Esperanto, the manufactured “global language,” derives its name from the Spanish word for hope, with the same Latin root as esperance. Naturally, then, in the Land of Hopenchange, it’s being touted as a second language at Change.Org’s website. Shit you is a thing that I do not do.
Of course, multi-culty Obama had to admit on the campaign trail that he didn’t have a second language, though goodness knows young Americans ought to be required to learn one (an assertion that I happen to believe is true). How Obama managed to pass the language requirement at Columbia University is one of those topics shrouded in the mist of misssing records. But why Esperanto?
Esperanto was the brainchild of one-worlders. When I lived in Coyoacan in Mexico City, among the lunatics who spent their days passing out information in the Plaza in front of Cortez’s palace, on the gazebo, were passionate advocates of Esperanto. I asked them kindly, in Spanish, why this was so important to them. They replied, in Spanish, that English, which has become, at least for the time being, the lingua franca of the world, was a racist, imperialist language. Which made me laugh, considering the place that La Malinche holds in their cultural mythos. Not long after this episode, some young Mexicans and I got into an argument in El Hijo del Cuervo, a bar on the plaza, because I had the temerity to be discussing Shakespeare, in English, with a Mexican-American friend. I had to push one of them over a hedgerow when they attacked my friend as we exited the bar.
Obama’s agenda of undercutting American exceptionalism seems to extend even to language. Esperanto has no great literature. It’s based in no nurturing culture. It is as artificial as Klingon, and perhaps less well developed. Its only true function is typically progressive, in that it lets its advocates feel superior to the benighted around them. Take a look at the link on the page, Esperanto has many traits. What language does not have many traits?
Esperanto is a language. It is neutral because it doesn’t belong to any single group of people or country. It is international and mainly useful for communication among people from several countries. It is egalitarian and easier to learn than national languages. It evolves and flourishes just like other languages, and can be used to express every aspect of human thought and feeling. It is relatively young, pioneered by Ludoviko Lazaro Zamenhof in 1887. A unique, rich and living language it is highly esteemed by many people throughout the world.
There is no such thing as a neutral language. All languages function to filter and organize the welter of impressions we receive through our senses. You could say that English is a neutral language, because it is less “gendered” than the Spanish from which Esperanto is largely derived. English is international, as was French before it, and Latin before French. Esperanto may evolve in its peculiar linguistic hothouse, but I’ve seen little evidence that it flourishes. No language, in and of itself, “can be used to express every aspect of human thought and feeling,” which is why Shakespeare was such a great creator of neologisms, and why English borrows so many terms and expressions from other languages. Esperanto has no innate advantages. To think so is poppycock.
But poppycock is what’s on offer at Hopenchange. Perhaps there’s an expression in Esperanto for “sour grapes.” I wonder from where they derived it. Some expertise in any foreign language gives one access to a different mentality, and a different personality. There are many besides English, Spanish and Italian that I wish I had, but Esperanto’s not on that enormous list.
Well, certainly my Spanish would be better if I didn’t have to learn all those Mexican colloquialisms, such as “handcuffs” – in Spanish “esposas” – strangely, “esposa” means spouse. And a spouse of the fairer gender.
Likewise, those pesky articles. Having to discern whether a noun is male or female in gender is kind of a pain. I wish they’d neuter them all…
Then I could pass myself off as enlightened rather than too lazy to study and memorize and practice.
There was a period when German dominated, too, at least in the physical sciences. I think chemists are still required to study German, or were until quite recently.
If I were going to learn an artificial language, I think I’d go with Lojban. Nearly as useless as Esperanto, but more intellectually stimulating.
The “universal” Esperanto completely ignores Chinese, Hindi, and all other Asian languages. If I found myself engaging a group of rabid Esperantists I’d ask them why they were so Eurocentric. Heh.
If I were responsible for the education of a small child, I’d make sure he learned Spanish and Mandarin. Both would be useful in a practical sense, and both cultures have an extremely rich history and literature.
If I were going to choose one, I’d go with Mandarin because tonal language are so damned hard to learn as an adult.
Increasingly it is becoming clear that Obama, or should I say the carefully crafted character constructed that he represents, is simply a placeholder for the left to use as cover to enact their radical and fanciful 35 year old wish list.
It’s demostrated in the “one world government” philosophy, one that rejects any semblance of American exceptionalism, that was on display last week at the UN, and underscored by this risable notion of teaching esperanto to our children. Also, there is the obsession with the throwback cause of “NO NUKES!”, the rallying cry of the left long before global warming; and perhaps re-emerging as the AGW connivance seems to be unraveling.
Mostly though, these precepts are aimed at diminishing American power, societally, economically, and militarily, and generally taking us down a few pegs until we are just another member of the peanut gallery that is the UN.
