60 Ideas for Europe

The most important difficulty for communication in Europe is multiplicity of languages. Of course, English is spoken by a lot of people, but for those who speak a romanic language, it is’nt an easy language. And above all, most of all don’t want a national language to become the european common language. So, we should teach esperanto in every school in Europe, as soon as young children arrive at school. It is a very easy language, because artificial, which could become an official common language in every country of European Union. Of course, each nation would keep also its own languages, but communication would be made easier between european citizens. Moreover, E.U. institutions (Strasbourg parliament…) would save money, by getting free from problems of translation. Esperanto would be a “bridge-language” inside political and administrative structures of Europe.

Author :
Print

Comments

  1. I don’t think the EU needs a ‘common language’, diversity being one of the hallmarks of the EU. Most business is conducted in one of the three most widely used languages Engish, French & German. It seems to work ok?

  2. I speak Esperanto and love it. I think it would solve a lot of problems for people to learn it, cost of translation would be one of them.

  3. Whether the EU needs a common language is for its citizens to decide.

    It’s worth considering, however, that the current system “works” by giving Britain an €18.000.000.000 subsidy each year from non-English speaking countries of the EU. This was the conclusion of an October 2005 report by Swiss economist François Grin.

    Translations in various languages can be found here:
    http://www.lingvo.org/grin/

    If I were one of the almost 400 million non-English-speaking
    citizens of the EU—especially one from a poorer member state—I wouldn’t be too happy about this.

  4. Quoting Mike: “I don’t think the EU needs a ‘common language’, diversity being one of the hallmarks of the EU. ”

    In some situations, diversity is a good option, in others it is not.
    Should people be allowed to drive at will on the left or right side of the road because we want to preserve diversity?
    EU needs a common language more than anything else, more than the euro, the EU bank, the army.
    It is obvious that one common language would remove a lot of misery.

    The prove “ad absurdum” :
    Would you recommend the United States to drop English in some states in favour of Spanish, French or German, just because diversity is good.
    As stupid as asking them to abandon the dollar.
    Yes, a painful decision must be taken sometimes.
    Esperanto is the least painful option of all.
    A short pain for a very large relieve.
    One shall not forbid people to learn English, Spanish, French and German in addition.
    But I bet more people would choose some other minor language instead.
    Is this not a better way to preserve diversity?

  5. Here are two recent reports which address this very issue:
    1) the ‘Grin report’:
    http://cisad.adc.education.fr/hcee/documents/rapport_Grin.pdf
    [already mentioned by Hoss above – deals mainly with the costs v. benefits of several scenarios]
    2) ‘Maalouf report’:
    http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/doc/maalouf/report_en.pdf
    [sticks to the official policy of ‘mother tongue + two’]
    Which of these two reports seems more realistic to you? Mike #1 seems not to make any distinction between ‘common language’ and ‘common second language’. We need a non-ethnic, non-territorial common second language for ‘universal bilingualism’ [YOUR language + Esperanto for all] and equal language rights for all.

  6. I don’t think that it would be useful to start Esperanto as a common language for the European Union.
    To Thierry’s comment: ‘Of course, English is spoken by a lot of people, but for those who speak a romanic language, it is’nt an easy language’ I can only reply that we all (who are not native English-speakers) had to learn English, it is the most widely spoken second language in the world and serves in most countries as a bridge language. Why should the European Union now start enforcing a language that is not practically used anywhere?
    Esperanto was a good idea 100 years ago, but the world has its own dynamics and English has established itself (and been established by the British) as the language to get by with in the whole world. The idea that the main European bridge language should be one that is not attached to one of the member countries is good, but it is in my opinion not possible to make people learn and accept yet another language next to English (needed for all other communication worldwide), German, French, Spanish, Russian and all the other languages that are being taught at school.
    Even in China signs are in English and Chinese! In Germany vending machines ‘speak’ English as well as French and Spanish. Forcing all the inhabitants of the EU to learn a new language after educational systems, business habits etc. have been fixed on English can simply not be realized!
    Let’s just force the British to learn one of the other EU-languages properly 🙂 (most of the English I know had classes in French or German but are not even able to order a coffee in that language).

  7. Advocating multilingualism, rather than the Esperanto solution is just cover for supporting the linguistic imperialism of English.

    Communication should be for all and not just for an academic or political elite. This is why the use of Esperanto protects minority languages as it acts as a neutral bridge, and places all languages on an equal footing.

    Check http://www.Esperanto.net

  8. I have used Esperanto in practice for over forty years. I have been given guidance about Bulgarian television, discussed unemployment in France, argued about political issues in Germany, discussed opera in Milan – alll through the medium of Esperanto. I really do recommend it.

  9. Language is not all about just communicating with each other. Languages reflect various cultures and different kinds of people.

    Variety of languages, cultures and people is a special character of Europe, and it should remain so. By supporting these variations within Europe we are encouraging people to respect and preserve their own culture but also respecting other cultures and learning from them.

    We, the people in Europe, will never look the same, or think in exactly the same way, or have the same kind of background, but we can still build Europe together without giving up one of the most important features of human life: our own language through which we define ourselves and others around us.

  10. I couldn’t agree more with this proposal. It seems to me the only possible way to protect our European linguistic treasure and ancient languages as Basque. Diversity is not only a word to be used for the European slogans, it is a commitment, or it is nothing…

  11. Esperanto is also usefull to learn other national languages (different from mother tonge). I know many people who feel bad because they couldn’t learn any foreign language. You can learn Esperanto easily in only some months and you will feel proud of yourself. It’s the first step to learn a foreign national language.

  12. Per esperanto, la europeanoj kapablus uzi neutralan lingvon por interparoli : Esperanto estas la lingvo kiu taugas por konstrui veran Europon !

  13. I have lived in Japan where I met many young professional people who although they had studied English for nine years were unable to converse in it. I also met many able to speak Esperanto and a few of these had studied it as a hobby for only months yet could communicate satisfactorily in it.

    It is difficult to persuade people to accept new ideas so two hundred years after the adoption of metric measurements in France they are still not in use everywhere. It is noteworthy that the theory of metic measurements was published two hundred years its adoption anywhere in the world.

  14. Esperanto is neutral
    It does carry national, political, cultural, financial specific interests.

    It has not be designed to replace any other langage, but as a common communication tool
    It fulfill the requirements for such a tool: very simple rules and vocabulary, clear prononciation, essential for very easy larning.
    Its main advantage is precisely that it “is not practically used anywhere”, as wrote Sandra. It is not an everyday, a vernacular langage. So it will not change so quickly. Stability is essential for an international tool.

    Reading that “is the most widely spoken second language in the world” makes me laughing: Which percent of these so-called english speaking people would be able to exchange ideas in a real conversation talk? Esperanto will allow this in a few months of learning.

    Just typing “esperanto” on Google or others allows access of anybody in any langage to very efficient, interactive and free learning mehods.

  15. Pourquoi se priver de cette langue si intéressante à apprendre et ce, tellement plus rapidement que toute autre ?

  16. Sally is right – language=culture=heritage.
    So a second common language that will not wipe out the others is the best way forward – and if you don’t want to learn it (Esperanto or another) leave that to the EU translators and interpreters. That will allow the rest to use their native tongues. We will get the best MEPs rather than just the linguistically able.

