Permanently Deleted

    • carbohydra [des/pair]
      ·
      3 years ago

      It's a pretty bad way since it was only based on European languages. Also it uses gender.

        • carbohydra [des/pair]
          ·
          3 years ago

          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

          • fed [none/use name]
            ·
            3 years ago

            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

            • carbohydra [des/pair]
              ·
              3 years ago

              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?

              • fed [none/use name]
                ·
                edit-2
                3 years ago

                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

                • carbohydra [des/pair]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 years ago

                  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

                  • fed [none/use name]
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 years ago

                    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

            • carbohydra [des/pair]
              ·
              edit-2
              3 years ago

              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?

                • carbohydra [des/pair]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  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?

              • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]
                ·
                3 years ago

                In my one lesson with esperanto I thought it was distinctly Slavic. My source is my terrible knowledge of Russian.