Universal World Language

[TransmutingSoul]

Nice idea but only one problem, its not profitable. The world is too fragmented, too many diffeent nations each looking out for themselves.

That will change, to that I am 100% sure as we have a great future in front of us. We have been gifted to live in this time of great change and it is up to us to make that change, firstly with our own selves.

Regards Tony

 

[ChristineM]

That will change, to that I am 100% sure as we have a great future in front of us. We have been gifted to live in this time of great change and it is up to us to make that change, firstly with our own selves.

Regards Tony

I can't see it but its i nice thought

 

[LuisDantas]

There is no reason to promote one language. It is computer age, and translation facilities are available. Tomorrow perhaps we will have spectacles which would translate from what is spoken in Spanish into English or even Hindi. Let people be happy with their own languages.

Have you heard of anti-languages? The concept disturbed me a bit at first, but it is only fair to acknowledge that they do in fact exist. Communities have reasons to be understood by others, and also to want to be cryptical and apart.

What Is an Anti-Language?

All the same, it is just not really possible to encourage a mutual lack of understanding for the sake of being snobbish much further than we already do.

More than that, while it is clear that automated translations are indeed becoming more widespread and may soon become the norm (not entirely unlike calculators), I don't think that such a change will be a step in the direction of sustaining the current variety of languages.

If people turn out to have considerably less incentive to actually learn new languages in the future, the natural trend will by my estimation be growing indiference to traditional, regional or ethnic languages of any kind, since there will be nearly no practical advantage in learning them nor handicap from neglecting to. And once that becomes a widespread perception, the natural next step is to simply start learning just one or two of the most widespread languages around, since that provides a tangible if eventual benefit at perhaps no cost, leading to a fairly rapid amalgamation in very few generations.

To a point that reminds me of how HTML5 (a web content description language) has become such a different beast from HTML 3 or even HTML 4. If automatic translation becomes widespread and effective, common human language will probably follow a similar, exciting path and become fabulously superior to the current alternatives - and much more homogeneous.

We do not really want a Bahai dictatorship.

That we do not. But I see that as very much an unconnected matter. Languages are not that strongly tied to creeds or ideologies. Nor do they demand a financial toll or refuse to be learned by those who do not want to conform. It is also very hard to forbid people from learning other languages if they truly want to, and it is all but impossible to even gauge what languages a rebel population might have learned.

In practice, learning languages is essentially always libertarian, or very close to.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't see any benefits to a universal language. In fact I see it as a great loss, similar to the idea of one universal religion. Concepts exist in local or religious languages that wouldn't exist any more should there be one language. For example, Dr. Rajiv Malhotra has identified some 100 concepts in Sanatana Dharma he calls untranslatable. Still, as languages are disappearing quickly, we'll most likely evolve our way along to 3 or 4, based on population and human stubbornness with regard to their ethnocentricity. Whoever will say 'There is no way in hell I'm giving up my language!' the loudest will win out, like some playground shouting contest on what game to play.

All that being said, nobody has mentioned which script would be the most useful, indicating an existing bias already. Maybe Devanagiri, in use in over 120 languages. (just making a point, not for real)

 

[LuisDantas]

Languages have their own dynamics.

I do not regret their extinctions as much as some other people do, but I also doubt that we will ever reach a point where there are less than a few dozen. I may be projecting from my experience with information technology. Some languages are enormously more popular than others, but there are also specific niches that are indeed hard to satisfy with broad appeal languages.

The flip side of the coin is that, precisely because they are so hard to translate, those niches are almost by definition rather arcane and tend to never have had a shot at being quite widespread.

We should also take into consideration that languages are not nearly as easy to regulate as some other resources. Usage counts.

As for writing scripts, I must admit that I can't really picture a future where some version of roman letters will not be significant for, at least, a century. Installed base and all that.

For all I know there are dozens of better choices out there. I certainly see merit on Kanji, for one, and there is no denying the esthetic merits of at least a half dozen systems that I know to exist.