    And I don’t want to lose my English heritage by being swamped with US ‘culture’

  17. Je pense que seul l’espéranto peut être la langue commune de l’union européenne. Ce rôle de langue commune ne peut être réalisé par l’anglais dont les difficultés de compréhensions auditives sont très importantes.
    Je dirai même que en attendant d’apprendre l’esperanto et pour la nécessaire période de transition parlons en allemand qui est une langue beaucoup plus compréhensible que l’anglais. Une écoute comparative sur internet vaut mieux qu’un long discours.

  18. Esperanto: neutraal, geen uitzonderingen, creatieve woordvorming,eenvoudige grammatica, geen andere culturen verdringende cultuur.
    Heeft zich in 100 jaar bewezen en blijft de jongste taal.
    Dit is geschreven in het Nederlands, want waarom zou ik Engels gebruiken?

  19. Comment/Commentaire:

    Widespread (and unrestricted) teaching/learning/use of Esperanto is the solution to a very large number of financial, moral, ethical, scientific and “bio-diversity-preservation” problems.

    It is also one of the main keys toward a democratically united Planet (rather than a “mercatically globalized” one : a unification that is profit-driven-only).

    The current real holders of financial and military power suffer from a kind of mental confusion that is blinding them (for the moment) to the necessity of caring first to Humans’ Simple and Real Needs, not to economic “theories” that have amply been proven wrong by experience.

    When they will understand how disastrous – even to them – their current policies are, they will start supporting many long-due and long-delayed changes: this will of course include the move to Esperanto as the way towards a kind of ethical unification and a tool for mutual-understanding between all nations.
    ——————————————-
    L’usage, l’enseignement/apprentissage généralisés (et sans restrictions) de l’espéranto résoudraient un très grand nombre de problèmes de nature financière, morale, éthique, scientifique et liés à la “préservation de la bio-diversité”.

    C’est en fait l’une des clés essentielles à l’avénement d’une Planète démocratiquement unifiée (plutôt que “mercatiquement globalisée” : une unification menée par la recherche aveugle du profit).

    Actuellement, les vrais détenteurs du pouvoir financier et militaire souffrent d’une sorte de confusion mentale, qui les rends aveugles (pour le moment) à la nécessité de s’occuper en priorité à satisfaire les Réels Besoins Elémentaires des Humains, et non d’obéir à des “théories” éconimiques amplement démenties par l’expérience.

    Quand ils auront réalisé les conséquences ô combien désastreuses – y compris pour eux-même – de leur politique actuelle, ils apporteront leur soutien à bien des changement (nécessaires depuis longtemps et toujours retardés): y compris bien sûr l’adoption de l’espéranto, vecteur d’une sorte d’unification éthique et outil de la compréhension mutuelle entre tous les peuples.

  20. För mig, som har svenska som första språk vore Esperanto den perfekta lösningen. Via Esperanto har jag redan haft tillfälle ta del av kinesiska, brasilianska, italienska, ryska kulturyttringar, något som jag annars inte skulle ha kunnat göra.

    Esperanto är ett perfekt hjälpmedel att överföra kulturell information till människor som inte behärskar mitt modersmål.

    ————————————————–
    Por mi, kies unua lingvo estas la sveda, estus Esperanto la perfekta solvo. Per Esperanto mi jam havis eblecon ?ui ?inajn, brazilajn, italajn, rusajn kultura?ojn, kiujn mi alie ne estus povinta fari.

    Esperanto estas perfekta helpilo por transdoni kulturinformoj al homoj kiuj ne regas mian nacian lingvon.

  21. För mig är Esperanto den perfekta kulturfömedlaren. Har gett mig möjlighet att läsa kinesisk, rysk, italiens, brasiliansk litteratur vilket hade varit tidsmässigt omöjligt om jag varit tvungen att lära alla dessa språk.

    Ergo: Esperanto är den perfekta kulturförmedlaren.

  22. Esperanto is de enige realistische, demokratische en rechtvaardige oplossing voor een vlotte communicatie tussen alle burgers van de EU. Esperanto betekent de beste bescherming van ieders eigen taal (officieel of niet) tegen verdrukking door een dominante nationale taal (geen naam nodig … deze webstek vond ik alleen in die taal!): achter Esperanto schuilen geen grootmachten, legers, economische of koloniale belangen en vooral geen staat, die belastingsopbrengsten investeert in de dominantie van zijn nationale taal.

    Esperanto estas la sola realisma, demokrata kaj justa solvo por facila komunikado inter ?iuj EUaj civitanoj. Esperanto signifas la plej bonan protekton de ?ies propra lingvo (?u oficiala, ?u ne) kontra? subpremado far iu dominema nacia lingvo (ne necesas nomi ?in, ?i tiun retejon mi trovis nur en tiu lingvo!): malanta? Esperanto ne ka?i?as grandpotencoj, armeoj, ekonomiaj a? koloniigaj potencoj kaj precipe ne ?tato, kiu reinvestas impostajn enspezojn en dominadon de sia nacia lingvo.

  23. Esperanto is de enige realistische, demokratische en rechtvaardige oplossing voor een vlotte communicatie tussen alle burgers van de EU. Esperanto betekent de beste bescherming van ieders eigen taal (officieel of niet) tegen verdrukking door een dominante nationale taal (geen naam nodig … deze webstek vond ik alleen in die taal!): achter Esperanto schuilen geen grootmachten, legers, economische of koloniale belangen en vooral geen staat, die belastingsopbrengsten investeert in de dominantie van zijn nationale taal.
    Deze webstek aanvaardt UTF-8 gecodeerde teksten. Waarom werd mijn tekst in Esperanto geweigerd?

  24. Mi provas sendi la Esperantigon de mia anta?a teksto.
    Esperanto estas la sola realisma, demokrata kaj justa solvo por facila komunikado inter ?iuj EUaj civitanoj. Esperanto signifas la plej bonan protekton de ?ies propra lingvo (?u oficiala, ?u ne) kontra? subpremado far iu dominema nacia lingvo (ne necesas nomi ?in, ?i tiun retejon mi trovis nur en tiu lingvo!): malanta? Esperanto ne ka?i?as grandpotencoj, armeoj, ekonomiaj a? koloniigaj potencoj kaj precipe ne ?tato, kiu reinvestas impostajn enspezojn en dominadon de sia nacia lingvo.

  25. Mi provis sendi Esperantigon de mia antaua mesagho en la nederlanda. Venis jena averto
    “WordPress database error: [Illegal mix of collations (latin1_swedish_ci,IMPLICIT) and (utf8_general_ci,COERCIBLE) for operation ‘=’]”
    Do jen surogatskribite:
    Esperanto estas la sola realisma, demokrata kaj justa solvo por facila komunikado inter chiuj EUaj civitanoj. Esperanto signifas la plej bonan protekton de chies propra lingvo (chu oficiala, chu ne) kontrau subpremado far iu dominema nacia lingvo (ne necesas nomi ghin, chi tiun retejon mi trovis nur en tiu lingvo!): malantau Esperanto ne kashighas grandpotencoj, armeoj, ekonomiaj au koloniigaj potencoj kaj precipe ne shtato, kiu reinvestas impostajn enspezojn en dominadon de sia nacia lingvo.

