Newsgroups: sci.lang,alt.politics.ec,soc.culture.esperanto
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!insosf1.infonet.net!internet.spss.com!markrose
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: Esperanto (was: Languages in the EC)
Message-ID: <D4oL74.MBH@spss.com>
Sender: news@spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc
References: <3h3ci5$qc8@agate.berkeley.edu> <D403LK.8r8@news.cis.umn.edu> <D4DEC8.G4I@spss.com> <3ip61p$jd2@belfort.daimi.aau.dk>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 22:59:22 GMT
Lines: 49

In article <3ip61p$jd2@belfort.daimi.aau.dk>,
Byrial Ole Jensen <byrial@daimi.aau.dk> wrote:
>Estas cxi tie granda disputo pri esperanto kaj gxia eventuala uzado en
>la Euxropa Unio. Iu provis argumenti, ke tio per si mem montras, ke la
>angla bone rolas kiel internacia lingvo en tiaj disputoj, sed por mi
>estis frapa, ke granda parto de la partoprenantaro devenis de aux
>logxis en Britio, Usono aux Kanado. Kial ne partoprenis pli da
>personoj de aliaj sxtatoj en EU? Kial estis la nura afisxo de mia
>lando, Danio, kiun mi rimarkis, iu unulinia sensencajxo pri ke
>esperanto estas itala pigxino? Laux mi la respondo estas, ke la angla
>ne bone funkcias kiel internacia lingvo.

If you want to criticize English on grounds of practicality, you should
be willing to examine Esperanto on the same grounds.  This discussion may
have excluded some non-English-speakers; but a discussion conducted
entirely in Esperanto would have excluded still more people.

However, this is somewhat beside the point.  I don't claim that English
"functions well as an international language", although others have made this 
claim.  It functions OK; but a combination of languages functions better.
If the EU had to choose a single working language, German seems to me to
be the best candidate; if it had to choose several, add French and English.

>Jene skribis markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder):
>>In the case of Esperanto, the basic problem is that the language has been
>>around for a century, hasn't achieved even 1% of its goal, and cannot show
>>that it ever will.  An Esperantist cannot admit this, even to himself... 
>>without ceasing to be an Esperantist.  
>
>Haltu! Lingvo ne havas kaj povas havi celon. Lingvanaro povas havi, sed
>esperantistoj ne kongruas pri iu celo por esperanto. Kelkaj kredas je
>"la fina venko" (t.e. ke esperanto estu la dua lingvo por cxiu).
>Kelkaj opinias, ke esperanto nepre ne disvastigxu pli, cxar tio
>detruus la esperantan kulturon, kiel gxi nun estas. Kaj aliaj havas
>vidpunktojn, kiuj estas cxie inter la ekstremoj.

Very well, I shouldn't have implied that all Esperantists have the same
goals.  As I've said, I don't have any problem with people who are satisfied
with what Esperanto can do for them as it is.  (Actually I don't have a 
problem with the _fina venko_ either... I just don't think it'll happen.)

>>One final note: to the non-Esperantists: you're not going to win the 
>>debate; religious arguments are not settled by rational discussion.
>
>Ne nur esperantistoj uzas religiajn argumentojn, ankaux kelkaj el la
>kontrauxuloj ...

Very true.  So far, the Esperantist replies to my posting have all been
reasonable and friendly; the only flame came from a non-Esperantist.
