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.
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 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?
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
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.