  26. Esperanto estas la sola lingvo, kiu apartenas al chiuj homoj kaj ne al hegemonia lando. Nur ghi do taugas por la internacia, egaleca komunikado, des pli ke ghi estas multe pli facile lernebla ol la naciaj lingvoj.

    L’espéranto est la seule langue, qui appartient à tous les hommes et non pas à un pays hégémonique. C’est donc la seule qui convienne pour la communication internationale, sur un pied d’égalité, d’autant plus qu’elle est beaucoup plus facile à apprendre que les langues nationales

  27. An additional auxiliary language for all those who feel discriminated …

    How to safeguard cultural and linguistic identities and to communicate in a Community with 23 and more languages in a comprehensive and non-discriminatory way? – and, how can multilingualism give an answer to cover both targets?
    That’s the challenge we are confronted with!

    The Commission’s favored model “mother tongue plus two”, does not give a satisfactory answer to this challenge; if one of the two languages is a national one, discrimination between people who are professionally competing persists !
    Only, if one of the two languages besides the mother tongue is an auxiliary (or planned) language (like Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua and others) for inter-cultural, inter-ethnique and international communication, efficiency in multilateral contacts and diversity in language instruction could be realized.
    For those who do believe that English should become or remain the practical instrument for multilateral communication can stick to their opinion, but they should allow all those who feel discriminated by being obliged to speak and work in English to choose a non-discriminatory auxiliary language, whether this is Esperanto or an other planned language, does not matter for the moment. It is the long-term concept which counts !

    We can even go so far by saying, if in the European Institutions (besides in the political functions as Deputy, Minister or Commissioner) such an option would be introduced as an additional working language in the medium term (after scientific feasibility studies), and, the actual “working languages” would be phased out when their use approaches the share of the mother tongue speakers, we would have a volontary process towards non-discrimination, only, if people feel discriminated in their inter-cultural and international communication.

    If, one could learn such an auxiliary language in two weeks holidays (as eight civil servants of the European Commission tried in 1983), what is the problem with such an investment?

    Or, in the end, because of its structure and regularity, that auxiliary language could easily be used as a “language orientation course” for better and quicker learning the target language, which can, for the time being, remain English, we would have at least, at the private basis, in the long run (one or two generations) the choice between an international language like English and a non-discriminatory auxiliary language.
    For those who will opt the latter solution, they are than free of choosing as second language, a neighbour’s language, which can be a national, regional or local one ( just according to their private or professional preferences), and, thus, they would become the first “Europeans” exercising a “real” multilingualism which is neutral and non-discriminatory !

  28. Ohne neutrale gemeinsame Sprache gibt es keine europaeische Identitaet. Ohne gemeinsame Identitaet gibt es kein EU auf lange Frist.
    Das wichtigste Symbol der Identitaet ist Sprache. Englisch ist sowie auch andere Soprachen gut fuer die Kommunikation, doch kann es nicht die europaeische Identitaet symbolisieren. Ob diese neutrale Sprache Esperanto oder Latein ist, ist es egal. Doch fuer das Neulernen ist es nicht egal ob man eine leichte und kombinationsfreie Sprache oder eine sehr schwere und nicht flexible Sprache auswaehlt.

  29. Warum sollen die Buerger der EU nicht ueber eine neutrale Sprache verfuegen, die es ihnen ermoeglichte miteinander zu sprechen? Ich finde, dass der Staat Israel sein Sprachenproblem gut geloest hat. Nicht die englische Sprache wurde fuer den neuen Staat ausgewaehlt und seinen Buergern angeboten, sondern eine Sprache die es vorher aber gar nicht gab und die am Tisch von einem Sprachwissenschaftler zusammengestellt worden war. Esperanto hat eine aehnliche Geschichte und sollte deshalb nicht von der Hand gewiesen werden. Inzwischen hat es sich gezeigt, dass es eine lebende und funktionelle Sprache ist.

  30. Perché i cittadini dell’Unione Europea non devono disporre di una lingua che permetterebbe a loro di parlarsi? Trovo che lo Stato d’Israele ha risolto bene il suo problema linguistico. Per il nuovo Stato non è stata scelta, e offerta ai suoi cittadini, la lingua inglese, ma una lingua che prima di allora non esisteva neanche e che era stata messa insieme a tavolino da un linguista. Esperanto ha una storia simile e per questo non dovrebbe essere ripudiato. Nel frattempo s’è dimostrato che è una lingua vivente e funzionale.

  31. I think this is a good idea, for the reasons of economic and political neutrality and justice set out above. We live in a global language hierarchy where those who speak the most dominant language (at this point English) are rewarded favourably.

    One of the most important factors in this debate is of course diversity. It is clear to me that the increasing use of English erodes diversity – around 2/3rds of the languages around today will be gone by the end of the century. The right of Europeans to use their own language is being superceded by the needs of English speakers and by our political strength alone.

    On the other hand, Esperanto speakers have been among the foremost protectors of minority languages and promoters of linguistic diversity. If we are to learn common second language at all, in the interests of justice, diversity and neutrality it should be easy and cheap to learn, the language of no one country and should facilitate the learning of further languages. The only widely-spoken language which meets these criteria is Esperanto.

    Esperanto is already one of the most taught languages in Hungary, has already been favourably endorsed by many European parliamentarians (even by hunger strikes and by nomination for a Nobel Prize), as well as UNESCO, leading organisations and thinkers, is already spoken by tens of thousands of Europeans and hundreds of thousands of people around the globe.

  32. Mike said “diversity being one of the hallmarks of the EU.”
    This blog is not really a proof of that, for it is entirely in english….
    You said diversity ?

  33. Il n’y a pas de multilinguisme durable de bon aloi sans la Langue Internationale espéranto !
    Chacun a le droit (articles 1 et 2 de la Déclaration universelle des Droits de l’Homme) d’explorer le monde au moyen de sa langue maternelle, quelle qu’elle soit, car c’est incontestablement pour soi le meilleur instrument d’investigation et de réflexion, le plus efficace qui soit !
    Pour faire part des connaissances qu’on a alors acquises aux différents membres allophones de sa communauté, et pour viser l’efficacité maximale au moindre coût, et la commodité, rien ne vaut la langue-pont espéranto qui épouse sans contrainte et avec naturel le cheminement de la pensée humaine !
    Vive donc la “langue équitable” pour construire une Europe et un village planétaire où il fait bon vivre pour tous et pour chacun : dis-moi quelle(s) langue(s) de communication tu choisis de privilégier en Europe et dans le monde et je te dirai quelle société tu nous prépares !
    *****
    Por tiuj kiuj ne regas la francan :
    – Ne povas esti daùrigebla multlingveco bonkvalita sen la Lingvo Internacia (Esperanto !).
    – Laù la artikoloj unu kaj du de la Universala Deklaracio de Homaj Rajtoj, chiu homo rajtas esplori la mondon pere de sia gepatra lingvo, kiu ajn ghi estas, char por chiu ghi farighas nekontesteble la plej bona, la plej efika ilo por elserchi kaj mediti.
    – Por sciigi la akiritajn spertojn al la malsamlingvanoj de sia komunumo kaj por celi maksimuman efikecon je la plej malgranda kosto en tute agrabla etoso de samrajteco kaj egaleco laù la lingvo, nenio superas la ponto-lingvo Esperanto, kiu adaptighas senghene kaj nature al la progreso de la homa pensado !
    – Vivu do “la lingvo senpartieca” por konstrui kaj Eùropon kaj planedan vilaghon, kie estas agrable vivi por chiuj : diru al mi kiu(j)n lingva(j)n komunikilo(j)n vi prefere elektas por Eùropo kaj la mondo, kaj mi diros al vi kian socion vi pretigas por ni !

