Ludovic Zamenhof was born in 1859 in Poland. In 1887 he introduced Esperanto to the world. Esperanto is a simple language he created to bring the world together. Esperanto has a Romantic influence and resembles many Slavic languages. Zamenhof decided to assemble his own language instead of bringing back an old language like Latin or classic Greek because those languages are too complex to learn easily.
Zamenhof was trying to solve many social problems with the creation of Esperanto. He figured Esperanto would make international communication easier and could possibly bring peace to Europe. One of the benefits of Esperanto is that it is not culturally biased.
When it first came out, Esperanto received mixed reviews. Some liked it and some didn’t. In the 20th century the West, including Western Europe and America, stilled showed no interest in Esperanto. Even though these places had many different types of people living there that spoke many different languages. Eastern Europe and China though saw the benefits of using a common language. By the 1970s anywhere between two and five million people studied or spoke Esperanto. There was even the possibility that Esperanto would become the official language of the European Union. Unfortunately Zamenhof did not get to see the rise in popularity that Esperanto got because he died in 1917.
Instead of Esperanto being the language of the world, English is. Even though English has idiosyncrasies, nonphonetic spelling, and consists of cultural biases it is still more popular than Esperanto, which has none of these negatives. English is more practical than Esperanto because it is a “mother tongue” language. English is also well known because it is the language of science, research, finance, investments, music, and movies. Approximately one billion people either speak English or in the process of learning English. Even 80% of web sites are in English. One of the inconveniences of Esperanto is that not many people speak it.
The goal of Esperanto is similar to the goal of standards committees. In order for there to be human communication a common language is necessary. A common language is especially important in the medical field for instance. The American Society for Testing and Materials was the first medical data standards committee established. It was started in 1970 and its purpose was to define standards related to medical information. Since then many committees have been created for the purpose of creating and maintaining standards and identifying communication problems in the medical field.
Wow! I had no idea that there was a language which someone had created on their own, and I find the reason he created it to be amazing. For someone to have created a language in an effort to create a world peace situation is wonderful. I feel like Zamenhof was the start of the ability to make languages for specific areas of concentration. It is sad however, to see that he was unable to see at least some fame for his language was had.
ReplyDeleteThe headline "The Decline and Fall of Esperanto" is just dead wrong - it has neither declined nor fallen. For the present situation of the language, see
ReplyDeletehttp://uea.org/info/angla.html
Gunnar is right.
ReplyDeleteThe web site http://www.lernu.net gets 120,000 hits each month.
It is unfortunate that prejudice is holding Esperanto back. We should oppose the linguistic imperialis of English.
And don't forget to mention the 7-point Prague Manifesto for a modern rationale for non-ethnic Esperanto (common second language for all):
ReplyDeletehttp://lingvo/org
and for some up-to-date facts try 'Esperanto Today':
http://esperantic.org/en/research/eotoday
So much for decline and fall!
This article was extremely interesting! I initially connected the idea of Esperanto with the metric system, the attempt to create an universal language for scientific data. (The United States did not accept this method of language either!) The benefits of this universal language are shown through its ability to easily convey data throughout the world. If the written and spoken word could be as easily conveyed, information and literature could be understood across the globe! People could communicate easily with others in various countries! However, I agree that a central issue is in convincing the world to learn a completely new language that does not adhere to any standard “mother tongue” or connect to any cultural convention. Without this foundation, this language is like Pangaea, a marvelous city floating outside of our current understanding of language.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to me that the article mentioned that while Esperanto had been accepted by some, English is widely spoken. English, being a combination of various languages, is rather complicated not only in verbal communication but especially in written correspondence. I agree with the article that English has various different spelling and mechanical rules that involve several exceptions. I also agree that English has become an universal language, which many can speak and read . The popularity of English, through its exposure in several forms of media and study, is a fascinating concept but one I cannot fully comprehend. English has not always been the accepted language of the sciences, of the church, or of literature. In fact, this vernacular was seen as despicable and lowly in several instances. How and when did English become the universal language? Did the monetary and political power of English speaking countries allow for more advances in these fields, producing more works in a common language? Or, is English simply that new language that has its base in such a multitude of languages that it can be incorporated easily into many?
This is by far one of the more interesting articles that I have read. I found it astounding that a man would undertake the idea of creating and dispersing a universal language on his own. That being said, it would appear that English and Chinese are the most predominately spoken languages as of right now, and they are continuing to grow. As nice as it would be to develop a universal tongue, it just won't happen. There are too many countries that struggle for power, why would any of them agree on speaking a universal language. Much like Elizabeth's brilliant point, look at how the metric system caught on in the United States.
