A Global/International Language
Should the world learn a simple international language that is spoken in all political or business endeavors. Esperanto is a language created to be simple, and to be used as a tool between nations, and yet I had never heard of it until about three days ago. Would language-globalization be beneficial towards a unified, more peaceful world?
|
A global language is likely impossible because of cultural differences. Language reflects how we think and what we think, from how we view time to whether we consider numbers important at all. Many cultures lack words for concepts our culture has always been aware of, and vice versa. A global language, unless it is pure and simply a trade language, will have to choose which sort of worldviews it uses. Side: GREAT IDEA but not going to happen
1
point
that would be such a great idea. If people were to understand each other, there would be less misunderstandings that could lead to fighing. It would give the idea that we are ONE. But that is far to happen. We would have to invent a new language. Some countries want their language be the Global language. Countries also for patriotic reasons will not give up their language. no. maybe in the future. but not soon at all. Side: GREAT IDEA but not going to happen
Language globalisation cannot work, because languages evolve in isolation and region, much like species diverge. This is why English, one of the most adopted languages, is extremely different between Singapore, South Africa, Australia, Britain, and the USA. Side: Language can't be homogenous
Of course it cannot be homogeneous. But that still does not preclude a common base. That all English speakers can understand virtually all other English speakers is a perfect example of what could happen with Esperanto. Certainly there are different phrases and idioms, but the overall meaning is not lost between Britain and America. Side: Language can't be homogenous
That all English speakers can understand virtually all other English speakers is a perfect example of what could happen with Esperanto. Singapore heavy creole example: "Dis guy Singrish si beh powderful sia." Australian colloquialism example: "My mate and I went to the barbie yesterday but I was the only bloke who was pissed." Regional variations only get greater with time. The same would happen with Esperanto. Side: Language can't be homogenous
1
point
Before we get a global language I would first rather see a global currency. Not everybody can speak the same language because of differences in culture, but countries with similar economies would be able to have the same currency. Of course this means if one country suffers from inflation then they all will, causing a global meltdown worse than the one now. Side: GREAT IDEA but not going to happen
Perhaps the two could be pursued in conjunction. I also believe in moving towards a global currency. And while yes, it increases the effect of inflation, it also decreases the likelihood of a mass financial meltdown. It also increases trade. In fact both a global currency and a global language would increase trade. Side: GREAT IDEA but not going to happen
1
point
It decreases the likelihood of financial meltdown in theory. We do not know if one country is more corrupt than the next. It increases trade to the countries that share the same currency. Besides if this currency becomes too strong, what will happen to the countries who didn't sign up to snare the global currency? They will collapse because their currency will be too weak. A global language will also never happen. Side: GREAT IDEA but not going to happen
I hope it's not going to happen. The fact that the people in the world speak so many languages makes the Earth so diversified and beautiful. Yes, sure there are languages acknowledged to be more popular and and really useful in international relationships, e.g. English, German or even Chinese. I myself am not a native English speaker, but I'm doing my best to learn as much as i can because i know it's gonna be very useful someday, and it already is, cuz I'm writing this argument, aren't I? So, yes, it would be great if everyone understood everyone without the need of translation, but it would suppose melting all the other languages into a new one and then everyone would lose a huge piece of his/her ethnicity, culture and the world that's so colorful now would become simply black and white. It's just not worth it. :) Side: Language can't be homogenous
Could not both the mother language and the international language be taught in the classroom? Esperanto was designed to be an international language because of its close relationship to many different languages, and couldn't it along with the home country's language be taught concurrently? Therefore, one could communicate outside of the country, while retaining your country's heritage. Side: Language can't be homogenous
1
point
0
points
1
point
0
points
1
point
1
point
Can I ask where you received the false information that Esperanto is a "European" language. A correction to this false assertion can be seen at http://ikso.net/broshuro/pdf/ Side: Language can't be homogenous
1
point
Actually, while Esperanto is easier to learn for speakers of European languages, its much easier than most any natural language because of its very regular grammar that lacks the multitude of exceptions common in natural languages. "Its easy on the brain" as one famous psychologist and Esperantist put it. I'm fluent in both English and Esperanto. Learning Esperanto is a piece of cake compared to learning English. Side: Language can't be homogenous
1
point
|