  34. Jestem za esperantem jako j?zykiem pomostowym w Unii Europejskiej.
    ———
    Mi preferas Esperanton kiel ponta lingvo en Euhropa Unio.

  35. What makes the Eu “special” is the number of languages we speak. And you dont show respect to other member countries if you would make them speak Esperanto. For example I’m from Slovenia (anybody knows where that is, if you guess that is somewhere in Europe, you are getting close).
    I speak german,english,a bit french,chinese, japanese and I’m learning latin and i will also learn Turkish.I like that the European Union is full of different languages.So why speak esperanto if english works just fine as an international language.If we all would speak one language,where would be the colourness of different accents?Some of you dont like that english is the dominant language.Why is that so?For example take a look at that blog, we have lots of languages in which the page can be shown, but no slovenian?how comes that?Why couldn’t latin or french be the language of Europe?Why esperanto,it isnt even a natural language, it is even more dead the latin.:-)
    Slovenia holds the presidency of the European union and still there is no slovenian language on this page,blog or maybe I havent found it.

    And If you just want esperanto as a global language because those you use,speak and write in english are rewarded and you not,that isn’t a problem of the European union and those who joined Eu.

    Respect all the languages that are in the European Union.

    Greetings from Slovenia!

  36. The EU and by extension the whole world is in dire need of a COMMON, EASY, NEUTRAL and SECOND language for all. The only serious candidate to become the second bridging language of all citizens is ESPERANTO. It meets all the requirements to become a real International Auxiliary Language.
    It’s obvious that English – although being a fantastic language – does not meet these criteria. It’s certainly not EASY (choatic spelling, pronunciation, extremely idiomatic …) and definitely not NEUTRAL (invading culture, sponsored by a dying military-industrial superpower, with complements to Mr Georges W. Bush and his neo-con mates …) at all.

  37. Yes, besides all our national and regional languages we need a common one – esperanto, la internacia lingvo.

  38. You’re right Jairo. Everyone speaks English already. Apart from the English football manager, that is.

  39. I have taugh English professionally in New York for Sixteen years. I occasionally teach Esperanto. English gave me a salary. Esperanto has given me friendship in Egypt, Israel, India, Australia, Czech Republic, France, Brazil, Holland and at least another 20 countries. I have hosted nearly 60 individuals in my home. I have met 10 thousand individual Esperanto speakers in a dozen countries during the general and worker Esperanto conferences which occur annually. Esperanto gives me hope for a genuine world of peace. Neil Blonstein, NYC

  40. There’s a good reason not to adopt Esperanto as a common language for the EU: it won’t work. It failed in the past because an artificial language just doesn’t have the capacity of a real, growing language like English.

    It’s also destructive to think of English as the ‘national language’ of England (not the UK, where Welsh, Gaelic etc. are also spoken). English is in fact spoken at a native level in the US, India, South Africa and Australia, not just the UK.

    It’s a common second language throughout Asia, Africa and South America too. Using English is simply pragmatic, however unsavoury it is for nationalistic sentimentalists.

  41. Conozco miles de personas que no hablan inglés y todavía más gente que lo habla mal. ¡No al inglés como lengua europea común!

    Mi konas milojn da personoj, kiuj ne parolas la anglan kaj multajn pli, kiuj parolas ?in tre malbone. Ne al la angla kiel lingvo komuna ?e e?ropo!

    I know thousands of people who don’t speak englis and many more who speak it very bad. No to english as a common european language!

  42. Solo puede decir que el inglés funciona bien el que no sabe de lo que está hablando. Qué rápido se olvida la gente de la muchas veces que ha recibido un “no entiendo” por respuesta.

    Nur povas diri ke la angla funkcias bone kiu ne scias pri kion li parolas. Kia rapide oni malmemoras la multajn fojojn ke oni ricevas “mi ne komprenas” pro respondo.

    Only can say that english works fine who don’t know what is he speaking about. How fast they forget the many times that they had “i don’t understand” as answer.

  43. Those who write in English here but are not native speakers seem blissfully unaware of how often they make mistakes in English. Esperanto is far more regular, and it helps the study of other languages because it gives a taste of success to those who have never known success in language learning. A carefully-constructed and nuanced role for Esperanto in the EU could be a powerful support to multilingualism and language-learning in general. The Springboard project in the UK is doing excellent practical work in this regard – have a look at http://www.springboard2languages.org.

    It is astounding that people who have never studied Esperanto feel qualified to comment on it, by describing it as “more dead than Latin”, etc. The quality of discussion improves when we all write from our own experience, limiting our comments to things we know something about.

  44. Hungary has mixed experience with Esperanto. As a small country with a unique language that is spoken by nobody, and generally very bad foreign language skills in the country we had two wakes Esperanto. In both cases, it turned out that indeed a lot of people can learn the language in a short time, and it is easier to learn than other languages. However, if this is useful, did not really turn out.

    In the Communist times people could learn Esperanto under supervision, but those, who did, could travel abroad (a right that most Hungarians were denied). Nowadays language skills are promoted with money and promotion benefits in the public schools and in the public service. Since 2004 it was decided that Esperanto, unlike Latin, is a ‘living language’ and the same benefits apply as if you learned Polish or Russian (but not the EU working languages) a yearly 5500-6000 people learn and make their exams in written and spoken Esperanto. It is said that those people choose this language who have a difficulty with learning, say, English.

    It is very difficult to assess the usefulness of learning Esperanto. Learning a traditional language gives an access to a cultural tradition, learning Esperanto gives you access to an international movement. Both can be useful. I think the Esperanto movement should concentrate on a viable target and see if using Esperanto is really applicable, people can accept it and it does eliminate translation problems. I have learned that some international professional bodies use it – it would be good to know their experience – and maybe an aim should be a limited introduction with incentives to learn in a few specific areas where all 27 member states are active, say, in one or two EU agencies as an optional working language.

    I have to admit that I am skeptical about this, but I think it is a false comparison when people put Esperanto against English. I think Esperanto may be a viable Latin, that helped scientific and legal communication even until the early 19th century over language barriers, but it was not widely spoken in Europe.

