Newsgroups: talk.politics.european-union,sci.lang,alt.language.artificial
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!news.mathworks.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!elna
From: elna@netcom.com (Esperanto League N America)
Subject: Re: Single European language: *NOT* European english
Message-ID: <elnaE0DJws.19K@netcom.com>
Organization: Esperanto League for North America, Inc.
References: <3273663A.3C0A@pp.inet.fi> <32768243.4C65@hildesheim.sgh-net.de> <elnaE049q1.3C1@netcom.com> <32790A4A.3EC2@hildesheim.sgh-net.de>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 01:53:16 GMT
Lines: 93
Sender: elna@netcom22.netcom.com

jgrantha@hildesheim.sgh-net.de writes in a recent posting (reference <32790A4A.3EC2@hildesheim.sgh-net.de>):
>Esperanto League N America wrote:
>> 
>> jgrantha@hildesheim.sgh-net.de writes in a recent posting (reference <32768243.4C65@hildesheim.sgh-net.de>):
>> >
>True, but how long has Esperanto been in existence? When you compare the
>number of speakers with the total global population, its influence is
>stagnating. 

From one user in 1887 to several million today-- this is not stagnation!

>       Yes, in sheer numbers, it _is_ rising slowly, but
>proportionally it isn't (source: Story of English). For a mass movement
>to work, it has to catch on quickly, 

Nonsense. This is prejudice, little born out by history. Democracy began
twenty-five centuries ago, and is *still* not universal.

>                   exactly like the telephone and like
>the Internet, and have support from all leves of society. The main
>reason I don't think Epseranto or any other synthetic language will
>succeed is this: though some governments and NGEs have paid lip-service
>to promotion of a synthetic language, they soldom go on with it at all.
>
Yes, I agree with this: the problem is one of *will* not practical issues.

>> >There is a further problem: how do you propose to actually encourage
>> >everyone to speak this proto-language, especially when the short-term
>> >benefits seem so miniscule?
>> 
>> Education can dispel such uninformed false opinion!
>
>I beg to differ. To get such a program to work, you would have to
>_immediately_ pour billions into textbook production, teacher training,
>and rewriting of existing laws, maps, books, guides, and so on into the
>new language to make it work. 

I disagree with the "immediately" part. These could be phased in: it would
be absurd to pour money into most of the listed projects before the chosen
language were well established.

>There is also a tremendous difference between using a telephone and
>speaking a language. Using a telephone simply requires buying one and
>picking up the phone. Learning an additional language requires a heck of
>a lot of time, and to learn it well, it requires immersion in the
>language. How do you propose to provide Esperanto immersion to millions
>of people?
>
Education. All countries of Europe educate their citizens....

>--snip--
>
>Again, it would be nice to have a neutral language--I really don't want
>to see Welsh, Finnish, or Bantu disappear and be overrun by American
>English. But you overlook the practical problems of your proposal, and,
>I'm afraid, are blinded by idealism.

I deny and resent this. I believe that I deal reasonably and rationally
with a real problem (the lack of communication between citizens of 
different parts of the world) by suggesting a practical solution. You
insist on misunderstanding and misrepresenting the proposed solution so
that it *appears* idealistic and unworkable. Nobody has ever suggested
that Esperanto be *immediately* adopted as the official language of
law, commerce, mass media, etc. 

>           This isn't an ideal world. We
>certainly have the resources to easily solve world hunger, for example,
>but people starve in the streets of America--the most bountiful nation
>on Earth--regardless, let alone people dying of hunger in Somalia,
>Liberia, or wherever. That's what I mean by investment of
>resources--Esperanto promotion is, by my definition, way down the list
>of priorities after hunger, but you don't see us doing much to solve it.
>You have to live with the limitations of human society.
>
Yes, indeed. Yet I see no harm in suggesting ways to better invest our
resources. I suggest that we could (and *should*) create better food
distribution systems in order to eliminate starvation. I also suggest 
we should manage our educational resources more wisely as well, by
providing all citizens a real tri-lingual education, teaching everybody
their local language, the international language Esperanto, and a third
language of their choosing. This is *not* pie-in-the-sky idealism; it is
a simple and feasible plan.

I see no conflict (or even *relationship*) between the world hunger
problem and the European communication problem. Do you mean to suggest
that we should not improve education until we eradicate world hunger?


-- 
Miko SLOPER              elna@netcom.com              USA  (510) 653 0998
Direktoro de la          ftp.netcom.com:/pub/el/elna   fax (510) 653 1468 
Centra Oficejo de la     Learn Esperanto! Free lessons: e-mail/snail-mail
Esperanto-Ligo de N.A.   Write to above address or call 1-888-2-ESPERANTO