But I just don't think that there any of those are very well positioned to apply for being universal systems. Perhaps in a couple decades or so, the most likely candidates being Mandarim Chinese and the Japanese Katakana and Hiragana. We might well benefit much from that. I just don't know, and I see little indication that it might happen in the next few decades.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Thank you for a positive reply and looking into the possibilities of what might need to be done. Many are saying on other forums I have been on that computer binary code is a possibility to be built upon.

The point of this thread is to say in this matter, that the Baha'i do not have the answer, but they have a prophecy that says humanity will move towards and eventually adopt an auxiliary language, It is said at that time we will also find our unity and science will explode into a cascade of knowledge. There is a 3rd sign, but can not remember off hand.

In the end it may only be because the need for it was found, and not from any spiritual aspiration.

P/S I looked up the 3 signs just for interest

1) The first sign of the coming of age of humanity referred to in the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh is the emergence of a science which is described as that “divine philosophy” which will include the discovery of a radical approach to the transmutation of elements.
2)Concerning the “second” sign which Bahá’u’lláh indicates to have been revealed in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Shoghi Effendi states that Bahá’u’lláh, “…in His Most Holy Book, has enjoined the selection of a single language and the adoption of a common script for all on earth to use, an injunction which, when carried out, would, as He Himself affirms in that Book, be one of the signs of the ‘coming of age of the human race.."
3) One of the signs of the maturity of the world is that no one will accept to bear the weight of kingship. Kingship will remain with none willing to bear alone its weight. That day will be the day whereon wisdom will be manifested among mankind.

Regards Tony

I could conceive of 1 and 2 achieved through technical means.
1 could be considered true when they get the fusion reactors going. Technically you could count fission reactors, but I would hold out for fusion reactors if I were you. They are true transmutation of elements.
2. Tagged file formats (SGML, XML, JSON, HTML etc) might count. Ok maybe I am stretching, but they could count.
3. ---The day when nobody wants to be a king. If people began to truly understand ourselves then this could happen. That would be a peaceful path to this result. Part of the problem of kings is they can't see themselves and get a distorted sense of reality, and the same goes for everyone around them.

 

[LuisDantas]

Actually, I think that a strong case can be made that HTML & company have indeed fulfilled 2).

 

[Aupmanyav]

All our current languages lack, Arabic I am told is a great language, but very difficult to master. English has too many stupid rules that do not work, too many words the same. Like i before e except after c, but no always?

So is Sanskrit or Tamil. I think all languages are great and all have their stupidities. Do you want Arabic as the universal language?

In practice, learning languages is essentially always libertarian, or very close to.

In answer to your post, I would say that whatever happens will happen gradually in time. We cannot make the whole world follow one type of religion or one language or one government. To think that is possible is utopian and, well, I would say, foolish. We necessarily have to accept diversity. The world goes its own way despite God, prophets, sons, messengers, manifestations or mahdis.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So is Sanskrit or Tamil. I think all languages are great and all have their stupidities. Do you want Arabic as the universal language?In answer to your post, I would say that whatever happens will happen gradually in time. We cannot make the whole world follow one type of religion or one language or one government. To think that is possible is utopian and, well, I would say, foolish. We necessarily have to accept diversity. The world goes its own way despite God, prophets, sons, messengers, manifestations or mahdis.

Time will tell. I see all Holy books have a promise of a day of peace. Meanwhile we can start or help by being a bringer of peace to all. That's my aim anyway.

Thank you for the replies.

Regards Tony

 

[QuestioningMind]

A comment in another thread asked;

"OK, let know the Baha'i people's success for establishment of the Universal auxiliary language, please."

The response was that it was not the responsibility of just the Baha'i to implement a world auxiliary language, it is the responsibility of all people of all nations.

Esperanto was popular back in that time and many Baha'i did try to take that path and some still do, but as the governments of the world have not adopted it, there is no way that it can go global. interestingly, English has become much more of a worldly language, but it is also no good for a universal language.

