tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) (01/01/86)
A month or so ago, I asked for some information about the planetary
languages, such as Esperanto. As a newcomer to the net, I was quite
unaware that the subject had been kicked around more than once.
I received a great deal of information. Many enthusiastic
Esperantists helped me out, and a number of individuals offered
thoughtful criticisms of the planetary language idea.
The critics of planetary language argued that (1) a common language
cannot guarantee world peace and (2) an artificial language could not
possibly be a substitute for natural language. It seems to me that
both (1) and (2) are true. In spite of this, I believe that learning
Esperanto is worth the rather modest effort called for. In *two
months*, I have acquired enough knowledge of the language to be able
to read philosphy papers in Esperanto (I took out a subscription to
_Simpozio_, an Esperanto philosophy journal). This alone strikes me
as ample return on the effort of learning the language.
I have been able to correspond with a philosopher in Japan, who does
not know English. Two months ago, this was not possible. And I am
still a klutzy beginner with Esperanto. I take this to be a
significant linguistic achievement.
Thanks to everyone who got me thinking about these things.
Wittgenstein diris: Ne ser<cu la signifon. Ser<cu la uzon.
Todd Moody | {allegra|astrovax|bpa|burdvax}!sjuvax!tmoody
Philosophy Department |
St. Joseph's U. | "I couldn't fail to
Philadelphia, PA 19131 | disagree with you less."