When Xu Jie came across a book introducing Esperanto while browsing in his university library years ago, he had no idea of the exciting journey that lay ahead.
im sorry but esperanto is for fucking weirdos based on a liberal fantasy that language barriers, not material conditions, are the cause of conflict. learn a living language
If the purpose is to "foster friendship among peoples, international cooperation and unity of human kind" then it is indeed bad to center it in the imperial core
just because a language originates from a region does not mean it, in any conceivable way, supports that reigon. As the article states Esperanto has been in China for over a century and if it helps the various ethnicities of China communicate and understand each others struggles I don’t see how that supports European imperialism
I don't mean that it originates in Europe, i mean that it was deliberately constructed from European languages to make it easier for Europeans to learn. If company managers from China can communicate with company managers from the UK, but not a prole with a fellow prole in the neighboring province, it doesn't deliver on the promise.
Would you for example support the EU standardizing Mandarin? Would that make it easier for people of different European ethnicities to understand each other's struggles, than standardizing something relevant like Latin?
the point of a global language is that it is easy to learn for most everyone, which, from the anecdotes of many native mandarin/Japanese speakers, Esperanto is.
but not a prole with a fellow prole in the neighboring province, it
yes it is. it is far easier for a Portuguese speaker and a mandarin speaker to both learn and then communicate in Esperanto than it is for one to learn mandarin or verse vica.
And no because mandarin is wildly excepted as a hard language to learn, Esperanto is not, even for non western speakers.
e: also a majority of the world speaks a form of European language as a result of colonialism, Arabic/mandarin concepts are not as easily learned and picked up by European speakers, where as Esperanto is far easier for non European speakers to use than than for European speakers to learn non western language concepts. So if you want to make a world language you should use the one that is exceptionally easy to learn for most people, and harder, but still far easier than other common languages for non western speakers
Languages are only "easy to learn" to the extent that they are similar to a language the learner already knows. Anecdotal evidence comes from Esperantists who I am going to assume already know either English, French or similar (all of which admittedly have more complicated and irregular features than Esperanto). E.g. Japanese-only speakers would usually have an easier time learning Korean since the grammar is basically the same.
edit: your edit is interesting since knowing a colonial language is often a class divide
you are literally denying what non westerners who learn the language say about the language. Yes obviously it is easier if the concepts carry over, but it is far more difficult for a global language to be established if nothing is carried over. colonialism is a reality, it happened, because of that a vast number of people speak indo-European rooted languages, therefore most everyone can learn Esperanto concepts easily. And for non western speakers, as explained by said people, it is far easier than any other western language, like English, to learn.
If a common global language is to be used, does it not make sense to make it as easy as possible to learn as a second language?
And obviously it is a class divide because rich people can travel/spend time learning a language instead of working, yet another reason a second global language should be as easy to learn as possible for the world round
I don't think I'm denying what they say, rather adding context to it. Maybe that counts as dismissing, but not denying.
I'm probably mostly upset about the discrepancy between Esperanto's idealist messaging and the real world compromises. If it is easy for Angolans to learn Esperanto because they already speak Portuguese, why not just use Portuguese and slim 3 languages down to 2? For practical purposes this is.
If we want to have a good idealist representative global language, we can do much better than Esperanto. There are already conlangs that take inspiration from all of the world, but I can't remember which they are atm.
edit: I guess what I'm clawing at is that while colonial languages present opportunities, we shouldn't assume that everyone already knows colonial languages, and if we do, we will screw over those who don't. A global language should be easy for everyone to learn.
you have to be trolling at this point. Esperanto IS easier for everyone to learn compared to any other some what prominent language, that is the entire POINT. Portuguese is much harder for non Portuguese speakers to learn than Esperanto is. Esperanto is not a colonial language, China adopted it literally citing that as a benefit.
The problem with “taking from every language” is it makes it difficult as fuck for EVERYONE because they have to learn completely foreign concepts, whereas many non western speakers already are taught English in schooling, and even if they don’t remember it it still provides a very strong base to build on.
Esperanto is not some “Anglo” language, it’s mostly used in the global south and China. And it’s adoption is not “screwing over” anyone, it literally helps facilitate human interaction that otherwise would not occur
I repeat: there is no such thing as a universally simple language. "non Portuguese speakers" is a comically large group that includes everyone from Spanish to Cherokee speakers. Can you guess which one of those will have an easier time learning either Portuguese or Esperanto?
Esperanto removes some complex features, but keeps others, like consonant clusters, case conjugations, multi-syllable words, etc. (not to mention the vocabulary which is 99% Euro). Those features exist in most European languages but are completely or mostly absent in other parts of the world, and to them seem completely exotic and alien. So no, "taking from every language" would just make it slightly harder for you, but make it easier for everyone else.