It’s not hard to understand why some people believe that this anti-Americanism is driven in part by our old enemies who decided to actually try to bury us from within. And, why Obama, whose tutelage under his self-avowed communist grandfather and Frank Marshall Davis may have unconsciously instilled a mindset in him sympathetic to this isea, has very little problem embracing these ideas as well as our nations enemies…
I’m a British citizen and I won’t comment on American political matters.
I do feel qualified to comment on Esperanto, which I’ve used for many years. Esperanto speakers include Christians and atheists, monarchists and republicans, idealists and realists. Some talk of linguistic imperialism, where others simply see Esperanto as useful when visiting their friends in Slovenia.
Quoted from and linked to at:
TCOTS
Mark Twain once derived enormous amusement from bringing together two proponents of Esperanto and discovering neither of them could understand what the other was saying, never having heard anyone else try to pronounce the language.
Your little tale about Mark Twain was very amusing — too bad it’s not, as far as I can tell, actually a true story. But then, Mr Twain didn’t let such details get in the way of his telling a story, either.
Please get your facts about Esperanto straight.
>Esperanto, the manufactured “global language,†derives its name from the Spanish word for hope,
The lexicon was selected from ethnic languages on the basic of ‘maximum internationality’. Both the Spanish and the Esperanto root for ‘hope’ come from the Latin.
>why Esperanto?
Simply put, because of its regularity and lack of idioms, and thus consequent ease of learning, it is the ideal ‘apprentice language’ for language and grammar awareness in junior high.
>Esperanto was the brainchild of one-worlders.
It wasn’t. It was initiated by L.L. Zamenhof in 1887. It is intended to be a common, non-ethnic SECOND language for all, and not ‘one language for the world’ (which is apparently the aim of hegemonistic global English).
>Esperanto has no great literature.
See Sutton’s ‘Concise Encyclopedia of the Original Literature of Esperanto’
http://www.librejo.com/enciklopedio/
>It is as artificial as Klingon,
This is simply B.S. Klingon is an a priori language, Esperanto is an a posteriori one – the difference between night and day.
>Esperanto has no innate advantages.
See the Prague Manifesto for 7 of them:
http://lingvo.org
>Perhaps there’s an expression in Esperanto for “sour grapes.â€
There is indeed – ‘ne plu dezirinda’ might be one of them.
>There are many besides English, Spanish and Italian that I wish I had, but Esperanto’s not on that enormous list.
Ignoti nulla cupido! Your loss, not ours.
How global can it be when it’s based on European languages… and mainly Romance languages at that.
How about a little love for the non-Indo-European language families?
English is more a global language than Esperanto. Because, you know, people actually speak it globally.
I think the entire concept of language “belonging” to one group of people or another is funny. English being spoken by the Irish, Indians, Chinese, English, Mexicans, Canadians, Spanish, Koreans, Japanese, and so on and so forth is not an accident. Of course, some would argue that it is a hold-over of cultural imperialism. But to argue that English is not more efficient than German, Polish, Mandarin, Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, etc would be silly. How or why it is so I’ll leave to the linguists… but trapped in a body with a need to communicate our thoughts to others via language, there should be no surprise that English is the “common tongue” of the world. If it is not, we cannot explain its continued adoption, but to simply accuse capitalism, technology, and literacy is intellectually dishonest. These factors may well account for its being seeded throughout the planet, or even blamed for the critical mass it now enjoys above all languages… or, perhaps, we ought to blame the language itself for the many successes of Western Civilization during the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries.
For instance, could Hitler’s appeal and granted success as an orator been due to some extent to the fact that his aggressive and defiant message resonated perfectly with the timber and tone of the language? Would he have been as successful in winning over the German people had he been promulgating his message in Portuguese? I don’t think so.
“Would he have been as successful in winning over the German people had he been promulgating his message in Portuguese?”
the simple answer is “no, as the Germans of the time wouldn’t have understood him.” I know, I know – but you get my meaning: the Portuguese tongue sounds far less forceful… even when spoken forcefully – to me, it still sounds like liquid sex, no matter the content.
#10 Jambo! Habari gani? Let’s stand up against the linguistic colonialism of dead white European males!
meep wrote:
>How global can it be when it’s based on European languages… and mainly Romance languages at that.
So you want 10 words from Zulu, 9 from Inuit, 300 From Hindi, 12 from Gaelic, 15 from Armenian, 45 from Tibetan, and so on?! That is linguistic political correctness gone mad! You have missed two essential points:
1) more than half of the world’s population, like it or not, now speaks an Indo-European based language.
2) I repeat: Zamenhof selected the word-stock of Esperanto on the basis of ‘maximum internationality’, that is those roots which would be recognizable to the greatest number of people. Most subsequent attempts to ‘improve on’ Esperanto, and re-invent the wheel, have also followed this principle.
>English is more a global language than Esperanto. Because, you know, people actually speak it globally.
