tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) (10/13/85)
[]
I have become interested in the "planetary language" idea, as an
instrument of world peace. I am aware that Esperanto exists, although
I don't know much about it. From what little I have seen, it appears
to be heavily Hispanic in its "look". Is this in fact the case? I
have heard of two other proposed planetary languages: Volapuk and
Interlingua. Is either of these as successful as Esperanto (even
though I don't suppose Esperanto could be called a great success; it
does have many adherents and a few publications, I believe)?
In general, what do you folks think of the planetary language idea?
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."dave@cylixd.UUCP (Dave Kirby) (10/16/85)
In article <2376@sjuvax.UUCP> tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) writes: > >In general, what do you folks think of the planetary language idea? My two cents: I am all for a planetary language, taught at least as a second language in all countries. But the grammatical rules of such a language should specifically exclude the unnecesary difficulties and absurdities that most existing languages have (such as genders for nouns, multiple declensions and conjugations, inconsistent rules of pronunciation and accent). It should, above all, be VERY easy to learn, and have a limited vocabulary. Shades of meanings should be accomplished mainly with word combinations, not with new words. Finally, it should be easily parsed by computer. Is there an existing "world language" that satisfies these criteria? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Kirby ( ...!ihnp4!akgub!cylixd!dave) (The views expressed herein are the exclusive property of Dave Kirby. Any person, living or dead, found with the same or similar opinions will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of law.)
neal@druny.UUCP (Neal D. McBurnett) (10/17/85)
We've discussed Esperanto before in this newsgroup, and I've been
meaning to send out a description of my trip to "Esperanto-land"
in Germany and Hungary last summer. (Quick summary: it was great,
accents were not a problem at all, and I'll probably go back to
Bulgaria and Israel for more fun next year.) Until I write that up, here
is the "basic intro".
____________________________
First "what is this Esperanto thing, anyway?" That's a hard question.
The pat answer is "the international planned language, used by millions of
people in over 80 countries. It was specifically designed to be
easy to learn and politically neutral."
One recent development which should interest computer scientists is that
the European Economic Community has funded a research effort to try to use
Esperanto to help them deal with translating official documents among the
nine languages they use. This should result in software to translate
from Esperanto into each of the languages, and vice versa (with help provided
by the author to resolve ambiguities). I think this capability
could provide a powerful incentive for people and organizations all over
the world to pay more attention to Esperanto.
Esperanto is much more popular elsewhere than it is in the US, chiefly because
other people deal with "the language problem" every time they travel more than
a few hundred miles in any direction. It is especially gaining popularity in
China and Japan. There are more than a million speakers in the world. This may
seem like a small number in relation to the number of English speakers, but
I like to think of it this way: a much higher percentage of Esperanto speakers
in foreign lands are the sort of people I would like to be able to converse with.
Esperanto does me the most good when I travel, especially to
the eastern european countries (where English is less popular....) I
currently have a list of over 50 interested USENETers (including some in
Holland, Sweden and Norway.) In August of 1985 there was a meeting
of the Universal Esperanto Association in Augsberg where I had the opportunity
to meet several thousand esperantists from scores of countries. Where
else could you do that? Scientific organizations also hold meetings: e.g., I
attended a Cybernetics conference in Budapest this summer.
There are about 30,000 books published in Esperanto (half original, half
translated), a hundred regular publications, and dozens of regular
radio programs worldwide.
How easy is it to learn? Some say between 4 and 10 times easier than other
natural languages, with all their exceptions, special cases, and idioms.
In a month of studying it during the evening in my spare time (on my own)
I got to the point where I could frequently (slowly...) understand the gist
of articles from a Chinese magazine without referring to a dictionary.
After a year I was able to understand rapid-fire conversation on most
topics, speak somewhat fluently, and edit a newsletter without making
too many errors.
I have lots of material on-line, including a 3000 word dictionary with parts
of speech. For further information, send mail to me or to one of these groups:
Esperanto League of North America, Box 1129 El Cerrito, CA 94530 303-653-0998
Free Postal Course, Esperanto Information Center, 410 Darrell Road,
Hillsborough, CA 94010 (send a self-addressed, stamped envelope).
Various local organizations (especially in CA): ask me for one near you.
-Neal McBurnett, {mcvax!seismo!}ihnp4!druny!neal
Boulder CO, Usono 303-538-4852doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee) (10/18/85)
> I have become interested in the "planetary language" idea, as an > instrument of world peace. > > In general, what do you folks think of the planetary language idea? [Break out the Nomex suit, here come the flames] You gotta be kidding. Language and peace have nothing to do with each other. Even though everyone in the U.S. speaks English, we don't have internal peace. English-speaking people are robbed/beaten/raped/killed by other English-speaking people every day. -- Doug Pardee -- CalComp -- {calcom1,savax,seismo,decvax,ihnp4}!terak!doug
esa@kvvax4.UUCP (Esa K Viitala) (10/21/85)
In article <> dave@cylixd.UUCP (Dave Kirby) writes: >specifically exclude the unnecesary difficulties and absurdities that most >existing languages have (such as genders for nouns, multiple declensions >and conjugations, inconsistent rules of pronunciation and accent). > >It should, above all, be VERY easy to learn, and have a limited >vocabulary. Shades of meanings should be accomplished mainly with >word combinations, not with new words. > >Finally, it should be easily parsed by computer. > >Is there an existing "world language" that satisfies these criteria? Sounds FORTRAN to me :-) :-). -- ---ekv, {seismo,okstate,garfield,decvax,philabs}!mcvax!kvvax4!esa
jack@rlgvax.UUCP (Jack Waugh) (10/22/85)
See also "Loglan", Scientific American, Vol. 202 #6 (June, 1960), p. 53.
tmoody@sjuvax.UUCP (T. Moody) (10/22/85)
In article <808@terak.UUCP> doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee) writes: >> In general, what do you folks think of the planetary language idea? [Moody] >You gotta be kidding. Language and peace have nothing to do with each >other. Even though everyone in the U.S. speaks English, we don't have >internal peace. English-speaking people are robbed/beaten/raped/killed >by other English-speaking people every day. >-- >Doug Pardee -- CalComp -- {calcom1,savax,seismo,decvax,ihnp4}!terak!doug True, but I'm not kidding. I did not mean to imply that a planetary language would, or could, be a *solution* to these problems. I do think that cultures are alienated from each other by language barriers, and other barriers. If you take the robbers/attackers/rapists/murderers of this country to be *typical* of humanity in general, then it might follow that language and peace have nothing to do with each other. On the other hand, if you believe that most humans are naturally gregarious, convivial, and inquisitive about other humans, then your conclusion is a non sequitur. Most of us do not have the time or opportunity to learn many foreign languages. So we are not in a position to read Le Monde, Figaro, Stern, Pravda, etc. Some of us, at least, would like to be in a better position to communicate, albeit imperfectly, with people in *many* countries. A planetary language is a feasible first step toward diminishing xenophobia and establishing wider and more truly international channels of communication. Mandarin, Arabic, Russian, English, Spanish, Hindi are among the most spoken languages in the world. The cultures associated with these languages are obviously important determiners of international events. How many of us can speak all of these languages? Very few indeed. How desirable would it be for people in all of these cultures to be able to read what others have to say, in their own words, or communicate in writing to a genuinely global audience? It seems to me to be worth thinking about. 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."