The argument against English being the world language is that it gives an unfair advantage to native English speakers. Why should we then give an unfair advantage to European language speakers by adopting specifically Esperanto? Why should we privilege people who were taught colonial languages earlier? You seem to ignore this large group of monolingual people in the global south. What makes them less important?
English becomes less daunting when you accept the fact that it's actually 3+ languages in a trench coat.
My point is that Esperanto, even if it has no internal irregularities, has a lot of arbitrary features like conjugation at all, when many natural languages don't. It's more complicated than it needs to be, but these features don't present problems for Europeans.
The conjugation is incredibly regular and simple to pick up on honestly, it’s not really a complex system and it’s about as simplified as it can be and still be called conjugation. And their nouns, verbs, and adjectives are labeled to a degree it almost makes some words kinda weird, but at least you know what type of word you’re looking at when you see it
To me a better irreconcilable issue for Esperanto as an interlang is basically it’s phonemic inventory is just straight up a mess if your goal is to have it be universal.
Some aesthetic reason like “its the language of colonialism” is just dumb. a global second language should be easy to learn for a large % of the global population and be easy to learn read and speak
Non-English countries have to spend a considerable amount of time and resources teaching and translating English (which is vulnerable to delays). It's not only about aesthetics, it's about information speed and quality
The point is it is easier for the vast majority of people than learning another language like English or Chinese , what is hard to grasp about that? Any globally adopted language is going to be easier for certain people who speak something similar.
like Chinese people who speak it literally say it is easy to learn
You sounds like the people that argue against universal heathcare/education because people who can afford it will also get it
I tried learning it for a while and to me it didn't seem Slavic at all, there was no weird sounds and no convoluted case systems. To me it was Spicy Latin
Ideally, workers would be unable to communicate with each other, while the capitalists should be able to communicate freely, secretly and easily. This was all happening during times of nationalist wars too right?
I learned it a long time ago bc i read it made language acquisition easier. I can’t speak for everyone but it definitely seemed to help me, I tried learning Spanish and Italian before Learning Esperanto with little to no success but picked up Spanish relatively easy after spending some time with Esperanto.
im sorry but esperanto is for fucking weirdos based on a liberal fantasy that language barriers, not material conditions, are the cause of conflict. learn a living language
language barriers are a barrier to solidarity, especially within countries/reigons
deleted by creator
It's a pretty bad way since it was only based on European languages. Also it uses gender.
neither of these things make a language “bad”
If the purpose is to "foster friendship among peoples, international cooperation and unity of human kind" then it is indeed bad to center it in the imperial core
just because a language originates from a region does not mean it, in any conceivable way, supports that reigon. As the article states Esperanto has been in China for over a century and if it helps the various ethnicities of China communicate and understand each others struggles I don’t see how that supports European imperialism
I don't mean that it originates in Europe, i mean that it was deliberately constructed from European languages to make it easier for Europeans to learn. If company managers from China can communicate with company managers from the UK, but not a prole with a fellow prole in the neighboring province, it doesn't deliver on the promise.
Would you for example support the EU standardizing Mandarin? Would that make it easier for people of different European ethnicities to understand each other's struggles, than standardizing something relevant like Latin?
the point of a global language is that it is easy to learn for most everyone, which, from the anecdotes of many native mandarin/Japanese speakers, Esperanto is.
yes it is. it is far easier for a Portuguese speaker and a mandarin speaker to both learn and then communicate in Esperanto than it is for one to learn mandarin or verse vica.
And no because mandarin is wildly excepted as a hard language to learn, Esperanto is not, even for non western speakers.
e: also a majority of the world speaks a form of European language as a result of colonialism, Arabic/mandarin concepts are not as easily learned and picked up by European speakers, where as Esperanto is far easier for non European speakers to use than than for European speakers to learn non western language concepts. So if you want to make a world language you should use the one that is exceptionally easy to learn for most people, and harder, but still far easier than other common languages for non western speakers
Languages are only "easy to learn" to the extent that they are similar to a language the learner already knows. Anecdotal evidence comes from Esperantists who I am going to assume already know either English, French or similar (all of which admittedly have more complicated and irregular features than Esperanto). E.g. Japanese-only speakers would usually have an easier time learning Korean since the grammar is basically the same.
edit: your edit is interesting since knowing a colonial language is often a class divide
you are literally denying what non westerners who learn the language say about the language. Yes obviously it is easier if the concepts carry over, but it is far more difficult for a global language to be established if nothing is carried over. colonialism is a reality, it happened, because of that a vast number of people speak indo-European rooted languages, therefore most everyone can learn Esperanto concepts easily. And for non western speakers, as explained by said people, it is far easier than any other western language, like English, to learn.
