OSNews

Esperanto has many problems?
The only problem for me is that ignorance of Esperanto is holding the language back.
I use the word "ignorance" not prejudice.
For anyone not prejudiced against Esperanto however can I ask you to visit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YHALnLV9XU

Indeed. I see some people in the thread coming at "the language challenge" from the standpoint of how many people already have learned English. And yet, the real questions is "How much effort would be required to get everyone up to a useful skill level?". And the answer is: Far more effort for English than for Esperanto, despite English's head start.

Almost 30 years ago, I completed 2 years of studying Spanish. And even back then, if I had needed to rely upon my fluency in Spanish to survive, I would have fallen on my face. I could not speak or understand it well enough to get by in everyday life in an immersion situation.

By contrast, today, and at age 45, I have spent a few days studying Esperanto. And the difference is amazing. The progress I am making is like nothing I experienced in my high school studies of Spanish. Mr. Piron's claim that a few months of Esperanto study is equivalent to years of study of a national language is well founded, as far as I am concerned.

Once the disparity between the total amount of effort to become effective with a designed vs a national language is taken into account, English and other national languages lose any attractiveness they might have had for use in the capacity of an international auxilliary language... despite any head start any one of them might have.

Malĝoje, Claude Piron mortes en januaro 22, 2008. Li estes homo escepta.

http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Piron

Mi esperas tio mesaĝo estas komprenebla. Mi estas komencanto de Esperanto.

Edited 2008-05-06 00:09 UTC

You are missing the point entirely. I am not a resident of any European country but even I can see the problem very clearly. Standardizing upon any one of the national languages currently used within the EU gives native speakers of that language a very real and very unfair advantage over the others. Official documents will be issued in that language, which the residents of one country can easily read and understand, while those of other countries have to struggle a bit to understand, and perhaps misunderstand certain things. Forms are issued in that language, and more residents of one country respond because, hey, it's easy. Residents of other countries must exert more effort to understand and respond, and may choose to spend their time and effort on something else, their countries ending up under-represented. (A effect which will not be considered when statistics regarding those responses are presented to further arguments regarding rules or policy on other matters.)

It is not a matter of cultural corruption. It is very much a matter of one country having the upper hand on that most important of intangibles: communication.

Leaders of countries whose language was not chosen would be remiss in their duties *not* to oppose such a move.

The chosen language *must* provide a level playing field for all involved.

Edited 2008-05-05 14:30 UTC

I think you've misunderstood me. I am also a native English speaker, and I live in Australia (even though I am a dual European citizen). English is my primary language and I have nothing against the language itself, it isn't a "Great Satan" for me.

But we also have to acknowledge the immensely unfair privilege that English gives people. Did you know that 20% of the GDP of New South Wales can be attributed to the status of English? An economist called Francois Grim found that the United Kingdom benefited to the tune of 18 billion euro a year because of the status of English. Neither of those facts include the edge that native English speakers have in diplomatic or trade negotiations, or the fact that English-speaking countries tend to support each other (and they happen to be some of the most powerful countries in the world!). None of this is fair and if we can imagine something better, there is no need to discriminate between people purely because of the language we happen to speak at birth.

I could say nothing and enjoy the privilege I receive as a native English speaker, in the same way that I enjoy privilege as a straight white male student. But how is that fair?