Go to Elinjo's World
- Add a comment
- Go to Should English be the universal language?
elinjo
I moved from one country to another, Scotland to Canada and I learned the Canadian language within days. In Tim Hortons it is 'Medium Double, Double,' and in the beer store it is either '24 or 18 Labatt.'
Seriously, I must admit to being extremely lazy about learning the second language in Canada, mostly because French Canadians speak English and change into that language as soon as I utter the first word.
posted by
johnmacnab
on August 6, 2009 at 6:11 AM
| link to this | reply
Time's up!
THank you everybody for reflecting on this topic, I appreciate it very much! Having spent a lot of time commenting on your wonderful comments I must rush off to write my daily blurb.
posted by
elinjo
on August 6, 2009 at 12:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: culture.
Instead of calling it a universal language, let's call it an auxiliary language. It would be a tragedy to campaign for just one language.
You are quite right about the volume of culture, however supposing you look at it slightly differently. By means of an auxiliary language we can enjoy the benefits of other cultures. For example I've read Tolstoy etc in English; just imagine if it were only available in Russian? Many, many literary works have been translated into Esperanto.
http://esperanto-usa.org/en/node/1513
posted by
elinjo
on August 6, 2009 at 12:24 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Expectations to immigrants - Lustorlove.
When you move to another country one of the top priorities should be to learn the language of your new fellow citizens. Coming from a family with a long history of migration I know all about that. My parents gave English such a high priority they neglected/ignored passing on their mother-tongue - Yiddish. In doing so their children lost out not only with regard to a language but also with regard to a culture. I'm not criticizing them; they did what they thought was necessary and I'm sure a lot of Blogit members could tell similar stories about their families.
My plea is that we should not throw the baby out with the bath-water! Global travelers have to be prepared to learn new tricks, but we should not forget the old ones.
posted by
elinjo
on August 6, 2009 at 12:16 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Nautikos - everybody's mother tongue
Thank you for such a long response. As you so rightly say this is a very, very complicated subject. I would like to take issue with you about the following:
'But I don’t think Esperanto will ever be anyone’s mother tongue…'
Heaven forbid that anybody would ever try to impose Esperanto or any other language on the world as a mother tongue! It is meant as an auxiliary language that can be used for international communication and certainly not as a substitute for other languages. By choosing a relatively easily learnt auxiliary language, schools would have more resources to foster the mother tongue. I can assure you that more and more people in my adopted country Denmark that are worried about their own beautiful and unique language and culture.
One of the reasons that the world's stock of at present 6000 languages is dwindling is that the people of the world are neglecting their mother tongues in order to learn the dominant languages in their region. English is not the only culprit. For example: the Berber language is under pressure in Morocco because of the pressure to use Arabic - I quote my well-educated Moroccan Berber friend here. In former French speaking parts of Africa native languages are losing out because of the necessity to use French etc, etc.
Our beautiful mother- tongue English is doing very, very nicely as a de facto auxiliary language; but it is not unchallenged by other people's equally beautiful mother tongues: French for example. One good argument for choosing Esperanto is that it is more neutral than other languages.
posted by
elinjo
on August 5, 2009 at 11:57 PM
| link to this | reply
elinjo
Well I'm all for English of course, and even though I learned enough French to be able to live in Quebec for most of my life, I'm no linguist.Seems to me that for Esperanto not to have made a larger impression since the 1800's, not much point in me learning it. Of course living next door to the U.S.A. and seeing all that has been accomplished there with mostly English, that's good enough for my life. Great post luv
posted by
WileyJohn
on August 5, 2009 at 9:43 PM
| link to this | reply
People like me are lazy and I really think that I agreewith Naut's comments
I'm not particularly proud of that mind you.
posted by
Kabu
on August 5, 2009 at 8:45 PM
| link to this | reply
Elinjo
A very interesting question, which would require a rather lengthy response to do it full justice.
English has become the lingua franca for many parts of the world by default, for reasons of history and because ‘simple’ English is easy to learn and use.
Whether that should be the case is another issue, but it is. Some people may regret that, but what to do about it? Should we have a different one? More concretely, should we introduce another, ‘artificial’ language, (yep, e.g. Esperanto, lol,) and enforce its use?
Certainly not, not only because it ought not to be done, but also because it cannot be done! One cannot 'graft' a language on populations...Among other things, there are vast emotional dimensions involved...
In any case, knowing what we do about the way languages form and change over time, even in an ‘ideal’ world (whatever that is) a language does not remain static. There are already many different forms of English, and there will be more.
Even if we can still agree on ‘standard’ English today, a few hundred years from now regional differences will be so pronounced that they will constitute different languages. (I suggest that trend may be slowed, but no reversed by the proliferation of ‘global’ communication.)
