|
 |
My English teacher really hates Esperanto | ||
 Language Learning Forum : Esperanto |  | |
| Art Newbie Russian Federation Joined 6319 days ago 24 posts - 24 votes Speaks: Russian* | Message 137 of 194 20 November 2007 at 9:07am | IP Logged | |||||
|
> "I don't think we're going anywhere, so I'll stop replying to you."
That is what I was intending to show -- speaking one language isn't a solution for the communication between people from different countries. I'm Russian, you are German, we are speaking one non-native language, English. But the conslusion is you are not going to talk to me. That's why Esperanto for communication between people who don't speak the same language doesn't work too. And it's not that I don't know about Germany and its culture -- I was born in there and lived there, not to mention that German was the second language of my mother. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| frenkeld Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6728 days ago 2042 posts - 2719 votes  Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: German | Message 138 of 194 20 November 2007 at 9:27am | IP Logged | |||||
Sprachprofi, Speaking of prophesies, it may be worthwhile looking at the possible role of technology in communication 50 years from now. Given the technological progress that has taken place between 1957 and 2007, it is not implausible to expect near-perfect, portable, real-time, and very convenient-to-use translating devices to be available by 2057, so it's not even clear how much of a need there will be for any common language by then for the purposes of basic communication. A married couple might still want to speak a common language, but other than that, there might not be a need for one. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6224 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese | Message 139 of 194 20 November 2007 at 9:58am | IP Logged | |||||
To put it another way, Art, a common language is a necessary but not sufficient condition for serious communication. As you have pointed out, quite rightly, a common language is not a panacea. That in no way negates the damage done by not having one. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Sprachprofi Nonaglot Senior Member Germany learnlangs.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6255 days ago 2608 posts - 4866 votes Speaks: German*, English, French, Esperanto, Greek, Mandarin, Latin, Dutch, Italian Studies: Spanish, Arabic (Written), Swahili, Indonesian, Japanese, Modern Hebrew, Portuguese | Message 140 of 194 20 November 2007 at 10:08am | IP Logged | |||||
Yes progress is fascinating at the moment and I'm particularly interested in any advances regarding computers processing human language. My favourite field of study is Computational Linguistics, you see. Unfortunately, seeing that the results of machine translation today are not much more useful than the ones in the 1950s when people first started exploring machine translation, even though the methods have improved, I don't think we can expect things to progress that quickly. I'm not saying it's impossible, but there would have to be a very miraculous breakthrough, and I personally don't believe that the problem of world knowledge will ever be solved completely. Let's see. It will certainly be interesting. Edited by Sprachprofi on 20 November 2007 at 10:09am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
 Hencke Tetraglot Moderator Spain Joined 6679 days ago 2340 posts - 2444 votes Speaks: Swedish*, Finnish, EnglishC2, Spanish Studies: Mandarin Personal Language Map | Message 141 of 194 20 November 2007 at 1:02pm | IP Logged | |||||
Art, you are trying very hard to disprove something that noone has claimed. You are only arguing with yourself on this. There is a big difference between "contributing to" and "being a solution for". Sprachprofi is quite right that you are repeatedly trying to put those words in her mouth, and quite right in deciding to stop replying. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Art Newbie Russian Federation Joined 6319 days ago 24 posts - 24 votes Speaks: Russian* | Message 142 of 194 20 November 2007 at 1:09pm | IP Logged | |||||
Here is a more interesting toptic -- what is a communication, what is a serious communication and what is the result of the communication? From wiki: Communication is a process that allows organisms to exchange information by several methods. Communication requires that all parties understand a common language that is exchanged with each other. Exchange requires feedback. Also, every communication have a goal. Even an idle talk have a goal. Back to my communication with Sprachprofi. Yes, we have a communication, we spoke a common language, but we have different goals and different expectaion of the feedback and the overall outcome of the communication. Sprachprofi, I think, expected me to listen to her reasons, and in heart accept it. Also she, again I think, expected me to follow the standart Western pattern of discussion. I have different goals of the communication, a different pattern of communication. The result of the communication was that Sprachprofi decided to ignore the other party. Back to a 'serious communication' and Esperanto. Esperantists share the common goal, they have the same pattern of communication, they mostly except the same outcome. That where peace come in their communication, that is what they like in the Esperanto movement and in its followers and they want the world follow the same model because in the real world we are all different and the outcome of any communication could be very violent. My point is, to unite the world, to make peace different parties who take part in a communication should share same goals, same patterns of communication, except same outcomes. And this is possible if all the people of the world will think the same. It's not about the common neutral language, it's about the common mindset. That's why I state that the Esperanto movement is very dangerous in its nature. Edited by Art on 20 November 2007 at 1:13pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6224 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese | Message 143 of 194 20 November 2007 at 2:53pm | IP Logged | |||||
You had a presupposition, which is that Esperanto is dangerous, and all Esperantists have common goals, and are seeking to convince you and turn you into a cultist. This makes it rather difficult to communicate with you, because you keep repeating variations based on this theme, without listening to other people. I personally have no such goal. In my view, Esperanto is an interesting experiment, with a unique associated culture, some interesting people are involved in it, and it would be a logical choice for a language to use in many (not all) situations - perhaps not the best choice, but certainly one of the stronger contenders. I'm willing to discuss Esperanto, enjoy dispelling incorrect claims (Esperanto-related or otherwise), and have absolutely no interest in converting anyone to anything, whether political, linguistic, religious, technical, or otherwise. You say that Sprachprofi's goal was that she "expected me to listen to her reasons, and in heart accept it". I have little doubt that she expected you to listen - there is no point in engaging in dialog if one does not expect this. As for having you "in your heart accept it" - I would say that this is more reflective of a paranoia about Esperantists than anything I would attribute to Sprachprofi. I've never heard of an Esperantist who wants to make everyone think the same way. I'm not saying that they don't exist: but if they do, they must be rather quiet or unusual. You said that you had "different goals of the communication"; what were they? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Art Newbie Russian Federation Joined 6319 days ago 24 posts - 24 votes Speaks: Russian* | Message 144 of 194 20 November 2007 at 3:25pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
> You said that you had "different goals of the communication"; what were they?
To show that there are people who have 'presuppositions' that Esperanto is dangerous for very good reasons (and the Esperanto movement is actually); that because there are such people Esperanto will never receive the world support. Just imagine, what if I were to decide to give or not to give the support to Esperanto in Russia, what I would have decided ... No offence, just the real life where 'good guys finish last' :) Edited by Art on 20 November 2007 at 3:27pm 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. |