Each year since 1905 at the annual World Esperanto Congress around 2,000 people from 55-60 different countries gather together to speak Esperanto – a global meeting without interpreters:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Congress_of_Esperanto
and of course continue to use it when back home again afterwards. And they do this voluntarily and of their own freewill, not forced by economic, political, geographic, school etc. circumstances to spend a large chunk of their lives on language study. Surely investing 200 hours in learning a non-ethnic second language is less wasteful then spending at least 2,000 on an ethnic one (often with little to show for it)?
“How global can it be when it’s based on European languages… and mainly Romance languages at that.
How about a little love for the non-Indo-European language families?
English is more a global language than Esperanto. Because, you know, people actually speak it globally.”
—————————————-
…What seems to me a Reductio ad absurdum.
a language mainly Indo-European cannot become global.
Esperanto is mainly Indo-European > it cannot be a global language
Exception: English is mainly Indo-European > it is a global language
Please note that there is much more than Indo-europeanism in Esperanto.
The soul of the language is simply human, and all humans share (according to Noam Shomsky) the same universal language skills.
This is why an unnecessarily complicated language or or highly regular one can become global, as we all have brains (and some more logic than others – what helps learning Esperanto).
–
RemuÅ
Noam Chomsky! He loves commies also, so, I believe his judgement is suspect…
ManÄi min.
Come, come now, Esperagus! I’m sure you can do better than that, if you’d only spend half an hour finding out how to “Talk dirty in Esperanto” properly at:
http://mindprod.com/esperanto/dirty.html
[And anyway, it should be 'manÄu min' (not 'manÄi', which is the infinitive form)]. I’m impatiently awaiting another, more original, effort from you (or from anybody else, for that matter)!
Mi kulpigas traduku.net.
Actually, Esperagus, you should blame all those people who have apparently caused you to believe that automatic translators work. True, they can usually give a vague idea of what a text is about (if you have the patience to slog through such a text), but as we have just seen, the grammar is often horrendously inaccurate, even for such short efforts, and all such “translations” still need a human editor.
Ergo – there is still a need for an easy-to-learn, non-ethnic, common, second language as a human interlanguage, and Esperanto is the most obvious candidate with a proven track-record since 1887. Don’t knock it till you’ve tried it!
The Language of LOVE is the only international language… or, so I am told. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9SHL9g48j8&feature=player_embedded#t=19
Type your comment here
Actually, it’s manÄu min!
Mia hovercraft estas plena de hollandaise saÅco.
BonÅanculo vi! [Aren't you the lucky one?!]
Se vi nun nur havus ĉefan pladon per kiu superÅuti vian saÅcon … !
[Now if only you had a main dish over which to pour your sauce ... !]
Kaj mi esperas, ke vi ne bezonos troan tempon por forigi la saÅcon de la teraplano.
[And I hope you don't need too much time to clean the sauce from the hovercraft].
To Bob Reed about Chomsky
You are right.
In fact he never said that that clearly (you have to read him between the lines), but he tried hard and would no doubt have come to that evidence had he learned Esperanto.
RemuÅ
l’emaindish c’est moi.
The Esperanto is not a language like Spanish. The fact that words derived from Latin means nothing. Different languages, including English, has something of Latin. Esperanto is agglutinative like the Germanic languages, has buildings of Russian and grammatical features of Mandarin. His sound is Italian. It is a language well built and very rich in the possibility of creating new words.
Esperanto almost ignores some languages not because of some idealistic motivation, but because, at the Zamenhof’s age studing “far” languages, or just finding a dictionary of those languages, was much more difficult than now. However i know some asian esperantists and they are quite satisfied of the language.
I’ve spoken with asian in english adn esperanto, and i must say, honestly, that in esperanto we spoken, in english we understand more or less what we wanted to communicate each other.
The unsaid truth is that english speakers are afraid that the world won’t learn their language, so that they also will have to really study a language.
Esperanto is neutral because NO state in the world would be advantaged of it, because it is no official anywhere.
[...] Ето произволно взети връзки, които дават доÑтатъчно предÑтава за какво Ñтава дума: Hussein Obama’s NWO EspeRanting [...]
French: ‘préjugé = English: ‘prejudice’, Esperanto: ‘antaujugho’, German:’Vorurteil’; Spanish:’prejuicio’;Breton and Welsh: ‘rakvarn’;
Russian:’predrassudock’ etc… I am 77 years old now, after, as a hoby, having been interested in different languages, my sole regret is to have started studying Esperanto too late for me (5 years). The varied forms of ‘prejudice’ are a personal gift to “Enoch_root”. May he honestly, earnestly, devote, let’s say 3 hours to the study of Esperanto before proclaiming nonsences.This wonderful language one can learn to speak and PRONOUNCE easily,( for a frenchman a tenth to a fifteenth of the necessary time which English requires, for equivalent results)… That is what I experienced. Now I teach Esperanto in Landerneau where I live.
