|
 |
Is a universal language undesirable? | ||
Tags: Lingua franca | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| Raccoon Newbie United States Joined 4643 days ago 4 posts - 11 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish, Esperanto | Message 1 of 75 25 March 2012 at 12:10am | IP Logged | ||
|
This is a question that I've been considering for a while:
What language should everyone learn? This question is important to me, because I believe that better communication leads to greater peace and understanding. Because this post is a little long, I'll just summarize here: I believe that a universal language is undesireable. I believe that encouraging multi-lingualism is the best alternative. I arrived at that conclusion in a few steps. First, before I became interested in learning languages, I realized that English is the most popular language, in terms of the geographical spread of English-speakers. Thus, I believed (like many other people) that everyone should learn English. I then decided that I should learn Spanish, because as a US American, it would be a useful skill for me. And as I studied, I realized how difficult language-learning can be. Irregular conjugations, idioms, regional variations, and other complicating factors make it difficult to master a language. And it got me to think about the richness of my own language. English is very rich language, with a rich history. We have words with roots from various northern-European peoples in contact with England. Then the Normans conquered England, and French got tossed in the mix. Then the British imperialized the East Coast, the US spread to its current area, and Native American words were incorporated. Meanwhile, immigrants from Germany, Ireland, Scottland, Holland, China, South America, Mexico, and so on and so forth came, and further contributed to American English. This is not to mention the numerous cultural references from English-language movies, books, radio broadcasts, news broadcasts, etc. In effect, English has a richness that lends itself well to precise expression. Take, for example, our various words referring to happiness that I can think of off the top of my head: happiness, joy, cheer, bliss, contentment, gladness, elation, etc. These are not synonyms; each has a specific connotation which refers to a specific kind of happiness. Most other concepts have a similarly-rich variety of expression. This richness, however, makes English a very poor condidate for a universal language. First, because one must learn more vocabulary to understand English than almost any other language out there. Second, because our written language and spoken languege are only loosely connected. On must learn both the written AND the spoken form for every word. Third, because English is unusually full of irregularities in spelling, syntax, conjugation, etc. And so, I decided that if there should be a universal language, it should have a minimal vocabulary, a very regular grammar, and still allow for a full range of expression. Esperanto, by far the most popular international auxiallary language, seemd to be the best solution. Esperanto seems to me like a handshake, where everyone goes halfway and does their fair share. So I started studying it half a month ago. People have told me that learning an artificial language is a waste of time, because it'll never become as popular as any of the major natural languages. Too me, these arguments seem unfair, in the sense that Esperanto isn't MEANT to be a first language or do the job of a first language. However, there is an element of truth to these arguments, and it is this: Most people don't like learning more languages than are strictly necessary in their daily lives, and this is the problem. Even in countries where everyone MUST learn a foreign language in school, most people learn the language, pass the class, and forget everything. In Japan, for example, where students must learn English, most people outside of school speak English poorly, if at all. This goes to show two things. First, that imposing the English language (or any other) on people is unhelpful. Lots of people (especially outside Europe / the Americas) find the English language difficult to learn or retain. But more importantly, people don't like being imperialized. I've heard from multiple people that being told "you HAVE to learn English" feels like imperialism. Even if they don't express themselves as such, I'm sure many people feel that instinctual resistance to having things forced upon them when learning English. And honestly, I don't want people to view my language like that. Second, we should make multi-lingualism a desireable part of our society. Not by forcing everyone to learn English or Esperanto or what-have-you. Rather, by making multi-lingualism culturally desireable. Already, most colleges have a foreign-language requirement. Our cultures recognize that learning another language is the "smart" thing to do. But it should also be the cool thing, and the fun thing, and the friendly thing to do. I realize that without a universal language, every single person won't be understood by everyone else. But really, the question is moot, since I think that having a universal language is more problematic than helpful. But at least with multi-lingualism, everyone can understand and be understood by people outside the bubble of their first language. And that is what's important. In short, I think that multi-lingualism is a far better solution for international cooperation and understanding that having any "universal" language. I imagine this topic may have been discussed before, but I couldn't find this spicific topic while searching. I'm interested in what others have to say about this topic! 8 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| manish Triglot Groupie Romania Joined 5544 days ago 88 posts - 136 votes  Speaks: Romanian*, English, German Studies: Spanish | Message 2 of 75 25 March 2012 at 12:34am | IP Logged | ||
|
I agree that encouraging multilingualism and language-learning is the way to go, since a universal language will probably never be achieved.
Making yourself understood to and being able to communicate with as many people as possible can only be achieved through learning as many languages as you can. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| druckfehler Triglot Senior Member Germany Joined 4866 days ago 1181 posts - 1912 votes Speaks: German*, EnglishC2, Korean Studies: Persian | Message 3 of 75 25 March 2012 at 12:42am | IP Logged | ||
|
So you think in order to communicate with people from all over the world everyone should learn thousands of languages? Or just restrict our contacts to speakers of a couple of languages and learn those? And all this while you acknowledge that most people don't like to learn many languages?
