakers are equal.

When the League of Nations was founded in the aftermath of the first world war Esperanto nearly became its official language, but the French vetoed this, under the delusion that French would become the international language if Esperanto didn’t.

Both Hitler and Stalin hated Esperanto and persecuted both it and those who advocated and/or understood it

A lot of people rubbish the idea of Esperanto, saying that English is now the international language and that Esperanto is a no-hoper.

Well, I say Esperanto is a better candidate. It is much easier to understand and belongs to all humankind.

And I think that if enough people bothered to learn it (and plenty of people do actually speak it, over 2 million by some counts, there are many speakers online too) and promote it then it could realistically become more and more important, over time.

I am an Esperantist in that I am studying - am trying to learn - Esperanto. But I am also an Esperantist in that I think it could unite all humankind with a common language and think that such a vision is noble and worthy.

What am I going to do about it? Well, I'm going to learn it, and I'm going to make it more well known, as I'm doing in this thread

I am currently learning it online, there is a good free course of study available on: www.duolingo.com

And I encourage others to do so, too

So..... what do others think of Esperanto and Zamenhof's vision?

Dankon por legas

I don't think a universal language is as necessary as it once might have been thought, since technology seems to be the solution. One can have a mini-translator in one's phone.

 

[Vinayaka]

I'm sure you and I could come up with a dictionary definition of "God" that would take into account how it is understood, if we really wanted to and even if we probably have different understandings of it

And I'm rather sure we couldn't. Very different paradigms.

 

[MNoBody]

we are using the current universal language right now, it's working, sort of....
.how long did that take to achieve, as a species?
hmm, centuries of tedious historical interactions and events and efforts
like it or not it is the only global language that has emerged in recorded history, so, shall we just start over?
that is frought with difficulties and would take centuries of more tedious bs to achieve to be right at the place we are now.....
esperanto affords no better odds of people grasping what others say than any other language humans use IMO

 

[GoodbyeDave]

International languages evolve, they cannot be imposed by governments. The linguist André Martinet summed it up:

The common mistake of nearly all language makers is to assume a demand where there is practically none. Well publicized and perfectly utilisable artificial languages have now been in existence for more than seventy years. Everybody knows about Esperanto, but no one, except a handful of idealists, ever bothers to learn it.

Earlier, the critic I. A. Richards had written

If you are going to the trouble of learning a language, you need to feel that you will get a return for your toil this very year. A man may plant an orchard and wait six years for his apples; but six months is long enough to wait for verbs and prepositions to bear fruit. … You do not want access merely to a limited and artificial literature, or to a few other speakers and correspondents. You want a vast and undelayed expansion of your contacts.

Who's going to learn a language with less speakers than Chechen?

Actually Esperanto is not well designed — I could explain at length, but I don't think that belongs on this forum.

 

[Eddi]

International languages evolve, they cannot be imposed by governments. The linguist André Martinet summed it up:

Earlier, the critic I. A. Richards had written

Who's going to learn a language with less speakers than Chechen?

Actually Esperanto is not well designed — I could explain at length, but I don't think that belongs on this forum.

"a handful of idealists" doesn't sound like a bad thing to belong to

I would be interested in hearing why you think Esperanto is not well designed, and I think such an explanation would certainly belong in this thread

 

[Eddi]

they cannot be imposed by governments.

Also, I'm not saying Esperanto should be "imposed by governments"

I believe there should be a mass social movement (optimistic, I know...) that lobbies governments to recognise it, alongside other languages

 

[shunyadragon]

I have for a long time advocated Esperanto and learned some not because I thought it would be successful, actually a bit idealistic, but because it represented the concept of the evolution toward an evolving universal language. It turns out that English is evolving with aspects like Esperanto. .

Actually computer languages are evolving as another international language.

 

[MNoBody]

learning the root code language for this matrix would be far more....useful

 

[Glaurung]

I would be interested in hearing why you think Esperanto is not well designed, and I think such an explanation would certainly belong in this thread

Ranto (JBR Anti-Zamenhofism)

This site goes into length concerning the many problems with the language's design. The big flaw being that Esperanto can be a near unpronounceable mess unless you're Polish.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ranto (JBR Anti-Zamenhofism)

This site goes into length concerning the many problems with the language's design. The big flaw being that Esperanto can be a near unpronounceable mess unless you're Polish.

This is one of the reasons why I do not think Esperanto would work, and it has some awkward artificial constructs. Despite the existence of instant translators the world works in conversations with inflections and subtle meanings. I grew up with Spanish, French and English, and spent nine years in China learning Chinese. Latin in Roman Church boot camp. Even though I am not particularly good at learning spoken languages. Spanish and English are my best.

Latin was the universal language in the past in Europe, and is the shared root of many languages today, but over time English has become the most universal written and spoken language everywhere in the world I have traveled, and in most countries is taught as the second language. It helps that English is an evolving dynamic language.

By the way I taught English in China when I lived there for nine years.

 

[Polymath257]

I would also contest the cultural neutrality of Esperanto. At best it is culturally European. It is based on the alphabet that is common in Europe, as opposed to the wide range of characters seen in other cultures (even alphabets, like Arabic).

And, as others have pointed out, culture is a *good* thing. Being able to express nuances and subtleties is an important aspect of being human.

The good thing is that a common language would allow *basic* communication between people of different cultural backgrounds, but that goal is only achieved if enough people adopt the language. Otherwise, when you travel, you are more likely to find someone who knows English or Chinese than someone who knows Esperanto.

And given how long Esperanto has been around, I'm betting it will never get past the 'curiosity phase' for most people. There are many more useful languages to learn in practice.

I'd also point out that Esperanto has the second fewest people trying to learn it in Duolingo: right behind Navajo and ahead of Scottish Gaelic.