Professor – No offense – I am not particularly fond of the British for a slew of reasons. Yet, I can still appreciate the English language just fine.
There was nothing inherently wrong with the cassette tape – it just isn’t as great as a cd. Doesn’t mean the content sucks.
@Bob Reed: I have a feeling Noam Chomsky doesn’t necessarily love communists the way you think he does. In some crazy implausible alternate reality where the U.S. had collapsed first in the Cold War he’d be writing books from one of the remaining non-aligned outposts about manipulation of the public through state-owned media and suppression/misrepresentation of nationalist or anarchist or maybe even bourgeois revolutionaries. If pressed lightly he identifies as an anarchist or libertarian socialist so his function is basically to attack the dominant ideology that maintains a position of authority and highlight the misuse of that authority, you just see him as he is today because that happens to be neoliberalism.
I am making fun of attempts to “perfect” human language.
What people forget is that all “real” languages – used in real speaking communities, who will be creating new words as time goes on and changing the grammar, the way all living languages change – are never “clean”, “pure”, etc.
If you want an international language that people will speak globally, there are any number of languages that are already spoken internationally – spanish, chinese, english, arabic. The thing is if you dig deep in each of these, you’ll note all the dialects, and many of the flavors are mutually unintelligible spoken [though they all work pretty well as written languages]. “Book language” differs quite a bit from how language is actually used, and when you get people actually using this stuff all the “illogical” features will creep back in. John McWhorter has written a lot on that subject [I highly recommend McWhorter's "Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue" for a really interesting look at the development of the English language.]
English is actually pretty good about not having too much variance now between its dialects [this was not always so], and it really is a global language. Why reinvent the wheel, when you’ve got a jumbo jet at your disposal?
One may wish that, sometime, in some ‘Perhapsland’, a valiant guy named Meep, will ponder over the fact that:
1/Esperanto does not aim at replacing any other language
2/It is a of verbal ‘lego’ the rules of which are quick to learn ( for a ‘frog’ like me, compared to English, one hour dedicated to Esperanto is the equivalent often the time of 10/12 hours spent over your “Actually pretty good English”
3/A l’époque de louis XIV il nous était agréables, à nous français, de constater l’universalité de notre langue! Sorry, have I to translate? Have I to ascend the stairs to your jumbo? Ok or all right, I like the idea of the ‘new wheel’ girating around nice ball bearings and
4/ the pronounciation of which is the most accurate and simple of ALL the spoken languages! A last confidence: well my English (which I like) is not that badly spoken, anyway, at times, hearing english speaking people I really doubt having studied it..
5/did you really consecrate an honest time (3 hours) to see how E-o works, before rejecting it with such, either ignorance or let me put it that brutal way, dishonesty?
An answer will be welcome, as you choose, in French, Breton, Spanish, German, Russian and of course Esperanto .
Bien à vous cher Meep
Thank you, Quere, for that! And Meep does not even seem to think it worth a mention that the whole point of Esperanto is as a NON-ethnic interlanguage. The use of any ethnic language automatically advantages and privileges its native-speakers, and discriminates against speakers of all other languages. Not so speak of its cost-effectiveness, when learning time is brought into the equation. Apparently the linguistic enslavement of 92-95% of the world’s population (i.e. non-native-speakers of English) is acceptable to him/her, as is the destructive world hegemony of one ethnic master-language.
what is this “linguistic enslavement” you speak of? Does it involve reparations?
You know, this whole business is ridiculous. You’ll forgive me, I hope, if I say that I am as skeptical of linguistic utopianism as I am of any other form of utopianism. That doesn’t mean that we are excused from attempting to improve ourselves, our societies, our discourse, and to those of you who wish to make of Esperanto a great language, I wish you all the luck in the world in your great project. I look forward to the day in which great novels and poems are written in Esperanto, translated into the languages that I know, and make me long to learn it.
For those of you, however, who wish to whinge and complain that it would somehow be fairer that Esperanto be taught generally in place of other languages, and that we owe it to you in some fashion, because of linguistic “hegemony” or “imperialism” and all of the other blather, please, shut up. This is Gramscian nonsense applied to language. We are all trapped in a world that we never made. All languages, even the artificially created ones, have biases. Human cognition and intellect have biases. We cannot “linguify” our way out of them. The Cratylus still appertains.
“I look forward to the day in which great novels and poems are written in Esperanto, translated into the languages that I know, and make me long to learn it.”
Dear Dan,
No, you wouldn’t: you’d find another excuse.
If what you say is true, search in Google with “original Esperanto literature”. But remember, no translation matches the original 100%.
The perfect language for everybody is a myth, but a good enough second language to get out of the trap is a reality.
Of course you do not resent language hegemony. The French didn’t either less than 100 years ago.
RemuÅ