If a common global language is to be used, does it not make sense to make it as easy as possible to learn as a second language?
And obviously it is a class divide because rich people can travel/spend time learning a language instead of working, yet another reason a second global language should be as easy to learn as possible for the world round
I don't think I'm denying what they say, rather adding context to it. Maybe that counts as dismissing, but not denying.
I'm probably mostly upset about the discrepancy between Esperanto's idealist messaging and the real world compromises. If it is easy for Angolans to learn Esperanto because they already speak Portuguese, why not just use Portuguese and slim 3 languages down to 2? For practical purposes this is.
If we want to have a good idealist representative global language, we can do much better than Esperanto. There are already conlangs that take inspiration from all of the world, but I can't remember which they are atm.
edit: I guess what I'm clawing at is that while colonial languages present opportunities, we shouldn't assume that everyone already knows colonial languages, and if we do, we will screw over those who don't. A global language should be easy for everyone to learn.
you have to be trolling at this point. Esperanto IS easier for everyone to learn compared to any other some what prominent language, that is the entire POINT. Portuguese is much harder for non Portuguese speakers to learn than Esperanto is. Esperanto is not a colonial language, China adopted it literally citing that as a benefit.
The problem with “taking from every language” is it makes it difficult as fuck for EVERYONE because they have to learn completely foreign concepts, whereas many non western speakers already are taught English in schooling, and even if they don’t remember it it still provides a very strong base to build on.
Esperanto is not some “Anglo” language, it’s mostly used in the global south and China. And it’s adoption is not “screwing over” anyone, it literally helps facilitate human interaction that otherwise would not occur
I repeat: there is no such thing as a universally simple language. "non Portuguese speakers" is a comically large group that includes everyone from Spanish to Cherokee speakers. Can you guess which one of those will have an easier time learning either Portuguese or Esperanto?
Esperanto removes some complex features, but keeps others, like consonant clusters, case conjugations, multi-syllable words, etc. (not to mention the vocabulary which is 99% Euro). Those features exist in most European languages but are completely or mostly absent in other parts of the world, and to them seem completely exotic and alien. So no, "taking from every language" would just make it slightly harder for you, but make it easier for everyone else.
The argument against English being the world language is that it gives an unfair advantage to native English speakers. Why should we then give an unfair advantage to European language speakers by adopting specifically Esperanto? Why should we privilege people who were taught colonial languages earlier? You seem to ignore this large group of monolingual people in the global south. What makes them less important?
deleted by creator
English becomes less daunting when you accept the fact that it's actually 3+ languages in a trench coat.
My point is that Esperanto, even if it has no internal irregularities, has a lot of arbitrary features like conjugation at all, when many natural languages don't. It's more complicated than it needs to be, but these features don't present problems for Europeans.
The conjugation is incredibly regular and simple to pick up on honestly, it’s not really a complex system and it’s about as simplified as it can be and still be called conjugation. And their nouns, verbs, and adjectives are labeled to a degree it almost makes some words kinda weird, but at least you know what type of word you’re looking at when you see it
To me a better irreconcilable issue for Esperanto as an interlang is basically it’s phonemic inventory is just straight up a mess if your goal is to have it be universal.
deleted by creator
No one is making that argument? It’s stupid and asinine. Why do you care about “advantage”? Like what the fuck ROFL
Sorry, you're the one trolling now. What is the reason we shouldn't just use English then?
Because it’s hard to learn?
Some aesthetic reason like “its the language of colonialism” is just dumb. a global second language should be easy to learn for a large % of the global population and be easy to learn read and speak
Non-English countries have to spend a considerable amount of time and resources teaching and translating English (which is vulnerable to delays). It's not only about aesthetics, it's about information speed and quality
The point is it is easier for the vast majority of people than learning another language like English or Chinese , what is hard to grasp about that? Any globally adopted language is going to be easier for certain people who speak something similar.
like Chinese people who speak it literally say it is easy to learn
You sounds like the people that argue against universal heathcare/education because people who can afford it will also get it
deleted by creator
I tried learning it for a while and to me it didn't seem Slavic at all, there was no weird sounds and no convoluted case systems. To me it was Spicy Latin
What classes in the global south promote it?
deleted by creator
Ideally, workers would be unable to communicate with each other, while the capitalists should be able to communicate freely, secretly and easily. This was all happening during times of nationalist wars too right?
In my one lesson with esperanto I thought it was distinctly Slavic. My source is my terrible knowledge of Russian.
lojban is better
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I learned it a long time ago bc i read it made language acquisition easier. I can’t speak for everyone but it definitely seemed to help me, I tried learning Spanish and Italian before Learning Esperanto with little to no success but picked up Spanish relatively easy after spending some time with Esperanto.