In the Baha'i Faith, Bahá’u’lláh enjoins the adoption of a universal language and script. His Writings envisage two stages in this process. The first stage is to consist of the selection of an existing language or an invented one which would then be taught in all the schools of the world as an auxiliary to the mother tongues. The governments of the world through their parliaments are called upon to effect this momentous enactment. The second stage, in the distant future, would be the eventual adoption of one single language and common script for all on earth.

Esparanto was talked about by Abdul'Baha in 1913 and it can be read at this link - Bahá'í Reference Library - Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, Pages 163-166

While these allusions to Esperanto are specific and encouraging, it remains true that until the House of Justice has acted on the matter in accordance with Bahá’u’lláh’s instruction the Bahá’í Faith is not committed to Esperanto nor to any other living or artificial tongue. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá Himself said: “The love and effort put into Esperanto will not be lost, but no one person can construct a Universal Language.”—‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London, p. 95.

So which language to adopt, and whether it is to be a natural or constructed one, is a decision which the nations of the world will have to make.

So what do you think?
Do you see the benefit?
Will it happen?

Ĉu ni kiel kunigita popolo adoptos mondan lingvon - Will we as a united people adopt a world language?

Esperanto/Quick and dirty guide - Wikibooks, open books for an open world

View attachment 34145


Regards Tony

It seems to me that the logical answer would be to adopt whatever the most commonly spoken language in the world is. Currently that would be English with approximately 1.39 billion speakers. I'm not sure why you don't think that English would be appropriate as a universal language. It has a larger vocabulary than any other language, mainly because it doesn't hesitate to freely adopt words from other languages. I would think that would be advantages. Is there a reason it wouldn't be suitable that I'm not aware of?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It seems to me that the logical answer would be to adopt whatever the most commonly spoken language in the world is. Currently that would be English with approximately 1.39 billion speakers. I'm not sure why you don't think that English would be appropriate as a universal language. It has a larger vocabulary than any other language, mainly because it doesn't hesitate to freely adopt words from other languages. I would think that would be advantages. Is there a reason it wouldn't be suitable that I'm not aware of?

I would like it to be English, but I did not do well, I still do not understand how the language works. My wife just smiles at me, because she is good with English.

From what I have previously read it is a difficult language, many rules of grammar and many same words with multipul meanings.

In the end all languages have deficiencies.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Do you want Arabic as the universal language?

I have no preference, it will happen after I am long gone, most likely.

I think a lot of Baha'i would want to learn Arabic, as to read the writings in its pure form. I am told it is a difficult language, so I do not see it fits the criteria of a language for all people.

Regards Tony

 

[LuisDantas]

In answer to your post, I would say that whatever happens will happen gradually in time. We cannot make the whole world follow one type of religion or one language or one government. To think that is possible is utopian and, well, I would say, foolish. We necessarily have to accept diversity. The world goes its own way despite God, prophets, sons, messengers, manifestations or mahdis.

Again, there is a very significant difference IMO. Languages can spread and wither only as a function of actual usage, and there are no logical obstacles of any kind for people to become bilingual or better, nor for switching languages in a couple of generations.

It happens fairly often here in Brazil; we have a large community of Japanese people and their descendants, and it is a dice's toss whether any of them speaks Japanese, Brazilian Portuguese, or both (and to which degree of proficiency). It is fairly commonplace for an immigrant not to be understood directly by his or her own grandsons.

So languages are both libertarian, in that they can't really be controlled; anyone who invests the time and effort can in fact master them. But they are also arguably tyrannical, or shall I say "imperialistic", in that it is enormously difficult to choose them freely. In a sense they are only useful if we submit to their influence and/or choose to spread it. That is, after all, their whole deal.

But most of all, I think that comparing their diversity to other forms of diversity is premature because languages are much more malleable than other resources, and involve very few and very less serious challenges than nearly any other. It is not at all clear that the current diversity of languages is in any way better than a far lesser diversity. And I do in fact believe that it would be nearly impossible to avoid a significant drift towards less diversity and much better mutual understanding in the next few centuries.

