The idea of a common language is far more complicated than it appears if you want to ensure an arrorfree communication between different cultures and times. Programming languages can be run (fairly decently) by most compilers, but human language is bound by human practical and emotional understanding of each item - how do you pronounce/place/stress/spell words/phrases and what is implicit due to background? Any sentence said in the us will be slightly different i europe and quite different i china, depending of the emotional content. If a person holds a negative life-attitude, s/he can assume just about any compliment to be negative (but fortunately vice-versa possible too - allthough then the person risks being called naive). I have learned esperanto (it was fun, made me far better in learning other languages and made it possible to travel and stay with natives all over the world) yet i certainly hold that english is more varied (I love tolkien and allways prefer original english to danish translations). As for the internet, there is a major hassle against esperanto: the missing letters in ansi - (I have tried the 'solutions' to use the five extra letters, it doesnt work in email/webpages unless the reciever has the correct fonts) so that it could bea ssumed that english is simply bound to be the de facto language of the net/the world. Yet I know that english is mindboglingly difficult to master for non-europeans, taking years to learn jsut properly, and accents all over. Esperanto, with its shortcomings, is/much/ easier to learn, and especially to master, having pure grammar, needing to memorize only 1/5th of words, 26 letter sounds instead of the ~150 sounds of english and an almost magic way of staying free of accents or change. It is orally superior, and deals with the physical language progblem beatifully. Emotionally, I miss the sound/text variations of english, making shakespearearean lyrics possible in all their old stylishness and great pronounciation. But the major problem is how to ensure that a word is getting the right connatations, if I say the sun is yellow, do you understand it as a bright yellow, a warm yellow, a cold yellow or is simply offended by the idea that the sun can have a colour (it is a light, right?) If I tell a girl she is lovely, does that give her the idea that she is good, is loved is loveable or adorable by me or generally, now or always?. Or will she assume that it is an insult, as her connonation to the word lovely (due to her upbringing) is with dolls or small furry animals?? Hope somehow it can be brought clearer, maybe by thinking like isaac asimov in 'foundation' where the scientists used a combination of sign language and words to connotate exact meanings - on the net/written, this would have to be in the form of more words or signs - maybe a handful of emoticons will be ever so helpful to ensure real flawless communications. angel denmark
Slashdot Mirror
The idea of a common language is far more complicated than it appears if you want to ensure an arrorfree communication between different cultures and times. /much/ easier to learn, and especially to master, having pure grammar, needing to memorize only 1/5th of words, 26 letter sounds instead of the ~150 sounds of english and an almost magic way of staying free of accents or change. It is orally superior, and deals with the physical language progblem beatifully. Emotionally, I miss the sound/text variations of english, making shakespearearean lyrics possible in all their old stylishness and great pronounciation. But the major problem is how to ensure that a word is getting the right connatations, if I say the sun is yellow, do you understand it as a bright yellow, a warm yellow, a cold yellow or is simply offended by the idea that the sun can have a colour (it is a light, right?)
Programming languages can be run (fairly decently) by most compilers, but human language is bound by human practical and emotional understanding of each item - how do you pronounce/place/stress/spell words/phrases and what is implicit due to background? Any sentence said in the us will be slightly different i europe and quite different i china, depending of the emotional content. If a person holds a negative life-attitude, s/he can assume just about any compliment to be negative (but fortunately vice-versa possible too - allthough then the person risks being called naive). I have learned esperanto (it was fun, made me far better in learning other languages and made it possible to travel and stay with natives all over the world) yet i certainly hold that english is more varied (I love tolkien and allways prefer original english to danish translations).
As for the internet, there is a major hassle against esperanto: the missing letters in ansi - (I have tried the 'solutions' to use the five extra letters, it doesnt work in email/webpages unless the reciever has the correct fonts) so that it could bea ssumed that english is simply bound to be the de facto language of the net/the world. Yet I know that english is mindboglingly difficult to master for non-europeans, taking years to learn jsut properly, and accents all over. Esperanto, with its shortcomings, is
If I tell a girl she is lovely, does that give her the idea that she is good, is loved is loveable or adorable by me or generally, now or always?. Or will she assume that it is an insult, as her connonation to the word lovely (due to her upbringing) is with dolls or small furry animals?? Hope somehow it can be brought clearer, maybe by thinking like isaac asimov in 'foundation' where the scientists used a combination of sign language and words to connotate exact meanings - on the net/written, this would have to be in the form of more words or signs - maybe a handful of emoticons will be ever so helpful to ensure real flawless communications.
angel denmark