| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > |
Universal Language for the Human Race. Thread poster: Syeda Tanbira Zaman
|
|---|
| Very difficult | Apr 18, 2007 |
I think it's very difficult..if not IMPOSSIBLE..to construct such a language. Unfortunately I dare add.
| | | |
SilviuM
Romania
Local time: 22:55
Romanian to English
+ ...
| Bad idea for uniformity | Jul 30, 2008 |
Of course, no intent in making you feel out-of-touch with human nature, dear Prozians, but... do you realize what you're proposing?! Uniformity! Pure and simple! Should we give any leeway to 'ideals' such as those of Lucas? Should we all speak, at one point,.. Gallach?!
Now, we don't need any Babylonian-type (i.e., that's if Babylon ever existed - of course, i... See more Of course, no intent in making you feel out-of-touch with human nature, dear Prozians, but... do you realize what you're proposing?! Uniformity! Pure and simple! Should we give any leeway to 'ideals' such as those of Lucas? Should we all speak, at one point,.. Gallach?!
Now, we don't need any Babylonian-type (i.e., that's if Babylon ever existed - of course, it didn't; it's a myth derived from distorted legends / folktale -) of language, like that spoken by Enoch (a myth kind of persona, again). Far from it! What we do need, however, is some sort of... common-sense, methinks. Common - sense from native speakers worldwide.
Why? Because they tend to adopt one language, usually imposed by economic reasons by certain very influential national powers to other countries, as dominant. So, in this context, please, remember French, please remember Italian, please remember German and, PLEASE, remember English(!) Then again, we're living the times when English is dominant, especially in its American dialectal form.
As for effective means of understanding each other, our linguistic nuances especially, who knows, maybe of some sort of... universal (i.e., global-oriented) translation - interpretation nanites too, but that... in the far - far future.
N.B. 1: I don't want to look like a nitwit in linguistics, in all, but... Esperanto does try to become THE language, unfortunately. It's a bad idea with a good and/or noble intent...
N.B. 2: Who knows still, maybe we'll have THE Romanian-based language with Romanian-based semantics and syntax aside from Romanian-based vocab and morphology, of course. THEN and only then we'll become truly interesting for the rest of the world, right?! Wrong...
Remember "Farscape"?
[Editat la 2008-07-30 17:46]
[Editat la 2008-07-30 18:44] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Krys Williams 
United Kingdom
Local time: 20:55
Member (2003)
Polish to English
+ ...
| Not THE language, but a common second language | Jul 30, 2008 |
I was active in the Esperanto movement for more than a decade and have a reasonable idea about its objectives. Esperanto does not seek to become the only language, but to be a universal second language, so that communication between speakers of different languages is not dependent on mastery of those languages. A non-native speaker is nearly always at a disadvantage. With Esperanto, everyone is a non-native speaker, so the field is more equal.
Secondly, on account of its total regu... See more I was active in the Esperanto movement for more than a decade and have a reasonable idea about its objectives. Esperanto does not seek to become the only language, but to be a universal second language, so that communication between speakers of different languages is not dependent on mastery of those languages. A non-native speaker is nearly always at a disadvantage. With Esperanto, everyone is a non-native speaker, so the field is more equal.
Secondly, on account of its total regularity of grammar, Esperanto is quicker and simpler to master than "natural" languages. Thus, it is possible to pick up enough to hold a basic conversation in one month or less. Furthermore, learning Esperanto eases the process of learning other languages. This has been shown in studies, where children who were taught Esperanto were subsequently more successful in studies of other languages than children who were just taught the other languages. I also know this from personal experience. I was hopeless at languages when I was at school. After I learned Esperanto, in my thirties, I gained an understanding of how languages are structured. Without this, I would never have dreamt of, let alone succeeded in, becoming a sought-after freelance translator in my professional specialty of biomedicine.
Thirdly, the Esperanto movement is a strong defender of minority languages. Using Esperanto as a common vehicle of communication would avoid what might be called the linguistic imperialism of English today, and who knows what language tomorrow.
