Poll: One World, One Language?

[Elledan]

What do you think, should everyone on this planet speak at least one language everyone understands? i.e. should everyone be able to speak, for example, English?

Also, should all important documents of a country be written in that language?

Using one language on this planet would be logic, and will also increase efficiency, no more translators will be needed, everyone will finally understand each other and the time spend with learning languages can be used for other things.

From a logic point of view, you can't give any reasons why we shouldn't.

Note: don't forget to vote (poll)!

 

[kami]

I think you are forgetting the billions of people who don't know a single word of English.

edit: yes it's a good idea but it won't happen...at least for a VERY VERY long time.

 

[Dameon]

(turning on the 700 Club voice)
No way man! That's a sign of THE NEW WORLD ORDER and the reign of 1000 years, the opening of the seals and the end of days! A Unified world for the prince of darkness to rise and conquer! It must not occur.. not now, not ever!

 

[Passions]

For your information, the 1,000 years has already begun. We are living in the end of days. The prince of darkness is already out and reigning. The unified languague that everyone speaks is SIN!

 

[Ornery]

Har, it's already happened! Why not check what the current language of maritime communication and international air traffic control is?

 

[Isla]

Everyone should learn Esperanto!



Um, actually, I took a course or two in it. Anyone else?

 

[konichiwa]

This represents the same arrogance displayed by Americans that makes the rest of the world hate us:

"Honey, why do these Mexican burritos not taste like our American ones?"

"Just incredible. They don't give you silverware to eat with in Morroco. Pfft."

etc, etc.

 

[kuk]

Hell no! Why do you think we have BabelFish for ?

konichiwa: my point

 

[Elledan]

<< This represents the same arrogance displayed by Americans that makes the rest of the world hate us>>

Arrogance? Since when is pure logic called arrogance?

Let me ask you this question: what for do we need more than one language?

Also note that I didn't mention any language which would become the standard language. It could even be a totally new language we would use.

 

[kuk]

<< what for do we need more than one language? >>



To have cultural integrity (spelling?). Languages refer to the society it represents. A language that has no relation to its people, culture, history and geography is a dead language.

 

[konichiwa]

<< Let me ask you this question: what for do we need more than one language? >>

A language represtents culture. Why do we all look different? Why not genetically alter all Asian people to look American? What's the point of everyone looking different? What's the point of having Chinese food, Mexican food, Italian, Japanese, Indian and Thai food? Why don't we all just eat Cheeseburgers and French Fries?

 

[Elledan]

Okay, so we just keep on trying to communicate using a zillion different languages because it doesn't represent a culture? Something is wrong in that reasoning...

Don't you realize that one standard language would represent the _whole_ world?

And anyway, cultural differences have already started to fade. When we finally reach the year 3000, I doubt there will be anything left of cultures as they exist now.

Try to imagine this: Humankind finally manages to create a space-ship which can travel faster than light. They set off for some voyages and discover intelligent life. You bet that at that moment Humans will start to realize that they all belong to one race and that those so-called 'cultures' on Earth are nothing compared to those alien civilizations.

When you've seen Star Trek, you'll know were I'm talking about.

 

[konichiwa]

<< Okay, so we just keep on trying to communicate using a zillion different languages because it doesn't represent a culture? Something is wrong in that reasoning... >>

Tell me, exactly what is wrong in that reasoning. It seems perfectly logical to me. Why deny people their cultural roots? You say that by the year 3000, blah blah blah. So what? If that happens in the year 3000, then change the language, but it's useless now. It will just strip people from their roots.

 

[luv2chill]

Saluton Isla,

Kiel vi fartas? Cu vi ofte venas ^ci-tien? Vi estas la sola esperantistino kiun mi renkontas.

^gis la

l2c

 

[Ornery]

Damn, it's a matter of practicality! How hard is that to understand? When you fly a plane into China, guess what language is the universal one used? Can you imagine how unsafe it would be to have various &quot;cultures&quot; represented where air traffic control are concerned. Again, this is just a practical concern. One common language would speed communication and development all over the world. Is that too complicated a concept to digest?