ReplyDeleteWhat a very sweet and endearing man! To create a language based unbiasly and romantic to bring peace. Though it didnt work out like he wanted it to and he didnt live to see its popularity in some places, the intentions were true. I would have to agree with the author though in order to have sucessful communication you have to have it in common. Though esperanto didnt work out in the long run, English can sometimes be romantic, unbiased, humorous and fun too.
ReplyDeleteI am amazed to find that so many people don't realize that new languages are invented and die all the time, not just in the real world, but in books as well (J.R.R. Tolkien anyone?).
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I hadn't heard of a language being created specifically to bring peace to a region until now. Also, I hadn't heard of this language until now. I think this is part of the reason people aren't learning it; they just don't know about it. If the concept was taught in schools around the world, perhaps English wouldn't be the most widely spoken/taught language.
This article is indeed interesting. While largely fact-based, it contains some erroneous premises and conclusions. Let me take them point by point. I hope you'll forgive me for the length.
ReplyDeleteThe Decline and Fall of Esperanto: Lessons for Standards Committees
As mentioned by Gunnar, Esperanto never declined and fell. People tend to notice the most visible face of Esperanto - the initial planning phase and official interest in the language - and base their judgment on that. However, the planning phase, as important as it was, just kicked off the language, while official interest has varied considerably over time and space and has, overall, contributed little to the growth of Esperanto. Much more productive and stable, over both time and space, and ultimately almost solely responsible for the growth of Esperanto over the years, but alas much less visible, is poplular interest in Esperanto.
In spite of its beginnings as a planned language, what few outside the Esperanto community know is that Zamenhof, shortly after publishing it, relinquished all rights to the language, set it free to become, not his language, not the language of a committee, but that of the community, free to evolve and grow at the whims of its speakers. There has always been an Esperanto Academy, but it has no real regulatory power. Esperanto has been, almost from the beginning, a bottom-up pull-phenomenon, spreading by word of mouth, taking hold among individuals who discover it and then choose to learn it and freely join a naturally growing community of speakers who own the language, rather than a top-down push-phenomenon driven by committees and organizations spreading the word through advertising or policy to people who learn it, if reluctantly, out of some external imperative. This bottom-up, pull-type of growth tends to be slow and steady but low-key - until it attains a critical mass where it draws attention by its sheer size and just takes off, a point we have not yet reached.
To the outside world, it could indeed appear that Esperanto has risen and fallen. But to speakers of the language, it has been a steady if, at times, laborious and even dangerous climb.
Esperanto has a Romantic influence and resembles many Slavic languages.
True, about 80% of Esperanto's roots are of Latin origin ("Romantic" [which should be "Romance"] here meaning "of or related to Latin-derived languages", not "love-struck" :-)). The phonology (the sounds used) and semantics (how words map to reality) are somewhat influenced by Slavic languages, but to say that Esperanto resembles many Slavic languages is just not true; only a couple of percent of the vocabulary is of Slavic origin, and the grammar is decidedly non-Slavic.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteZamenhof was trying to solve many social problems with the creation of Esperanto. He figured Esperanto would make international communication easier and could possibly bring peace to Europe.
"Alleviate" or "help solve" is perhaps a more accurate word than "solve". Zamenhof felt that communication problems were an important component of interethnic conflict, but was not so naive as to believe that a common language would usher in peace - a step in the right direction, yes, but cause peace wholesale, no.
In the 20th century, the West, including Western Europe and America, still showed no interest in Esperanto.
That is, no official interest. As mentioned above, Esperanto has been mostly a popular movement. Esperanto is alive and well in mainland Western Europe, and Brazil is a current hotspot of Esperanto growth. English-speaking countries seem more resistant to Esperanto; Esperanto presence in the U.S. and the U.K. is disproportionately small.
Eastern Europe and China though saw the benefits of using a common language.
Yes, Eastern Europe historically, and China currently as another hotspot of Esperanto growth.
By the 1970s anywhere between two and five million people studied or spoke Esperanto.
Probably between 1 and 2 million speakers in the 70's, 2 million and up today. Many different estimates of varying credibility exist out there, but the most scientific estimates to date were done by (the now late) Sidney S. Culbert, professor of sociolinguistics, provider of number-of-speaker figures to the World Almanac and Book of Facts, and Esperanto speaker. He estimated the number of Esperanto speakers by locating, visiting and interviewing Esperantists where they lived, and came up with a first figure rounded to a million speakers. Later, he bumped his estimate up to 2 million. (The Almanac, for whom he provided the figures, rounds numbers to the nearest million). Again, slow, steady low-key growth in the number of actual speakers. Interestingly, the language seems to be picking up steam in recent years, thanks largely to the Internet; one could almost say that Esperanto is becoming an Internet language.
There was even the possibility that Esperanto would become the official language of the European Union.