Fourthly, Esperanto can serve as a very useful bridging language for translation. Despite its grammatical regularity, it is extremely flexible, because every word root can be used as noun, verb, adjective, adverb; prefixes and suffixes can be added to every root to give even more nuances; and roots can be glued together ad libitum. A skilled speaker of Esperanto can reproduce the vagaries his/her own native language in a way that can be instantly understood and appreciated.
Fifthly, I still remember with huge pleasure the buzz I felt when engaged in animated conversation on every subject under the sun with a diverse group of people, between whom there was no single common language apart from Esperanto
[Edited at 2008-07-30 19:38] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
SilviuM
Romania
Local time: 22:55
Romanian to English
+ ...
| Good intents and odd results... | Jul 30, 2008 |
Krys Williams wrote:
Esperanto does not seek to become the only language, but to be a universal second language, so that communication between speakers of different languages is not dependent on mastery of those languages. A non-native speaker is nearly always at a disadvantage. With Esperanto, everyone is a non-native speaker, so the field is more equal.
Secondly, on account of its total regularity of grammar, Esperanto is quicker and simpler to master than "natural" languages. Thus, it is possible to pick up enough to hold a basic conversation in one month or less. Furthermore, learning Esperanto eases the process of learning other languages.
After I learned Esperanto, in my thirties, I gained an understanding of how languages are structured. Without this, I would never have dreamt of, let alone succeeded in, becoming a sought-after freelance translator in my professional specialty of biomedicine.
Thirdly, the Esperanto movement is a strong defender of minority languages. Using Esperanto as a common vehicle of communication would avoid what might be called the linguistic imperialism of English today, and who knows what language tomorrow.
Fourthly, Esperanto can serve as a very useful bridging language for translation. Despite its grammatical regularity, it is extremely flexible (...). [...] A skilled speaker of Esperanto can reproduce the vagaries his/her own native language in a way that can be instantly understood and appreciated.[/quote]
I do not question these realities. However, English is known also almost by every single peasant in this world. They too can (i.e., rudimentary) say: "Hellow!" or "Helo!" or "Halo!" (wait, that's German-like ) and "No problem!" with ease. And that's their... second language, in a sense. They use it for biz (vending and countryside-oriented tourism) only, of course.
As for Esperanto's flexibility, indeed, it's real; I can notice it. What it resembles with, from a vocabulary / lexical point of view? Well,.. with: Portuguese, Hungarian, Spanish, Italian, French, Greek, Polish...
In any case, causes of all sorts have to always be regarded with... care. They tend to become... somewhat unpredictable, at one point. I mean, every single project starts with a good intent, as this one had (i.e., the one as a dream of offering each and every person on this planet the chance of speaking a global-like second language), and it turns out... quite oddly.
P.S. It should REMAIN at this stage: that of proposition for using a 'native' second language.
[Editat la 2008-07-31 09:06]
| | | |
kanajlo
Local time: 15:55
Esperanto to English
+ ...
| Bridge language for the human race | Oct 10, 2008 |
People often overlook the grammatical and lexically agglutinative flexibility of Esperanto, which makes it ideal for non-European students. For example, I can frame a sentence in Esperanto that allows the verb to come first, or the subject, or the object, and I will still be understood.
I see a tree.
Mi vidas arbon.
Arbon mi vidas.
Vidas mi arbon.
(Would any native speaker of English say, "See I a tree"?)
| | | |
| Similar to Sanskrit | Mar 4, 2009 |
Sanskrit is, arguably the most ancient language on this earth. As Kanajlo says for Esperanto, these laws hold true in Sanskrit where such permutations are possible.
[Edited at 2009-03-04 19:29 GMT]
| | | |
| Not an attractive idea.. | Mar 19, 2009 |
As a translator and first of all as a languages lover, a common language to everyone on this planet is something that I wouldn't like at all.
Many people consider translation and languages as a simple way of communication. I don't. Every time I use a different language, I also imagine the country/countries, the people, the culture that go along with this language, and it's a wonderful feeling.