Since that's understood (I hope), what language would you suggest to be the common one?

 

[Elledan]

konichiwa, I didn't say that all other languages should be prohibited. People will be free to use them, but for official documents they _must_ use the standard language.

And anyway, what's the value of 'cultural roots'? A culture is nothing but a set of man-made rules. The history behind a language may be interesting to some people, but I don't think many would care about which language they're using, as long as it's an efficient language.

Culture and the history behind it are both irrelevant IMHO.

 

[Whisper]

I find it interesting that you jump on all Americans and begin stereotyping based on a post made by someone who could POSSIBLY (i.e. the originator of the thread never mentioned his nation of origin) be one. Also, the poster made sure to mention that English was just a possibility (most likely because it's his primary language, and thus the first language that sprang to mind), not the end-all decision.

Some people's biases spring to light so easily.

edit: of course I had to misspell at least one word in there...

 

[thEnEuRoMancER]

Would an average english only speaking person be willing to learn mandarin chinese, spoken as a mother tongue by over one billion people in mainland China, Taiwan and Singapure? Would an average mandarin chinese only speaking person be willing to learn english, spoken as a mother tongue by over 500 million people all over the world?

I don't think so - an average english only or mandarin chinese only speaking person wouldn't have a real need to learn the other language, because he'll never get in the situation where he will be forced to use it.

 

[Whisper]

Having said that...I personally don't think focusing on efficiency over culture and history is the proper path to take. It's not effective or logical not to do so; this much is true. However, being diverse is just something that makes us humans so &quot;special.&quot; Once we begin focusing so much on what's the fastest and least expensive way to do something, then we'll really begin fulfilling Mr. Orwell's predictions. I for one would take enjoyment and fun over profitability and efficiency any day of the week...and most likely the weekend, too.

 

[konichiwa]

Whisper

<< the originator of the thread never mentioned his nation of origin >>

In my comment about American arrogance, I wasn't even referring to Elledan. He's from Netherlands (right? ) ... I was responding to the people who replied to his post. You are right in your second post, in that if we eliminate all cultural diversity just in the &quot;interest of efficiency&quot; we'll be fulfilling the vision of the robotic, conformed human being. Blech.

 

[dopcombo]

This isn't really a discussion about which language to use, but whether ONE language should be chosen and used by all of this earth as the official language. This ONE language can be any language.

PROBLEM: who decides which is the language?
Solution: no one can. there isn't any &quot;teacher&quot; being that rules over all the leaders of the state.

So now if u say u do want to implement this &quot;One language&quot; ideal within the next 200 years, it is impossible since
1. None of the state leaders will agree to a language that they themselves do not speak as a first language. The arguments as to why not spanish, or why not russian, or what about mandarin would take too long.
2. The UN currently has 5 major languages( forgot which ones, but not really impt) . I dread to think if Spanish or something else won, i would have to then spend the next 5-7 years of my life practicing this language to become efficiebt in it. I think many other people would agree.
3. Logistically, it is impossible. To make everyone learn one language, would mean that the language has to be spoken everywhere. heh.

 

[earthling]

Think that its a good for a person to speak another language, but a certian language shouldn't be forced on people because some idiot leader some place in the world will probably start a little war if such a thing were to happen.

 

[SendTrash]

Hmmm.... its very egotistic and a load of crap to expect the world to use English. There a 6 billion people in the world. Too bad that since only 300 million people or so (the US) that own 90% of the resources use it to not help the rest, but force their military and ideology on the rest of the world.

But aside from being harsh, I only know English myself (despite 3 years of HS spanish) but I cannot tolerate the idea of one world, one langauge, because language is something that defines a people, a culture. If you take that away, the world would be a boring place.

 

[SendTrash]

<< Using one language on this planet would be logic, and will also increase efficiency, no more translators will be needed, everyone will finally understand each other and the time spend with learning languages can be used for other things. >>



People still don't understand each other in English!

 

[Killbat]

Vocal language will simply fade away into the past when the world's communication network evolves into an interconnection of minds. No, I'm not joking.