Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?

"Raymond" == Raymond S Wise <mplsray@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Raymond> Preserving the diversity of natural languages is *not*
Raymond> the paramount idea of Esperanto. The paramount idea of
Raymond> Esperanto is that *humanity is one huge family whose
Raymond> members should be able to communicate with each other on
Raymond> an equal basis.*

"On an equal basis"? Then why are Esperantists telling people that
there are _denaskuloj Esperantaj_? And why would you find the
Eurocentric design of Esperanto acceptable?



Raymond> Most Esperantists believe that using Esperanto as a
Raymond> lingua franca would accomplish this better than using a
Raymond> natural language such as English, and this may be so, as
Raymond> I will explain below.

I can't see how Esperanto provides a "more equal" basis than English
for a chat between a Japanese and a Malay speaker, when they don't
know the language of one another.


Raymond> However, any lingua franca that is spoken throughout the
Raymond> world is going to accelerate the demise of some
Raymond> languages, especially minority languages
...
Raymond> That is because using such a language allows one to live
Raymond> and work where one could not do so before.

Then, isn't this global lingua fraca (if it exists) and ideal
candidate for international communication? Even more ideal than
Esperanto!

If you want to use as lingua franca a language that one cannot live
and work with, why not revive ancient Greek or use classic Chinese
with Middle Chinese pronunciations? What's the point of inventing yet
another language? And if an invention is justifiable, why is
Esperanto better than Klingon, Lojban, interlingual, etc.?


Raymond> I've believed since reading Mario Pei's comments on the
Raymond> matter that an international language will lead to the
Raymond> demise of some languages, and John McWhorter, in his book
Raymond> *The Power of Babel,* brings up a point I had not
Raymond> considered before. People who share only the lingua
Raymond> franca as a common language will get married and use only
Raymond> the lingua franca in the home. This happens now in the
Raymond> case of people who come from villages where different
Raymond> languages are spoken, to live in a city where a majority
Raymond> language is spoken.

And what could prevent the same thing from happening to Esperanto, if
it were successful?


Raymond> I've discussed such matters with other Esperantists, and
Raymond> I have come to agree with them that one advantage which
Raymond> Esperanto has over a natural language such as English
Raymond> used as a lingua franca is the point about equality.

Sorry, I don't find it equals. Esperanto is simply Eurocentric.


Raymond> It is much more likely that a person can gain a
Raymond> native-speaker fluency in Esperanto compared to a native
Raymond> speaker of the language than it is for a person learning
Raymond> English as a second language to gain a native-speaker
Raymond> fluency.

This is an unjustified, ungrounded claim. I can make a similar claim
for Lojban and Klingon too. it's easy to claim without giving
evidence.



Raymond> It's the public we have to convince.

And you've been failing, I'm afraid.



Raymond> I made that point because you're setting up a situation
Raymond> where Esperantists are damned if they do and damned if
Raymond> they don't.

No. It's the Esperantists who set up that situation. e.g. on the one
hand, they tell people Esperant provides an equal basis for
communication because it is nobody's mother tongue. On the other
hand, they tell people proudly that there ARE native speakers of
Esperanto. They're shooting themselves in the feet.

Another situation that them create themselves. From time to time,
there are people who critize Esperanto by posting in English in
soc.culture.esperanto. The Esperantists respond by saying that "you
have no right to critize Esperanto's design, because you don't use
that language." OK. However, occasionally, there are people who post
criticisms against Esperanto *in Esperanto*. And this time, the
reponses read: "Now, you're an Esperanto speaker. You should be in
our camp and support Esperanto, rather than criticising it. It
doesn't make sense to criticise Esperanto in Esperanto." blah blah
blah




--
Lee Sau Dan 李守敦 ~{@nJX6X~}

E-mail: danlee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
    ... Raymond> the paramount idea of Esperanto. ... They tell them there native speakers of Esperanto to counter the idea ... being a true language and not merely some sort of code or a pidgin is ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
    ... Raymond> They tell them there native speakers of Esperanto to ... >> make sense to criticise Esperanto in Esperanto." ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: unnatural languages
    ... Esperanto seems rather irrational and emotional. ... the right to use that language if they choose. ... The entire concept of a lingua franca that belongs to no one is ... arose from a bunch of dumb people who got the dumb idea in their heads ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Eventuale vi emus iel reagi...
    ... "Fans of the Esperanto language are in Florence for their 91st World ... Why would artificiality be wrong? ... were told there were literary translations from over 60 languages. ...
    (soc.culture.esperanto)
  • Re: unnatural languages
    ... Esperanto are not a new phenomenon. ... Esperanto-related creoloid variety) as their native language? ... You are entirely ignorant of Irish sociolinguistics, ... generations of Irish speakers by now. ...
    (sci.lang)