is there a universal language??

Question

is english the universal language? if not does one exist?

Answer 1

It does exist. Not to sound corny, It is the language of Love. There's a song that can describe it to a point.


Je t'aime
Te amo
Ya tebya lyublyu
Ani o hev ot cha
I love you

The sounds are all as different
As the lands from which they came
And though the words are all unique
Our hearts are still the same

Love in any language
Straight from the heart
Pulls us all together
Never apart
And once we learn to speak it
All the world will hear
Love in any language
Fluently spoken here

We teach the young our differences
Yet look how we're the same
We love to laugh, to dream our dreams
We know the sting of pain

From Leningrad to Lexington
The farmer loves his land
And daddies all get misty-eyed
To give their daughter's hand

Oh maybe when we realize
How much there is to share
We'll find too much in common
To pretend it isn't there

Love in any language
Straight from the heart
Pulls us all together
Never apart
And once we learn to speak it
All the world will hear
Love in any language
Fluently spoken here

Tho' the rehtoric of government
May keep us worlds apart
There's no misinterpreting
The language of the heart

Love in any language
Straight from the heart
Pulls us all together
Never apart
And once we learn to speak it
All the world will hear
Love in any language
Fluently spoken here

Answer 2

English, in terms of how many people speak it, isn't (Chinese is #1 because of how many people live in China the pie charts get wonky), but it is on a lot of official language lists, especially major countries (culturally and militarily).

Esperanto was slated to be the Universal Language, but for some reason few people speak it, making it just another language.

To me (not a linguist, but I speak three), these are the major groups of world languages:
1. Romance; French, German, Spanish, English, rooted in Latin (basically, European)
2. Slavic; Russian, Czech, Macedonian, Romanian, etc.
3. Asian; not to sound ingorant, but the variations in Hindi, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese give me a headache,
4. African languages; which I also have no understanding of,
5. "Miscellaneous" languages like Basque and Esperanto.

I've noticed that with the first two groups and some think time you could understand basic words and such that sound similar but with different intonation (Russian plachyt, to cry, sounds a lot like plouchyt, Czech, to cry). English is a weird anomaly to that though. I have no experience in groups 3-5, so I'm not one to talk.

Math and body language are really the only truly 'universal' languages, but it's kind of hard to say "9123-01" instead of "hello" and silently waving to someone is kind of creepy.

Answer 3

Linguistically speaking, there is no such thing as a Universal Language. But there are five languages to be included in a group of "Terrestrial Language" (Latin: Earth-based Languages), and these are, based on the number of first language speakers, 1) Mandarin Chinese, 2) Spanish, any variant, 3) English, any variant, 4) Arabic, any variant, and 5) Hindi, any variant.

If we count the number of Second-language speakers, then probably, the list would be: 1) Mandarin Chinese, 2) Arabic, any variant, 3) Spanish, any variant, 4) English, any variant, and 5) Hindi, any variant.

There are also secveral languages which are mutually comprehensible with other languages, and as such included in the classification as a Terrestrial Language, and these are:
1) Scandinavian: mixture of Danish and Norwegian, as well as Icelandic and Swedish
2) Hindustani: mixture of Hindi and Urdu (when taken together, this would be the world's third largest spoekn language)
3) Malayo-Indonesian: mixture of Bahasa Malaysian and Bahasa Indonesian.
4) Philippine: mixture of all Philippine languages which are spmewhat comprehensible, would make it maybe the tenth largest language in the world).

Answer 4

Well, some people obviously have a use for Esperanto. Me for one.
It IS a universal tongue, which of course doesn't mean that everybody needs to speak it; just those that need it, want it.
It's a slow process, but one that is moving forward none-the-less.
In a recent reprint of the Unua Libro (first book), editor Gene Keyes said that when he first started the project in 2000, he had done a search for Esperanto on Google and it yielded over 1 million hits. At the completion of his task in February of 2007, the same search yielded over 34 million hits. Out of curiosity, after I had read that I did the same search and it yielded over 39.2 million hits. That's up over 5 million in two months. So it's growing. Slowly (or maybe not so slowly!)
Obviously not everyone will find a use for it, and that's fine. However for those that take the time and bother to search out the other users, it's worth it. Of course searching out other uses gets easier with each passing day.
Personally I have friends all over the world. Friends I wouldn't have had with out Esperanto.

Let's answer some specific concerns that many people might not have bothered to research.
Impractical and awkward?
The two million plus (as of 1995) people that use it says it's not Impractical. (This includes at least 2000 native speakers; people who are born to couples that meet through Esperanto and use it as their household language. Yes, they exist.)
Awkward? Anything that is generally new to people tends to be awkward. That changes with practise. I can vouch for that personally.
Never use it? I think I answered that.
European based?
Ask the thousands of asian speakers if they'd rather learn Esperanto or English, French or one of the the other rule riddled languages (and ALL of their exceptions). The only reason that they would say any but Esperanto is because of the coverage that English has. That however is changing.
Pax Americana is coming to a close. Of course that will draw some scoffs. Naturally when you stand in a very small segment of history, you draw conclusions from that small segment. When you stand back and view history as a whole, and watch as history repeats itself, you can draw conclusions from a firmer perspective.
The real value of Esperanto lies in its desire to allow other languages to thrive right along side of it. As an AUXILIARY language, it serves as a means of communication between cultures, and allows tham to continue to grow and enrich human kind much as thay have always done.
The best observable item that says it's making progress is the fact that Esperanto (UEA) holds observer status (Class 'B') at the UN and UNESCO.
The Iranians atempted to have Esperanto included in the League of Nations as a working language in the 20's, but the French killed that. They didn't want to loose the prestige of owning the "International tongue of diplomacy". The Americans pulled the same thing in the 50's.
Sooner or later, the $600 million plus that is spent on translation services at the UN and EU is going to cause a big problem. (Actually, it already has). Then someone is going to go looking for a solution, and they'll find it right on their door step. The question has already been raised a number of times in the EU.
Christianity was very slow in making the progress that it did. Not without bumps either. Yet it took hold, and florished.
Hummm, similarity? Time will tell.

Research and draw your own conclusions.

Ĝis!

Answer 5

Esperanto

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto

Answer 6

There is no universal language, at least technically. English is just one of the three most widely spoken worldwide.

Answer 7

I would say English is the most world wide known language but to me music or dance is the universal language. You don't have to understand what the person is saying or doing to understand the message.

Answer 8

Math is the universal language.

Answer 9

If maths is the universal language then how would you say "I'm late for work" in mathematics?

Answer 10

Yes math is a universal language, so are music and love