 

[LuisDantas]

It seems to me that the logical answer would be to adopt whatever the most commonly spoken language in the world is. Currently that would be English with approximately 1.39 billion speakers. I'm not sure why you don't think that English would be appropriate as a universal language. It has a larger vocabulary than any other language, mainly because it doesn't hesitate to freely adopt words from other languages. I would think that would be advantages. Is there a reason it wouldn't be suitable that I'm not aware of?

English is a strong candidate, but the claim that it is the most common language is tentative and needs strong qualifications.

It just barely edges over Mandarin Chinese, and that only if we include those who learn it as a second language. By that point we have to consider how well it is generally learned.

That would not necessarily make Chinese (or Spanish, or Hindi, or Esperanto, or Japanese) better choices, but it is not really as simple as counting the number of people who have any degree of proficiency and blindly looking at who turns out at the first place.

For similar reasons, I would hesitate to even consider English's vocabulary (much as I love it) larger than that of "any" other language. Do we even know how large Kanji's vocabulary is?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Time will tell. Meanwhile we can start or help by being a bringer of peace to all. That's my aim anyway.

We can surely do that, and it does not require us to follow one religion. If that is your aim , do not insist on one scripture, one messenger or whatever, one religion, one language, etc. Keep the aim in your view and let nothing else interfere with it.

I think a lot of Baha'i would want to learn Arabic, as to read the writings in its pure form.

Ah, Bahaullah wrote in Arabic. Why? What was wrong with Persian? It is a beautiful language, closely related to Vedic Sanskrit. Does writing in Arabic gives more authenticity to Bahaullah? Does Allah speak Arabic only?

 

[Aupmanyav]

And I do in fact believe that it would be nearly impossible to avoid a significant drift towards less diversity and much better mutual understanding in the next few centuries.

I believe IT will make learning a second language totally unnecessary in time. It will do the job for you - understanding or making someone else understand, speaking, writing. My machine will speak you to what I want to convey in Spanish.

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe IT will make learning a second language totally unnecessary in time. It will do the job for you - understanding or making someone else understand, speaking, writing. My machine will speak you to what I want to convey in Spanish.

Good thing that I learned some Spanish then. I can understand it fine in written form.

But no one in Chile ever understood me. I am a lousy speaker, and a very mediocre writer.

(Just being a pain. It is a common misunderstanding; Brazilians learn Portuguese, not Spanish).

But sure, we seem to be headed to such a future of an automated translation interface. YouTube is already halfway there.

 

[Aupmanyav]

(Just being a pain. It is a common misunderstanding; Brazilians learn Portuguese, not Spanish).

Sorry about my stupidity to think that all countries south of USA speak Spanish. I stand corrected.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Ah, Bahaullah wrote in Arabic. Why? What was wrong with Persian? It is a beautiful language, closely related to Vedic Sanskrit. Does writing in Arabic gives more authenticity to Bahaullah? Does Allah speak Arabic only?

Baha'u'llah wrote in Persian as well. He also used Pure Persian at times. The Hidden Words is a good example. Half in Arabic, half in Persian.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Good thing that I learned some Spanish then. I can understand it fine in written form.

But no one in Chile ever understood me. I am a lousy speaker, and a very mediocre writer.

(Just being a pain. It is a common misunderstanding; Brazilians learn Portuguese, not Spanish).

But sure, we seem to be headed to such a future of an automated translation interface. YouTube is already halfway there.

I always consider music can feed the soul and the best music is that of heart felt passion and love sung with meaning. So many songs around the world are sung and we do not know what they are saying, if we did know, we may realise how much we all want to share in a lasting peace.

How cold I feel it would to be to let a machine translate, when all we have to do is have an axillary language.

The logic so far is only rejected by those that are not thinking globally or act globally, but global thought and action will be the future, to that I have no doubt. Climate change is but one issue we now all face and requires global action.

Thank you for your input to this thread, It has been balanced and thoughtful.

Regards Tony