Esperanto, why not?

[Chris_Sleeps]

Wasn't it Esperanto that what used in Bladerunner ?

I don't think so. Rimmer tries to learn it in Red Dwarf.

[AJ sheffield]

I don't think so. Rimmer tries to learn it in Red Dwarf.

 

I can remember the traders selling food spoke in a strange mixed language in Bladerunner, sounded very odd.

Actually the name Rimmer reminds me of Polari.

[Halibut]

I can remember the traders selling food spoke in a strange mixed language in Bladerunner, sounded very odd.

Actually the name Rimmer reminds me of Polari.

 

You've led a sheltered life if you think rimming is just a gay phenomenon...

[AJ sheffield]

You've led a sheltered life if you think rimming is just a gay phenomenon...

 

I know it isn't

[Waltheof]

Esperanto is fine as a construct but is unlikely ever to become a universal language because pragmatically people want to learn the language that will be of most benefit to them (mostly economically). Currently English seems to be favoured; in the past French was an international language for both culture and trade. In other places pidgins and creoles have been created to serve the practical purpose.

 

While we are at it, we should keep in mind that Esperanto is deeply Eurocentric, being an amalgam of various European languages similar in their syntax. It makes no concessions to other languages with different constructions, such as the Arabic group, the Semitic ones, or the oriental languages, let alone any indigenous languages of the Americas, Australia and Polynesia. It really is condescending of the promoters of Esperanto (though its very name means "hopeful") to seek to foist it onto the world as though Europe has the right to set the pace.

 

Perhaps in future we would all do better to learn Chinese...

[RootsBooster]

Because it's very little used in the real world and it would have little practical value.

 

Your reason for why it shouldn't be taught is actually a RESULT of it not being taught.

 

Or... We... Just... Shout... Slowly.

 

I like it when people speak english slowly to foreign people whilst trying to mimmic the local accent, as if that makes all the difference

[Chris_Sleeps]

While we are at it, we should keep in mind that Esperanto is deeply Eurocentric, being an amalgam of various European languages similar in their syntax.

To be fair, when Esperanto was created the World was quite eurocentric. The Americas had taken English, Spanish and French. Africa was being incorporated into the Lingua Europa. In a modern context it would be a terrible idea, but back then it is understandable.

 

Maybe someone will create a world language that works one day, but I doubt it. People like organic languages, with their faults and complexities, much more than they will ever like a construct. Maybe Kling'on will take off.

[Waltheof]

Why teach an artificial language with very little cultural tradition behind it, when there are real languages that give not only an entry into places where they are used, but also encourage finding out about the rich cultures of the people who speak them?

[RootsBooster]

Why teach an artificial language with very little cultural tradition behind it, when there are real languages that give not only an entry into places where they are used, but also encourage finding out about the rich cultures of the people who speak them?

 

Purely for the sake of communication. Some people already know about culture and history, some aren't interested. Some just don't have time.

 

Let me put it in terms that are easy for me to explain:

In the motor trade there is a disgnostic system called EOBD (OBDII in USA).

It's universal system found on all modern cars, although very basic, it usually gives you key information about a fault on the emmissions system. Before EOBD every vehicle brand had its own system and you had to go to a garage that had that individual system. These days many garages have an EOBD reader.

 

It's the universal language of cars.

 

Imagine the same with human language, a universal one to convey basic but key information, it wouldn't have to be Esperanto, any universal language would be better than none.

[Waltheof]

Purely for the sake of communication. Some people already know about culture and history, some aren't interested. Some just don't have time.

 

Let me put it in terms that are easy for me to explain:

In the motor trade there is a disgnostic system called EOBD (OBDII in USA).

It's universal system found on all modern cars, although very basic, it usually gives you key information about a fault on the emmissions system. Before EOBD every vehicle brand had its own system and you had to go to a garage that had that individual system. These days many garages have an EOBD reader.

 

It's the universal language of cars.

 

Imagine the same with human language, a universal one to convey basic but key information, it wouldn't have to be Esperanto, any universal language would be better than none.

 

It's a fine ideal, but impractical in the end. Of course one can have a universal "language" for cars, because that is based on the universal laws of physics, electronics and mechanics; just as the world wide web works by agreement on a universal protocol that all computers can use, and information can be stored in digital form because it's based on a universal binary form of mathematics. But it's not really logical to draw an analogy between those things and a language, which (as someone remarked) is organic, and used by people in all their variety and heterogeneity. People can even be comfortable with the inconsistencies and irregularities in a real language, especially their own, because they have inwardly digested those as they acquired their language. When they learn another language, they have to accept that it too has its variations--not to mention idioms, which may be tricky to convert into an artificial language. Laudable as your aim may be, it will probably never happen.

 

Perhaps it's a bit like all the schemes that have been put forward to regularise the spelling of English, ever since the 16th century. None has succeeded, because people prefer what they learn early as children, even if they may recognise intellectually the logical basis of the various suggestions. You just can't account for people!