No, I don't want any kind of common language, I want all the languages of the world!
| | |
|
|
|
| Universal Language | Apr 30, 2010 |
How can anyone really argue that a fully functioning, comprehensive "Universal Language" would not be a great thing in and of itself? Of course, the other details are what will most certainly cause disagreement.
1. Taught in schools in all countries as the World/Universal Language
2. No different than teaching English in schools of other countries for the benefit of business
Because translators would have to look for other work is a reason to oppose the idea? Come... See more How can anyone really argue that a fully functioning, comprehensive "Universal Language" would not be a great thing in and of itself? Of course, the other details are what will most certainly cause disagreement.
1. Taught in schools in all countries as the World/Universal Language
2. No different than teaching English in schools of other countries for the benefit of business
Because translators would have to look for other work is a reason to oppose the idea? Come on! It would take many generations for this idea to come to fruition, plenty of time to look for other work. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
| ONE language? No way! | Apr 30, 2010 |
To propose that all other languages be discarded and replaced by a common language is absurd. First of all, it COULD never happen. There would be so much oppostion on a million fronts that it would never take off. However, the idea of a Universal Language to increase understanding, trade, international cooperation and a feeling of unity is not a bad idea is it? I know I'm sounding Bahai'i Faith or New World Orderish, but I don't see it as a bad thing.
| | | |
Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 21:55
French to German
+ ...
| There already are "universal languages"... | Apr 30, 2010 |
but none that could be really (immediately) useful for business and the like.
| | | |
| Some thoughts | Apr 30, 2010 |
JustMi wrote:
To propose that all other languages be discarded and replaced by a common language is absurd. First of all, it COULD never happen. There would be so much oppostion on a million fronts that it would never take off. However, the idea of a Universal Language to increase understanding, trade, international cooperation and a feeling of unity is not a bad idea is it? I know I'm sounding Bahai'i Faith or New World Orderish, but I don't see it as a bad thing.
But my friend, can you tell me what language are we using just now to communicate?
I think that thinking about a new language (I did not use "artificial") that could be taught to all the people in the world would be to separate man from language. Language is man, man is language. If you want to change the language, you have to change the man, but to change the man you have to change the whole setting in which people live. Promoting a single language would be as useless as promoting the same food for everyone: each place in the world has different living conditions, people live differently in each place, and language is also part of that, as the people's main tool for survival and storage and transmission of local knowledge.
Let me add that it --IMHO-- it would be pretty absurd to devote huge resources to teach people an universal language when 99% of the population of the world only communicates with people within their same region in their lives. I think it would be far more interesting to dedicate those resources to teach people to read and write in their first language.
| | |
|
|
|
| Yes absolutely | Jun 27, 2010 |
Laurent KRAULAND wrote:
There are already univrsal languages
but none that could be really (immediately) useful for business and the like.
English is already THE universal language, in my life I was able to communicate in English all over the world, it is also easy for a mere communication, but yes not (really) at high level (for business like you state).
Yes Tomàs we are multicultural here and have a common language to communicate
No need for a common artificial language in my opinion.
[Edited at 2010-06-27 20:28 GMT]
| | | |
apk12
Germany
Local time: 21:55
English to German
+ ...
| I love my profession | Jun 27, 2010 |
so I can't really see a sense in a 'universal language' :] - I prefer to leave this search for universality to funny scientists (universal grammar/chomsky, although he's also not talking about a real universality but instead about the theoretical possibility of a common grammar as a base of all languages - "an innate set of linguistic principles shared by all humans"), don't need this in my real working environment.
[Edited at 2010-06-27 08:59 GMT]
| | | |
The idea of an universal language is an utopia. It simply can not work. Every language has its own dialects. Very often speakers of different dialects of the same language can barely understand each other.
An eventually universal language would have sooner or later hundreds of dialects around the world (even in the business field). So what's the point?
| | | |
| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > |
Login to reply/comment 