  45. Interesting how some people think English has taken over. Only 5% of the world speak English as a native language. Only 5% more speak it as a second language. It’s interesting to note that in the early twentieth century, French was supposed to be the international language that you could speak anywhere. In fact, it was only the French who voted against Esperanto as the official language of the League of Nations (had to be unanimous, you know)

    These things change around. I know the Internet may make it seem like English is everywhere, but it’s not. I know hanging out in the touristy areas of Paris and Rome make it seem like everybody speaks enough English to order fish and chips and then discuss the latest Cricket scores, but it’s just not really true. My last stay in Lyons reminded me that even the people who spoke English only spoke enough to get by in their business (the hotel people knew how to talk about extra towels, but they couldn’t explain why the metro drivers were on strike — in English). And my high school French didn’t serve me any better than their schooling in English.

    Anyway, English is not the language that everybody’s talking. Try hanging out in Romania for awhile and see how far you get speaking only English. Travel guides say that it’s spoken by 10% of the country. You probably couldn’t get out of Bucahrest without strong mime skills… or a guide that shares a common language with you and the others in that country…

    And since both of you could learn Esperanto and communicate reasonably well inside of a month (yup, 16 basic grammatical rules, consistent pronunciation and 90% of all communication being made up of a 1000 word vocabulary makes it pretty easy to learn), then neither one of you has to invest several years just to learn how to speak a broken version of the other’s language.

  46. Las buenas ideas son tercas. Y el dotar a la humanidad (por ende a Europa) de una lengua auxiliar común que, a la vez que proteja la diversidad lingüística y cultural permita una comunicación en términos de igualdad y neutralidad, lo es. USA y el Reino Unido se esfuerzan por imponernos su lengua. Si al final lo consiguieran no sería por méritos lingüísticos inherentes a la lengua inglesa, sino por intereses económicos de los países angloparlantes. ¡Nos están comiendo el coco, señores! “que si todo el mundo sabe ya inglés”, “que si no eres nadie si no lo aprendes”, “que es el idioma de los negocios y de la ciencia”… ¡Es muy cómodo y barato para un anglófono el no tener que aprender idiomas extranjeros o el saber que dando clases de inglés podría ganarse la vida a la vez que da la vuelta al mundo! Creo que las lenguas del imperio están abocadas al fracaso. Sólo una lengua neutral, una ventana abierta a todas las culturas, puede prosperar. Creo sinceramente que el Esperanto es la única solución viable.

  47. je suis d’accord pour que l’espéranto devienne la langue pont au sein de l’Europe car elle sauvegardera l’égalité des chances de tous les membres la composant.

  48. Bonsoir à tous,
    Il ne faut pas se voiler la face, l’europe ne pourras pas continuer éternellement comme ça, surtout si l’europe continu de s’agrandir.
    Il y a quand même 30% du budget de l’UE qui va dans la traduction, c’est assez colossale.
    Il faut une solution, une 2ème langue commune, pour tous se comprendre et faciliter les échanges («Unie… ») tout en gardant chacun sa langue maternelle (« …dans la diversité»).
    Utiliser ure langue nationnal ne serais pas une solution car ça serais imposer une culture à tout le monde, alors qu’une langue ‘vierge’ serais… idéale.
    L’espéranto est la solution la mieux adapté à ce problème…

    Good evening everybody,
    We must face reality, europe will not continue like this forever, especially if europe continued to grow.
    There are still 30% of the EU budget which is spend in the translation, it is quite daunting.
    We need a solution, a 2nd common language for all to understand and facilitate exchanges ( “United…”), each preserving its own language ( “… in diversity”).
    Using a national language would not be a solution because it would impose a culture to everyone, while a language ‘virgin’… would be ideal.
    Esperanto is the best suited solution to this problem…

    In varietate concordia

    Anaël

  49. (about 10 years ago)
    Internet? For what? Nobody have that! The entire business world works great with traditional post services! Is impossible to create conditions to all of citizens have that! Blá blá! Blá blá blá!

  50. It’s so simple.
    Esperanto – or similar – as a common second language would just save so much time, money, paper, trees, energy, confusion.
    Just do it.

  51. OK then, let’s go for Esperanto as an official language and take French off the list. Such a move will be vetoed before you can say ‘Jacques Delors’. Just you watch.

    It’s all about nationalism, people, the cancer that’s dogged Europe since 1648.

  52. L’espéranto permet le dialogue interethnique, interculturel, dans le respect mutuel de la langue, de la culture, de la dignité de chacun des interlocuteurs, sans aucune discrimination culturo-linguistique.

    C’est une ouverture tous azimuts vers d’autres langues, vers d’autres cultures.

    When two persons shake hands, each extends his hand halfway, meeting in a neutral zone as a mutual gesture of friendship. So it is with Esperanto – a linguistic handshake !

  53. Of course Esperanto is the best solution, not only for the EU, but also for the whole world. The Chinese already understand that, by learning Esperanto first as “bridge-language” to other western languages.
    Shall EU (again) miss the boat?
    Klaro ke Esperanto estas la pli bonan solvon!

  54. Thank you for your remarks.
    Danke fuer eure Gedaenke
    Merci pour vos considerations
    Gracias a todos! Grazie per le vostre considerazione sulla lingua, strumento di cultura.

    Dankon al Esperanto, kiu per sia amikeco kaj amo de la diversaj kulturoj permesas komprenigxi sen perdi nian identitecon.
    Tre placis al mi precipe tion:

    Language is not all about just communicating with each other. Languages reflect various cultures and different kinds of people.

    We, the people in Europe, will never look the same, or think in exactly the same way, or have the same kind of background, but we can still build Europe together without giving up one of the most important features of human life: our own language through which we define ourselves and others around us.

  55. The little known reason for the small success of Esperanto is that teachers of modern languages in every country comment upon it snobbishly and refuse to teach it. The practice must have begun in 1887 when the genius who invented it wanted people of various nationalities to be able to understand one another, and the teachers then wished to protect their own interests, fearing that if Esperanto became popular, they would lose their jobs. In fact, language departments in schools and universities everywhere would expand if Esperanto were taught, for the majority of students could master it, and the minority would proceed to the mastery of national languages because of the self-confidence gained through learning Esperanto.

  56. La malgrande konata kialo por la malgranda sukceso de Esperanto estas ke geinstruistoj pri modernaj lingvoj en chiuj landoj komentas pri ghi snobisme kaj rifuzas priinstrui ghin. Tiu kutimo vershajne komencis en 1887 kiam la geniulo kiu iniciatis ghin volis ke homoj de diversaj naciecoj interkomprenighu, kaj la geinstruistoj deziris protekti siajn interesojn, timante ke se Esperanto ighus populara, ili perdus siajn postenojn. Fakte, lingvo-departamentoj en lernejoj kaj universitatoj chie pligrandighus se Esperanto estus instruata, char la plejmulto da studentoj regus ghin, kaj la malplejmulto irus al regado de naciaj lingvoj, pro la memfido gajnita per lernado de Esperanto.

