- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 462 Hour
- Reading permission
Originally posted by joeching at 2009-1-15 03:10
a international language is not that big a deal except as an equalizer between the english-speaking haves and non-speaking have not. it would therefore strictly be for technical pursuit. english has an early lead bcs it for now dominates the commercial market places.
actually, i v already constructed the universal computer english language(500 to 1000 words), and learning them would allow anybody to do computing, from programing the computer to doing computer analysis, anywhere from analysis of a pingpong match and also debunk the mit's hoax about winning in blackjack, to optimal design of a space nuclear reactor, which i did for reagon's star war and bush's anti-missile defense system, which he lied to us as jupitor mission.
as to korean, it's alphabetical and it makes more sense as i get deeper into it. although, i must say it's not taught very well. most teaching techniques confuses more than help, except maybe for pimsleur. if i have 3 months to spare, i ll get everybody into speaking/writing korean in 3 months.
the merits of korea is that it has added culture value than the chinese in how it conveys feeling of the speaker. and it's not only musical, but very modern at that, as it raps( i did cracked my jaw learning to rap for an asia). finally, it's pronounciation is unambiguous by strict correlation to the alphabets.
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Is this international language you're talking about a human language (i.e. for inter-human communication, which can include literature, including poetry), or are you talking about a language for technical interaction between man and machine? The two are two different things. If you're talking about a computer language, then this would be a specialized language that only specialists in the field would need to learn.
If, however, you're talking about an international human language that all would have to learn as a second-language, then it would have to be capable of expressing not only imperative commands and technical data, but also be capable of literary devices and poetry. In addition to this, if we're aiming at a language that fulfils certain moral requirements, it would also have to be easy enough for the average person to learn to fluency by the age of 15 or so, to make sure that all can have access to it, and not just the elites of society.
Now I'll assume here that you're referring to an international human language and not computer language. In taht case, how would we go about it? As a short-term, temporary and partial solution, I believe that adopting a policy similar to that of the springboard2languages project or that of the Italian Ministry of Education, simply allowing interested schools to teach Esperanto as an alternative second-language to fulfil graduation requirements would a step in the right direction.
If we're talking about a more long-term and complete solution, then I believe the ony way to go about that would be to consult with the members of the UN to either adopt or create a language that they could all agree to, that would be easy for all to learn, which could then be taught children in all schools.
I don't see the short-term and long-term solutions to be mutually exclusive though. In fact, I believe that they are not only compatible, but even mutually supportive of one another. After all, before we could ever have everyone learn Esperanto compulsorily, we'd first have to allow schools to teach it at their own free will, since otherwise we'd have a teacher shortage anyway. So the growth of Esperanto would still need to be gradual and sustainable.
And as for long-term solutions, before we can convince the world to accept an end to the privileged linguistic status of the elites through an agreed-upon world aucxiliary language, that status would need to be considerably weekened already. Esperanto could do that once it should have grown enough. In this sense, even if Esperanto is not to become the final world auxiliary language of the future, it would still prove to be a necessary step towards that goal. In this sense, Esperanto would still serve a necessary purpose even if only as a stepping stone to another language.