Newsgroups: soc.culture.german,soc.culture.french,alt.politics.ec,soc.culture.europe,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!elna
From: elna@netcom.com (Esperanto League N America)
Subject: Re: talk & travel
Message-ID: <elnaD3rJst.Do7@netcom.com>
Organization: Esperanto League for North America, Inc.
References: <elnaD3oBsD.IE7@netcom.com> <3hbj13$9b4@fido.asd.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 02:48:28 GMT
Lines: 51
Sender: elna@netcom11.netcom.com

livesey@solntze.engr.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes in a recent posting (reference <3hbj13$9b4@fido.asd.sgi.com>):
    [article not repeated]

>None of this answers the questions I raised, or says anything in
>support of Esteranto.   Shall I conclude that you *can't* say 
>anything in support of Esperanto, and so you try to conver that
>up by producing irrelevancies like this?
>
I had thought the line of argument was clear. For the benefit of Mr. Livesey
and others lacking the ability or will to follow through a line of reasoning
to its obvious conclusion, I shall be more direct.

Since the means of communication have changed in the past few decades, it 
has become more common for persons to be confronted with situations where
speech communication is desired, but impossible due to a lack of a common
language between the potential interlocutors. I pointed to increased use
of telephones, jet airplanes and the internet as examples of recent tools
which place us together with persons of other language groups. An auxiliary
second language, which is easily learned, politically neutral, and 
demonstrably successful, is available to anybody who wishes to overcome the
language barriers which prevent easy flow of information. This language is
called Esperanto. It is not a panacea; it is merely a tool of communication
which places participants on level ground, for it belongs to no nation.

The number of speakers of Esperanto has not yet sky-rocketed because a veil
of ignorance and disinformation still clouds the air of political and 
social discourse. Hysterical nay-sayers still capture a wide band-width.

Perhaps some more people will cut through the massive noise in the media to 
recognise the reality of the problems caused by the lack of a common tongue..
Both Leibniz and desCartes worked on independent versions of an international
language, because rational men are drawn to rational projects. GB Shaw
supported a project called "Basic English" which he thought would give people
a common language. Umberto Eco has endorsed Esperanto as a reasonable solution
to Europe's linguistic difficulties.    I cite these worthy gentlemen to 
lend historical credibility to the project. The time was not right for the
large-scale acceptance of any international language. The situation in the
(post?)modern world allows for anybody who has ears to hear the language
problem, and anybody whose mind is open to consider a solution.  

Standards of communication are needed. Operating systems of computers can
exchange information only if they use a standard format. If we can make
the internet work, we ought to be able to make face-to-face conversation
work by agreeing on a common language. People will not agree on any national
tongue, for they all carry political baggage. An inter-language  *must* be 
inherently international.

Miko.



