Certainly for I have touched the world through Esperanto and I know what it is capable of.
At a yearly cost of $100 million per official language at the UN (currently at six), the monetary crunch is going to force them eventually to look to alternatives to the current system. That's right folks! The UN currently spends in excess of $600 million USD each year on translation services.
Most people balk at the thought of Esperanto because they don't see it every day, especially in North America. They fail to explore it as an alternative because they fear the loss of their language. They fail to realize that through the Internet alone it has exploded in popularity, so the projection of 2 million+ speakers that was arrived at some years ago has more likely doubled by now. There will always be those who reject it out of hand, and those who simply won't need it because they will refuse to leave their home sweet home, or except a foreigner on their turf. That is fine. As with any good idea, it's time will come, stronger than before.
So you can thank Zamenhof now or later.
2007-01-21 09:27:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jagg 5
·
4⤊
4⤋
I don't think it ever will, I agree with everything Steve said. However, I still think, for different (economic) reasons, it still has a shot in the E.U. The U.N. has capped the number of official languages at 5. But the E.U.'s bylaws gives equal status to the official language of every member nation. If all European countries eventually join the E.U. it's my understanding that will be 28 languages. It will eventually make economic sense for them to choose an international language to be the main interlanguage of the E.U. Otherwise the cost of communication within the E.U. will become cost prohibitive.
2016-05-24 07:50:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sorry, I will not sign any such petition.
It's not that I do not like Esperanto itself or the reasons proferred by Zamenhof. However, English is already functioning as the lingua franca of the world. Swedes will most likely talk to Japanese in English, or Ethiopians with Dutchmen. Many people in Central Europe are already learning English (I read Hungary wants to make English a compulsory subject in secondary school). Even the linguistic chauvinism of Frenchmen is beginning to show some cracks. "The Economist" reported in a recent issue that the most frequent language used in the European Union is English, with French and German trailing behind. The French are slowly coming to grips with reality. Thank heavens!
Besides, rocking the boat too hard is too radical an approach for the acceptance of Esperanto as a recognized international language. I wonder whether having the UN approve Esperanto as its official language would facilitate things. Why not try a step-by-step approach, perhaps at a lower international level?
You may know of course, that Esperanto is heavily based on Romance and other European languages. It might strike speakers of non-European languages as excessively eurocentric or too Western in origin. If apologists for an international language really want to break down barriers without promoting any natural or national language, they might as well invent a language incorporating features of Indo-European, Hamito-Semitic, Bantu, Malayo-Polynesian, Ural-Altaic Sino-Tibetan-Burman-Thai and others.
In short, it isn't probably such a big deal accepting the current six official languages of the UN. Perhaps in due time, Portuguese, or Turkish (if it is intelligible to speakers of other Turkic languages), maybe German, should be added to the list. Portuguese, as I see it, has stronger claims than Chinese to be a truly international language.
2007-01-28 16:32:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Rommel 3
·
2⤊
4⤋
I used to work at a UN agency in the area of public communications and even the current six official languages are not fully supported. English is top, then French and Spanish. The others trail, with Portuguese an honorary 7th language sometimes.
Esperanto = no chance. Sorry!
2007-01-23 03:50:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tantrum 2
·
1⤊
4⤋
i think this goes against globalization trends. Countries love American culture, food, goods, music, and language. Heck, it's the most used lingua franca out there and there are more speakers who are learning how to speak it everyday! Esperanto will not get passed as any countries' official language. It is sad that more and more indiginous cultures and languages are becoming extinct, but Esperanto can't do anything to help that.
2007-01-21 16:50:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Hello K 1
·
0⤊
6⤋
Noooooo. Esperanto is not going to be an international language; too many people are going to refuse to learn it. Most countries already speak English, so why not make that the international language? Esperanto is only a barrier itself. No one speaks/understands it. It is one of the least-widely spoken languages there is (on a global scale).
2007-01-21 08:27:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by always_withisrael 1
·
2⤊
7⤋
I thought that esperanto had died a slow horrible death. I find it interesting that it's apparently still alive and being used.
2007-01-21 08:32:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
No, there are others languages used in the world that would make far more sense -- if it even makes sense -- to add another official language at the UN.
2007-01-21 10:10:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by elf2002 6
·
4⤊
5⤋
Yes, because it' easy and logic, unbiased
2007-01-28 11:20:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by although71 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Umm...No thank you, Nein danke, Non merci...etc, etc. We Europeans are already doing a pretty good job of communicating with each other and the rest of the world.
2007-01-26 12:43:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