  57. Teaching Esperanto in basic schools totally coincides with the theoretical Europ Union multlinguism desire.
    Specialists about language dynamics say that multlinguism (the theoretic choice defended by the EU autorities) is an essentially unstable situation, which – without unrealistic severe rules – automatically evolves to the only use of one dominant language (because of political, monetary, military, colonial, … forces). They also assert that the use of non-etnic language like Esperanto can play a very important role in the stabilizing process.
    A fair democracy without privileges or discrimination demands an independent language.
    Even for speakers of a germanic language (as mine) English is a very difficult language (of course expressing simple things is easy like in all languages, but serious negociation in that language is very difficult – and even dangerous).
    Esperanto has been specially projected for quick acquiring and use as international language. None national language has been projected for international use.
    Most Esperantic word roots are already familiar to most Europeans. Even for example russians immediately recognize 50% of the Esperantic word roots (says prof. Shilo in Moscow).
    After an enthusiastic learning children quickly have at their disposal a high quality communication tool and a firm base for further learning other languages and for logical branches, such as computing and programming.
    The use of Esperanto is now growing exponentially thanks to the growing communication possibilities.

  58. I have spent several years learning English, German, Russian, Spanish, Italian and French. However, if I have to speak English to an Englishman, German to a German, Russian to a Russian, Spanish to a Spaniard, Italian to an Italian, French to a Frenchman, I always feel that I am a “second-class citizen” a “second-class language-user”. I don’t say what I want, but only what I can say.
    Who likes being a second-class citizen?
    That is why I use, support and defend my second mother-tongue, the language of equal rights: -Esperanto.
    Visit our website: http://www.egalite.fw.hu
    Lajos Molnár
    Chairman of the Budapest Medical Esperanto Specialists

    En Esperanto:
    Mi lernis dum pluraj jaroj la anglan, germanan, rusan, hispanan, italan kaj francan lingvojn.
    Tamen, se mi devas paroli kun anglo angle, kun germano germane, kun ruso ruse, kun hispano hispane, kun italo itale, a’u kun franco france, mi ‘ciam sentas min “duaklasa civitano”, “duaklasa lingvouzanto”. Mi ne diras, kion mi volas, sed mi diras nur, kion mi povas diri.
    Kiu ‘satas esti duaklasa homo?
    Tial mi uzas, subtenas kaj defendas mian duan gepatran lingvon, la lingvon de egalrajteco: – Esperanton.
    Vidu nian hejmpa’gon: http://www.egalite.fw.hu
    Lajos Molnár, prezidanto de la Budapesta Medicina Esperanto-Fakgrupo

  59. Dr. Molnár Lajos,

    Je suis 100% d’accord, qui veux être de deusième classe d’utilisateur d’anglais? …

    I totaly agree, who want to be a “second-class language-user”?

  60. Le texte de Mr Thierry Le Bars est excellent. Félicitations. Comme l’a fort bien signalé le rapport Grin, rédigé par une commission de linguistes spécialistes à la demande du gouvernement français (Education Nationale)l’Espéranto est, à tous points de vue, la meilleure des solutions à apporter au problème posé par la communication intra Union Européenne. Les transferts de fonds au profit du seul pays anglophone de l’Union n’en sont que l’aspect le plus évident et injuste mais l’inéquité qu’entraînent les transactions en anglais entre anglophones et non anglophones, les modes d’emploi rédigés en anglais, les dépots de brevets obligatoires en anglais seulement est tout aussi réelle (sinon parfois dangereuse)et plus difficile à chiffrer. Chef d’oeuvre de précision et de facilité d’apprentissage, l’espéranto est donc à l’heure actuelle la solution la mieux adaptée pour l’un des problèmes les plus importants et urgents de l’UE. Loin d’être l’opposé du maintien de la diversité linguistique et culturelle l’espéranto est la condition désormais indispensable à ce maintien. Espérons fortement que nos élus le comprendront très vite.

    Traduction en espéranto :

    La teksto de Thierry Le Bars estas gxustega. Gratulojn. Kiel tauxgege atentigis la raporto de Sinjoro Grin, redaktita de komisio de fakuloj lingvistoj, petita de la franca registaro (Nacia Edukado), Esperanto estas, laux cxiuj vidpunktoj, la pli bona solvo al la problemo de la interkomunikado de la Europa Unio. La enspeza transdonado al la ununura angloparolanta lando en la EU estas nur la pli videbla kaj maljusta aspekto de tio, sed la maljusteco kiu rezultas el la negocado angle inter la angloparolantoj kaj la ne anglo parolantoj, la malfacileco (se ne iafoje la dangxero ) sekve al uzinstrukcioj nur en la angla, la depozicio de la patentoj, deviga nur en la angla, estas finance ankoraux pli malkvantigeblaj. Cxefverko, cele al la precizeco kaj la lernada facileco, Esperanto estas do nun la pli tauxga solvo por unu el la pli gravaj kaj urgxaj problemoj de la UE. Malproksimante la kontrauxstaron de la lingva diverseco, Esperanto estas nun la nepra kondicxo por lia dauxrigo. Ni multe esperu ke niaj elektuloj gxin rapidege komprenos.

  61. L’anglais est la langue de communication ,,uniquement parce qu’elle est la langue maternelle du pays le plus puissant du monde. Elle n’a aucune qualité intrinsèque pour remplir ce rôle. Cela a toujours été le cas: c’était le français au 18-eme siècle, c’était le latin lorsque que Rome est devenu un Empire….et ce latin a survécu dans ce rôle jusqu’au 19 ème siècle , pour le monde savant. et aussi parce qu’il était devenu la langue de la religion prédominante en Europe : le Catholicisme.
    Ces langues sont toutes des langues difficiles à apprendre – les connaître a toujours été un privilège dont le peuple a été exclus.
    L’espéranto a des qualités intrinsèques parce qu’il fonctionne comme le cerveau humain : par réflexes innés et par assimilation généralisatrice- voir l’oeuvre de Jean PIAGET- , qui analyse le mécanisme humain d’apprentissage du langage.
    L’espéranto est l’ami de toutes les langues maternelles. Il ne se veut qu’une langue de communication. S’il éveille tant d’enthousiasme chez ceux qui l’apprennent, c’est parce qu’il permet de se concentrer sur l’idée que l’on veut exprimer et non pas sur la façon de l’exprimer, avec toutes les exceptions des langues maternelles et le sentiment que jamais on n’atteindra le niveau. d’un “native”
    . Evidemment l’anglais est, à présent, la langue internationale des affaires mais l’espéranto est la langue internationale de l’amitié et de la paix. Il y a des espérantophones non seulement dans tous les pays européens, mais aussi,dans tous les pays du monde. Hélène Falk-Bracke

  62. I began to learn Russian in 1950, German in 1954, French, Esperanto, Latin in 1957, English in 1959, Finnish in 1960, Slovak in 1965, and I spend a lot of time learning they to today, bat if I spoke to an Russian, German, Frenchman, Finn, Englishman or Slovak I was always feeling, I am in disadvantage to him, because he could say, what he want, gat I could say only what I know. I could speak to Pole or Czech in language German or Slovak. Then I don’t have this feeling, but it wasn’t a really discussion. I could speak totally free to foreigner, when I have meted somebody, how spoke Esperanto. That is why I use the Esperanto, and I wish it must have equal rights as other languages in Europe.