Sorry for playing devil's advocate :) Of course I'm all for learning many languages and I think it has more benefits than most people outside of this forum care to acknowledge. I also think it's great that you don't think everyone should have to learn your language while you don't learn any, because you're lucky enough to be born as a speaker of the international language. But without English (or another international language) I don't think globalisation and all its benefits and problems would exist. Of course English became the global language not because it's easy, but because of colonialism and people talk about postcolonialism for a reason - it's not possible to undo the effects of colonisation (not only in regard language) and it'll remain a topic for a long time to come. 11 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| iguanamon Pentaglot Senior Member Virgin Islands Speaks: Ladino Joined 5260 days ago 2241 posts - 6731 votes Speaks: English*, Spanish, Portuguese, Haitian Creole, Creole (French) | Message 4 of 75 25 March 2012 at 1:21am | IP Logged | ||
Welcome to the forum, @Racoon. I must disagree with your premise about better communication leading to greater peace. I wish it were that easy! Some of the most deadliest and destructive wars have been so-called "civil" wars. More Americans died in the US Civil War than in all of the US' other wars- combined. Both sides spoke English. The Korean War and the Vietnam War were both civil wars, albeit with outside partners. The Vietnam War led to the "killing fields" in Cambodia when the Khmer Rouge went on a rampage against their own people. More recently, we have the example of the Balkan War where the languages were mutually intelligible. Presently, Syria is involved in a de-facto "civil" war- one in which both sides speak the same dialect of Arabic. I could go on. Mankind's history is replete with this sort of thing. Whilst I do think communication and understanding are important, I think equanimity with our fellow humans is most important. Sadly, learning a language, or learning ten languages, is easy in comparison to seeing others as we see ourselves. Again, welcome to the forum. I look forward to seeing more of your posts. Edited by iguanamon on 25 March 2012 at 1:27am 17 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Medulin Tetraglot Senior Member Croatia Joined 4666 days ago 1199 posts - 2192 votes Speaks: Croatian*, English, Spanish, Portuguese Studies: Norwegian, Hindi, Nepali | Message 5 of 75 25 March 2012 at 1:25am | IP Logged | ||
|
95% of all medical scientific literature (research articles, journals) is published in English.
Medical English is closer to Latin than Medical German is. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| onurdolar Diglot Groupie TurkeyRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 4650 days ago 98 posts - 147 votes Speaks: Turkish*, English Studies: Italian, German | Message 6 of 75 25 March 2012 at 7:31pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I believe every language is a different way of thinking, a different "style" of living.
There is a direct correlation between how people think and how their language works. Uniformity is almost always bad, as the motto of European Union says we should be "united in diversity". I agree to you that multilingualism and multiculturalism should be encouraged. 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Raccoon Newbie United States Joined 4643 days ago 4 posts - 11 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Spanish, Esperanto | Message 7 of 75 25 March 2012 at 11:21pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Thank you all for the warm welcome!
@manish: Agreed. Plus, another effect of learning a new language is being able to think and act outside the boundries of one language. If language affects how we think, and if we learn many languages, could that be a step toward a higher form of flexible thought? @drukfehler: There certainly is a valid point to discuss in your first paragraph. If everyone knows a few languages, then most people can communicate with most other people. Nothing's perfect. But HOW do we make it so that people WANT to learn languages? I don't know precisely, but I suspect that it involves promoting multi-lingualism as being cool. Heh, I have no problem with English's popularity. But I'd love it if people learned my language because they want to, not because they must. I'd love to see colonialism give way to a love of diversity. @iguanamon: You make a great point! People understanding each other's words is important, but they also need to understand each other's minds and hearts. Multi-lingualism is one of many difficult steps toward cooperation. @Medulin: I tried looking up medical literature in Spanish and Esperanto. You're not kidding! :P @onurdolar: My thoughts exactly! Also, I like that phrase of the EU, "united in diversity." I've never heard it before, but it's cool! 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Thor1987 Groupie Canada Joined 4732 days ago 65 posts - 84 votes Studies: German | Message 8 of 75 26 March 2012 at 5:17am | IP Logged | ||
|
Meh my personal view is that a common language is bad. With a common language, good
idea's travel fast no doubt, but so do bad ones. Just think of the global financial crisis all the western economies were hit hardest, as all the asia countries were burned by the asian financial crisis. Lucky us the east didn't quit follow us off a cliff. Also as a canadian it's pretty hard not to be resentful of the US's dominance in our media. It'd be nice to imagine a canada where people didn't follow america's every step. 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
