Esperanto language (An artificial language or our future way of communication) - by MissJane
05.01.2011, 22:55
The thread dedicated to the Esperanto language did not provoke a real heat of discussion but nevertheless it merits a great deal of attention. Since we are people who are more or less interested in languages and the way of their development, it is not surprising that the problem of one language for everyone does not let us remain indifferent. The basic issue that lies at the bottom of this forum discussion is whether we need such kind of a language or not. Generally, the netters come to the conclusion that it is not so vital to have one language for all, but some of them admit that it would be beneficial for science to have it. The Esperanto language seems to be ideally created for this particular sphere of life. Since it is not as colorful and expressive as natural languages are, it perfectly meets the requirements of a scientific language – the words are simple, based on common Indo-European roots, and rich in derivatives, whereas grammar contains almost no exceptions and is based on a set of stable rules. However, Esperanto receives a lot of negative remarks being “a language with no future”, “the thing that hasn’t made much headway”, “an experiment that failed”, “unable to solve the pressing problem of language barrier”, “an artificial and dead language”. Another point that is raised in this thread concerns the difference between a global and universal language. The forum users state it sounds reasonable to strive for attaining one global language, but a universal one is almost improbable. There is no doubt that national languages will never be wiped out no matter how simple and convenient a new made-up language turns out to be. It is accepted that a global language could serve the purpose of making communication easier and more successful, but it seems unbelievable that this language could comprise all the diversities of cultural phenomena, language clichés, speech patterns and etiquette. On the whole, the idea of creating one global language (or of resuming the usage of Esperanto) verges on impossibility. The most frequent argument proposed is that we already have the English language as a means of international communication. The number of people who learn to speak English is amazing, though Chinese and Spanish exceed English in the amount of native speakers. This proves we already possess languages that are widespread and gaining more and more recognition. Then a logical question is brought into the foreground: what for do we need one more language to learn? Why not use the ones available? Do we need to waste our energy and efforts creating things that will be a priori destined for failure? Perhaps, it is a bit early to draw foregone conclusions, especially now, in the epoch of new discoveries and unconventional decisions, but the general view on the problem is rather pessimistic. People do not believe that there will be times of complete mutual understanding and international peace. And it does not seem probable that even some of the ethnic conflicts will be solved with the help of one, almighty and unifying language which can destroy mental and cultural barriers between nations and countries. However, we’d better not be so critical about the actual state of events and moreover, we should not forebode the wistful future of the planet.