    Mi komencis lerni la rusan lingvon en 1950, la germanan en 1954, la francan, Esperanto kaj la latinan lingvon en 1957, la anglan en 1959, la finnan en 1960, la slovakan en 1965, kaj mi lernadis dum multe da horoj ‘gis hodiau, sed kiam mi parolis al rusa, germana, franca, finna, angla au slovaka homo, mi ‘ciam sentis, ke mi havas malavanta’gon kontrau li, ‘car li povis diri, kion li volis, kaj mi povis nur diri, kion mi kapablis. Mi povis paroli al pola au ‘ce’ha homo helpe de germana au slovaka lingvo, sed tio ne estis vera interparolado. Mi povis tute libere paroli al fremda homo, kiam mi renkontis iun, kiu parolis Esperanton. Tial uzas mi Esperanton, kaj deziras, ke Esperanto havu egalajn rajtojn, kiel anka la aliaj lingvoj en Europo

  63. Hi!

    As an American speaker of English, I hope that you Europeans will permit me to join in on this conversation about Esperanto as a common language for Europe, because I think that your favorable decision will be followed by Esperanto as a common language for the rest of the world. I read that the Chinese are waiting for this to happen.

    You Europeans already have shown your progressive thinking by your adoption of a common currency, the “euro.” But the French had to give up their “franc,” the Germans their “mark,” the Italians their “lira,” etc. As a professional investment advisor, I was amazed to see this happen. But if you decide to adopt Esperanto as a common “second” language, you will not have to give up anything — especially your native languages!

    May I share with you two of my experiences that bear on this subject?

    In 1970 I travelled by train across Siberia.
    About a year later, I read in a newspaper about a scholar who was writing a book on the Sino-Russian conflict that was occurring along the border. He had taken the same train afterwards but he complained that at the end of the day he had to go to sleep because there was no lamp in his cabin. I smiled when I read this because, in my broken Russian, I was able to ask “U vas yest lampa?” (Do you have a lamp?) and the conductor brought me a lamp. Needless to say, I did not buy this book because I was not impressed with his lack of common sense.

    Nobody spoke English on the train besides me. But I had a Russian phrasebook with which I was able to speak with the other passengers. This was during the height of the “Cold War.” But when I arrived at Irkutsk, where I was scheduled to get off the train at midnight, and I was very quiet so as not to wake the others, I was amazed to find that almost everyone from the train was dressed and waiting to say “DO svidanya” (Goodbye) to the American! People are basically the same all over the world, if only you can speak with them. Governments are another matter. When I arrived in Vilnius, in Soviet Lithuania, I bought a Lithuanian phrasebook and registered in Lithuanian at the hotel. They gave me the best room in the hotel! But I could not help seeing all the Russians in Vilnius and I wondered why so many were there. They did not seem to be as pleasant as the Russians on the train in Siberia! And they would not let me rent a car and drive to the region where my Lithuanian grandmother was born!

    My other experience was in 2005, when I attended my first World Esperanto Congress, held in Vilnius, in FREE Lithuania, for the first time. There were 2,344 people from 62 countries and we could all speak to one another in Esperanto. I did not have to by 61 phrasebooks! The Congress was well organized. There was a book in Esperanto about the History of Lithuania and there was even a book in Esperanto for learning Lithuanian. THis time they let me rent a car and travel to the region where my Lithuanian grandmother was born!

    These experience showed me that I would be missing a lot if I knew only English. I speak French, Polish and Esperanto and I dabble in Russian, Lithuanian, Japanese and Irish. The Irish have a saying, “Tir gan teanga, tir gan anam” (A land without its language is a land without a soul). But because of English, not many Irish speak their native language each day. This is what English as a common language can do to the other languages in the European Union! I hope to be able to travel to the Aran Islands off the Irish coast and speak with the natives there in Irish before this language disappears.

    Good luck to you.

  64. Saluton!

    Kiel usona parolanto de la angla, mi esperas ke vi europanoj permesos al mi kunighi al chi tiu konversatcio pri Esperanto kiel komuna lingvo por Europo, char mi pensas ke via favora decido estos sekvita de Esperanto kiel komuna lingvo por la restajho de la mondo. Mi legis ke la chinoj atendas chi tion.

    Vi europanoj jam montris vian progreseman penson pro via adopto de komuna mono, la “euro.” Sed la francoj devis cedi ilian “frankon,” la germanoj ilian “markon,” la italoj ilian “liron,” ktp. Kiel profesia investada konsilisto mi estis mirigita vidi chi tion. Sed se vi decidos adopti Esperanton kiel komuna “dua” lingvo, vi ne devos cedi nenion — speciale ne viajn naskighintajn lingvojn!

    Chu mi povas partigi kun vi du el miaj spertoj koncerne chi tiun subjekton?

    En 1970 mi vojaghis trajne trans Siberio. Proksimume unu jaro poste me legis en jhurnalo pri klerulo kiu verkis libron koncerne la chino-rusan konflikton kiu tiam okazis apud la bordero. Li estis uzita la saman trajnon poste sed li plendis ke li devis iri dormi kiam la tago finis, char ne estis lampo en sia kajuto. Mi ridetis je chi tio char, en mia malperfekta rusa, mi povis demand “U vas yest lampa?” ( Chu vi havas lampon?) kaj la konduktoro alportis al mi lammpon. Ne bezonas diri, mi nemiam achetis chi tiun libron char mi ne estis impresita de lia manko de prudento.

    Neniu parolis la anglan en la trajno krom mi. Sed mi havis rusan frazlibron kun kiu mi povis paroli al la aliaj pasagheroj. Chi tio okazis dum la pinto de la “Malvarma Milito.” Sed kiam mi alvenis al Irkutsko, kie mi devis per plano eliri de la trajno noktomeze, kaj mi estis tre silenta por ke mi ne veku la aliajn, mi estis mirigita vidi ke preskau chiuj de la trajno estis vestitaj kaj atendis diri “Do svidanya” (Adiau) al la usonano! Popoloj estas baze la samaj en la tuta mondo, se nur oni povas paroli kun ili! Registaroj estas alia afero. Kiam mi alvenis al Vilniuso, en soveta Litovio, mi achetis litovan frazlibron kaj mi registris min che la hotelo litove. Oni donis al mi la plej bonan chambron en la hotelo! Sed mi ne povis eviti la vidon de tutaj rusoj en VIlniuso, kaj mi demandis min kial ili estis tie. Ili ne shajnis esti tiel agrablaj kiel la rusoj de la trajno en Siberio! Kaj oni ne permesis al mi lui automobilon kaj veturi al la regiono kie mia litova avino naskighis!

    Mia alia sperto estis en 2005, kiam mi partoprenis mian unuan Universalan Esperanto-Kongreson, kiu okazis en Vilniuso, en LIBERA Litovio, unua foje. Estis 2,344 personoj el 62 landoj kaj ni povis paroli Esperante unu la alia. Mi ne devis acheti 61 frazlibrojn! La Kongreso estis bone organizita. Estis libro en Esperanto pro la Historio de Litovio kaj estis ech libro en Esperanto pro lerni la litovan. Chi tiu foje on pemesis al mi lui automobilon kaj
    veturi al la regiono kie mia litova avino naskighis!