What is really happening is that there are now different languages in various fields of endeavor, especially technology and science, that are so specialized and esoteric that they are incomprehensible to anyone on the outside
But, as do many others, I like the diversity represented by different languages, and the diversity of thinking they entail. (As it is, many tribal languages are disappearing at an alarming rate.)
I understand (well, at least I think I understand) some of the certainly well-intentioned, idealistic notions that lead people to embrace an undertaking such as Esperanto, and they certainly have their place. But I don’t think Esperanto will ever be anyone’s mother tongue…
Just some quick thoughts…
posted by
Nautikos
on August 5, 2009 at 6:17 PM
| link to this | reply
I believe if you are not native to the country you live in you should try to learn the language well enough to speak it, I live in Ca and it seems the native language is Spanish and to be honest it makes me upset when people that live here dont even try to speak English and use it as a crutch and people cater to them. Those at my job that speak Spanish do so much better then if you are just English speaking. Personally I dont feel I should have to learn Spanish. My daughters bf mom doesnt speak or know how to read English and doesnt plan on learning, but all her kids speak mainly English and do very well in school. I think she could do so much better in life if she did.
posted by
Lanetay
on August 5, 2009 at 5:42 PM
| link to this | reply
Personally, I've always liked the diversity of many languages, even if I don't understand what they say. I think the universal language should be in a loving attituted, a smiling facial expression, helpful body language. If everyone learned a universal language, an awful lot of translators would be out of jobs.
posted by
TAPS.
on August 5, 2009 at 12:02 PM
| link to this | reply
I don't think there should be a universal language. Too much culture exists with different languages.
posted by
FormerStudentIntern
on August 5, 2009 at 11:59 AM
| link to this | reply
Elinjo
Interesting article - thanks.
posted by
Troosha
on August 5, 2009 at 10:45 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Troosha language choice for air traffic control.
This is one of the spheres where it is vital to have an international language. The Quebec suggestion was a total no-no, at least under present circumstances. You're right about Esperanto having a long way to go before it becomes universally accepted. For the time being discussing it makes people aware that not all people on our planet accept that English is a fair choice as an international language. In addition it reminds us that many languages and their cultures are in danger of disappearing partly because of the necessity to promote English and English culture so they can compete.
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0215-language.html
posted by
elinjo
on August 5, 2009 at 9:37 AM
| link to this | reply
Elinjo
I’ve always thought of Air Traffic Controllers as setting the stage for which language should be used thus establishing the “international” language. Currently air traffic is moved along in English. I remember not so long ago our province of Quebec proposed that Air Traffic Controllers speak French – yeah, like that went over like a lead balloon. Anyway, I know how passionate you are about Esperanto but I think we’ve got a long way to go for it to surpass the dominance of English. But you’re right on a couple of points – we should speak the language of our country of residence, and that people who speak English are lazy about learning new languages.
posted by
Troosha
on August 5, 2009 at 8:14 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Leave it as is. If we all spoke the same language,
Well that's certainly another way of looking at the situation.
Thanks for visiting Pat.
posted by
elinjo
on August 5, 2009 at 5:49 AM
| link to this | reply
Leave it as is. If we all spoke the same language,
there'd be more conspiracies, more rock 'em, sock 'em fights because the meaning of an insult was crystal clear. Let's leave a little confusion, a few smiles.
posted by
Pat_B
on August 5, 2009 at 5:11 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Communication problems in India.
Thanks NIta for reading and commenting on this post.
Yes, it must be very difficult for Indians. Citizens of the European Union have the same problem; 27 member states and 23 official languages. The following site includes a lot of information about multilingual policy in the E.U., though it does not quote the cost to European taxpayers.
http://europa.eu/languages/en/home Some people think the answer is to accept that English should be the official language, however if that were so the French for one would be up in arms.
Look after yourself!
posted by
elinjo
on August 5, 2009 at 4:35 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: lazy English speakers.
I am just as lazy as the next person. It wasn't until I moved to Denmark that I really buckled down to learning another language - Danish; Latin and French at school were just subjects and had very little relationship to real life situations. Even in Denmark not everybody speaks English and when you travel to Poland (one of our neighbors) many have never learnt it; Russian and German are more common.
posted by
elinjo
on August 5, 2009 at 4:25 AM
| link to this | reply
This is a major debate in India too, where every state has a different language, and people from the north and south have communication problems with each other!
posted by
Nita09
on August 5, 2009 at 4:12 AM
| link to this | reply
Hmm. Personally I'm glad it's English as I probably couldn't communicate at all otherwise (being one of those lazy English speakers...)
posted by
Rockingrector_retd
on August 5, 2009 at 2:54 AM
| link to this | reply
Thank you my friend!
posted by
Chilitree
on August 5, 2009 at 12:52 AM
| link to this | reply