This is a long-standing proposal from Esperanto speakers, and there is a European political party whose platform includes promoting Esperanto as an official European-Union language. The European Union has, alas, so far ignored all suggestions.
(last part, promise!)
ReplyDeleteEnglish is more practical than Esperanto because it is a “mother tongue” language.
Actually, there are native speakers of Esperanto, children of couples who speak Esperanto at home, either by choice or by necessity. The fact that it has a much smaller percentage of native speakers than other languages is not a handicap to learning it; in fact, it's an asset, as it tends to keep the language easy and uniform, desirable qualities in an international auxiliary language. Besides, Esperanto is used exactly like every other natural language and has, in fact, become a bona fide natural language, used in every imaginable situation. People who use it experience it to be just as fluid, expressive and real as any other language, with only one difference: it's a lot easier to learn, so you're up and running much faster, and have a real chance at mastery in a reasonable amount of time, regardless of your native language.
English is also well known because it is the language of science, research, finance, investments, music, and movies.
True, Esperanto does not dominate in these fields. But it has been and continues to be used in all these areas (OK, there aren't any Esperanto banks or other financial institutions that I know of, but Esperanto is used in business, which does involve financing and investment :-).
Even 80% of web sites are in English.
That figure is at least 10 years old; in 2007, it was 45%. As the number of non-English Websites continues to rise, the percentage of English ones will continue to fall. One of those rising languages is Esperanto - try Googling "Esperanto", or checking out the Esperanto Wikipedia ("Vikipedio" in Esperanto).
One of the inconveniences of Esperanto is that not many people speak it.
That's true - but it's an inconvenience only because it makes it a bit harder to find Esperanto speakers. But there are enough Esperanto speakers out there that you can, if you want, feel part of a community and never run out of interesting things to do in Esperanto. The Internet has made it particularly easy to find other Esperanto speakers.
The goal of Esperanto is similar to the goal of standards committees.
The goal, yes - the methods, no. As mentioned above, Esperanto has been a grass-roots, bottom-up, pull phenomenon, the opposite of the hierarchial, top-down, push approach of a standards committee. Still, the goal of Esperanto as a "standard" is not to supercede and replace, but to supplement and complete by breaching a gap instead of ousting what's already there by being a common second language, not a unique one-world language. In that way, it is very different from a standards committee.
I'm with everyone else on this one, I had never heard about this language until I read this article. I think it was interesting that this man created a language just to create peace. Unfortunatly, it will never work, one country is always going to want to have power over others. People aren't learning this language enough. If people don't know about this language then how can it become a universal language? Also, a lot of people that already know and communicate in one language might not be interested in learning another language just to bring peace to the world. They might not want to take the effor into learning another language or it might not be available to them to even learn it.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of having a universal language is really cool. But I doubt that it will ever happen. There are already so many people that are opposed to learning a second language. But the fact that he made up his own language is very impressive! It is a good thought, but I doubt that the idea will ever take off.
ReplyDeleteThe article is interesting, and I see where Zamenhof did it to help. However, there is no need for more languages. We have a sufficient one that works for us, sure it may not be perfect but we all understand and get our points across. Esparanto, if anything will simply seperate regions because it would just be another language for everyone to learn, and many people may choose not to learn it. Also, I understand we need to communicate but am against the idea of One universal language. Every language is apart of culture, "uniting" everyone through language would only take away from that culture.
ReplyDeleteHaving a universal language is something that is a really good ideas with many of the language barriers that people today still face however i feel that it is something that will never be achieved do to the fact that there are so many different cultures and not everyone is going to want to learn or speak the same language. it is a good idea to have but will most likely not happen.
ReplyDeleteI think it is really awesome that someone created a new language with intentions to bring peace to Europe. There are a lot of language barriers today along with many people being unwilling to learn a new language. Creating a whole new language is something to be admired but getting everyone to learn it is very unlikely.
ReplyDeleteZamenhof was genuis for creating a langaue to help Europeans to communicate with each other. I which I could do something along those lines, because just from him making that one language and it spreading like it did, he became very famous.
ReplyDeleteI never head of this till I read the article. You hear stories of twins that create a language that they can only understand, but to see a man who is trying to create whole new language is amazing. I just can not see a universal language happening one day. To much power as to do with it. The dominant countries with a strong economic system will have the power of languages that will be used for business
ReplyDeleteI believe that one world language would be great. I believe the biggest barrier between nations is not culture, but language. If everyone knew one certain language, in addition to their native language it would be so much easier to communicate in different countries. It would be easier to communicate in this country, with how many different nationalities we have living in our America.
ReplyDeleteEsperanto keeps outliving its obituary-writers.
ReplyDeleteDon't overlook the idea of using Esperanto as a springboard to other languages.
Google for "springboard to languages".