    Chi tiuj spertoj montris al mi ke mi mankus multon se mi scius nur la anglan. Mi parolas la francan, la polan kaj Esperanton, kaj mi diletantas en la rusa, la litova, la japona kaj la irlanda. La irlandanoj havas aforismon, “Tir gan teanga, tir gan anam” ( Lando sen lingvo (estas) lando sen animo). Sed pro la angla, ne multaj irlandanoj parolas ilian naskighintan lingvon chiutage. Tio estas kion la angla kiel dua komuna lingvo povas fari al la aliaj lingvoj en la Europa Unio! Mi esperas vojaghi al la Aranaj Insuloj che la irlanda marbordo kaj paroli kun la naskighintaj tiam irlandane, antau ol chi tiu lingvo malaperos.

    Bonshancon al vi!

  65. It is for me and for many people evident that Esperanto would be the most rational and most fair solution for the problems of communication between different nations. But will there be a political will to promote its spreading by creating the essential conditions for being able to learn it on all levels of education and just a little propaganda in favour of it. It would need some investion, of course, but the benefits for the future will be for all the EU nations (including the English whose language wouldn’t be distorted by the deluge of incorrect use) great.

  66. “Advocating multilingualism, rather than the Esperanto solution is just cover for supporting the linguistic imperialism of English.”
    Tout à fait!
    la diversité n’est pour les instances européennes qu’on slogan “pour faire bien”, mais un slogan constamment bafoué par la leurs actions réelles, pas du tout une pratique concrète! il suffit de parcourir les sites et les documents européens!!

  67. Ik spreek een beetje Engels, Frans, Duits, Spaans. Ik heb ooit Grieks en Latijn geleerd. Maar als ik dit stukje schrijf in mijn moedertaal Nederlands, dan kan geen Griek/Fin/Est/Hongaar enz.dit lezen. Misschien spreken zij toevallig ook Duits, Frans en Spaans. Dan zouden zij dit stukje ook niet kunnen lezen als ik het in het Engels had geschreven. Waarom moeilijk doen als het gemakkelijk kan? Esperanto, neutraal, eenvoudig,geen uitspraakproblemen en geen uitzonderingen.
    Dus geschikt als internationale taal.

  68. Fort bien…on souhaite standardiser la communication: un outil incolore, inodore…et insipide!

    Qui, dans nos écoles où il y a déjà pénurie d’enseignants de langues ( je suis belge!) , sera l’apôtre de ce nouvel idiôme? où en est la formation des enseignants en cette matière dans nos pays?

    Qui, dans nos opinions publiques vieillissantes, fera l’effort ( après en avoir tant consenti en faveur de l’anglais, de l’allemand…) d’apprendre l’esperanto???

    A supposer qu’il y ait un nombre suffisant de professeurs dans TOUS les pays, à supposer que TOUS, de 3 à 55 ans, fassent le pari de cette langue impersonnelle parce que purement conventionnelle, combien de temps prendre cette mutation culturelle?

    Je crains qu’il faille 4-5 générations…A ce rythme, l’Union aura disparu…Les pères fondateurs – sans doute étaient-ils six!) – ne se sont pas encombrés de ce problème.

    Pour ma part, je reste convaincu que le respect de l’Autre consiste à le laisser s’exprimer dans sa langue, à condition bien sûr de maîtriser passivement, à l’écrit comme à l’oral, 3 ou 4 autres langues.

    Au fait…comment les Etats-Unis s’en tirent-ils aujourd’hui???

  69. Cher Jean-Luc,

    Sachez tout d’abord que l’espéranto n’est ni incolore, ni inodore, ni insipide. Il permet d’exploiter toutes les forces grammaticales de toutes les langues, tout en ne s’encombrant pas d’une grammaire irrégulière. Au final, à l’oreille, on dirait de l’italien, très régulier, et avec du vocabulaire salve et germanique.

    Sachez aussi qu’un professeur de n’importe quelle langue est capable, en 200 heures, d’enseigner l’espéranto sans même connaître la langue auparavant.

    L’espéranto, en puisant ses racines dans toutes les langues européennes, ouvre extraordinairement à toutes les langues. En apprenant l’espéranto, on apprend des bases de latin, de grec, d’allemand, de slave…

    Tolstoï a dit qu’il avait appris l’espéranto en 10 à 20 heures. Disons que c’était un génie des langues, et qu’un humain banal mette 50 heures apprendre l’espéranto. A raison d’une heure hebdomadaire, on connait l’espéranto en un an. Je suis sûr que des millions d’européens seraient prêts à passer une heure par semaine à étudier si en retour ils pouvaient communiquer avec tous leurs frères européens.

    Cordialement.

    PS : Les Etats-Unis, culturellement, s’en sortent on ne peut mieux il me semble. Avec un langue commune et d’autres langues (12% de la population est hispanique tout de même).

  70. Jean-Luc a écrit dans http://speakup-europe.blogactiv.eu/2008/03/14/esperanto-as-common-language-for-europe/ :
    “combien de temps prendre cette mutation culturelle?”
    6 mois dans nos pays développés, en utilisant efficacement les moyens dont nous disposons actuellement: internet, Skype, TV, radio, CD, enregistreurs, livres, et les profs de latins (et autres) au chômage temporaire durant ces six mois.
    Il faut s’attendre à une recrudescence de la demande pour l’enseignement de langues étrangères par la suite.

  71. I agree with the proposal, but I do not see how
    “E.U. institutions (Strasbourg parliament…) would save money, by getting free from problems of translation”
    there would always be an obligation, legal as well as moral, to translate material into all EU official languages. That is only natural, as you cannot expect each and everybody to learn either Esperanto or English or whichever common language. All you could save money on is internal EU communication, but that’s only a fraction of the costs (which are not that high anyway, just around 4 EUR per EU citizen per year).

  72. Não se trata de poupar dinheiro à UE, mas de criar uma identidade europeia, só possível através de uma língua comum que seja neutral. De resto, a UE tem que investir muito na divulgação de todas as línguas internas, para respeitar a sua natureza multilingue e multicultural.

  73. Ne temas pri shpari monon, sed krei europan identecon, kiu nue eblas per komuna kaj neutrala lingvo. Cetere, EU multe devos elspezi por disvastigi chiujn europlingvojn kaj kulturojn lau sia multlingva kaj multkultura esenco.

  74. I noticed that even among the people that said “english is already the international language, we don’t need another one” there were a LOT of grammatical mistakes. And as for those who think that Esperanto will kill diversity, english is used as an International Language, and it hasn’t ruined diversity. It would just make this international communication easier. I support Esperanto 100%

  75. quand on voit votre site, on se demande ce que peut bien être cette “Europe” dont vous parler à part un clone des USA !

    cela montre bien qu’il y a un problème linguistique dans les institutions européennes, et qu’il ne faut pas laisser faire.

Comments are closed.