Esperanto discussion at Slashdot
A discussion about China establishing its own internet root domain system has had a small series of side discussions about Esperanto. Christopher Culver, who withdrew from the Esperanto movement in a very public way a year ago, is linking to his essay that describes why he thinks the Esperanto movement is a Bad Thing. His main beef seems to be that people kept saying "Ne krokodilu!" to him.
Personally, I think Culver is just rather thin-skinned and never understood why people were saying that. He thought people were simply saying he shouldn't speak in any other language, whereas I find that pressure to speak in Esperanto is usually just about encouraging people to try to speak, rather than just giving up and speaking in their native language. Or about discouraging experienced speakers from letting beginners get away without trying. You see the same sort of thing at any immersive language class. People try to encourage and support one another to try, try, try!
Or maybe he was just unlucky. There certainly are some obnoxious people among the Esperanto community who act just like he describes, but they are marginal in my experience. And in many communities don't exist at all: AIS, for example, is explicitly multilingual. Walking around the AIS meetings, Esperanto tends to be the default, but people switch into other languages very comfortably and naturally without any stigma attached, although they will apologize when there is someone there who ends up being excluded as a result -- as is only polite.
Several ideas in Culver's commentary are simply ridiculous: the idea that you learn more about the culture speaking haltingly in a country's native language, rather than fluently in Esperanto -- that's just silly. And the idea that Esperantists are all about suppressing language diversity on a broad scale -- silly and demonstrably false.
His notion that having people study other national languages as a means of preserving them is rather like ideas in wildlife conservation that have been described using source-sink dynamics in ecology. In ecology, some habitats can support self-sustaining populations of organisms that represent a "source" for emmigration (or transplantion) to other environments. Other habitats look inviting, but can't support a viable population of an organism: trying to introduce them there doesn't work -- the populations always go extinct, hence the area is a "sink". The only way to make sure a native language remains viable is to have self-sustaining sources of native speakers. I'm not persuaded that teaching threatened languages as a foreign language in other places can help -- those places simply represent sinks of effort. The proposition Esperanto has always made is to remove the economic liabilty of not being a native speaker of the dominant language, thereby allowing people to have their own native language, rather than give it up in order to not suffer economic disadvantage. In that way, countries can preserve their native language and remain a viable source of native speakers. English can never offer the same proposition.
- limako's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
notes from my experience
I agree about the identity of Mr. Culver's main complaint. What he seems to fail to understand is that people who go to congresses may wish to go there to actually use and practice their *Esperanto* as opposed to English, Swahili, or what-have-you.
Tied in to my own experiences: I am a graduate of the Defense Language Institute in Monterey CA. One of the goals there (at least in the intermediate course) is use of the target language at all times when with other speakers of that language. I see the (Esperanto) Congresses in the same light. I mean that's WHY we were at DLI/a congress, after all. Just like if I went to a Congress, seeing as I'm SUCH a poor, to-be-pitied provincial soul (an actual accusation against me (and Don Harlow and Andrea Chiti-Batelli) by Mr. Culver) it would be so that I could practice ESPERANTO, not Spanish or Romanian or Russian or any other language I happen to know. For some of us poor provincials a Congress would be the only venue to get such intenstive practice of Esperanto and for one such as Mr. Culver to deny us the opportunity (not to mention waste our time and money) by insisting on speaking to us in our native languages, well, I can just say, he'd find himself without my company rather quickly (not that I'm saying that would be a GREAT loss, but anyway.)
April 10, 2006 by orthohawk, 4 years 21 weeks ago
Some additional "refutations"
Here are some extensive "refutations" that I published elswhere when Culver's essay first came out:
refutations
March 22, 2006 by J. Amis, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Interesting
Thanks for the link. I particularly appreciated the intelligent comments by Michael Farris in the "language hat" thread. He's smart. He has not only an interesting analysis of Esperanto culture (the different classes of speakers), but he also acknowledges that people like Culver turn up with some frequency in the Esperanto movement: idealists who burn out when they realize that the Esperanto movement is imperfect (like anything else constructed by people, of course). Almost everyone I know who is actually involved in the movement is either relatively new, or has gone through a period of disenchantment. I alluded to mine when I cited the haiku I had written about it. In fact, I have a whole series of haiku from that period. Not everyone freaks out and repudiates the entire language, of course.
I thought it was interesting in the original thread that others recognized the intolerance and ad_hominem nature of the attacks against Culver in the thread and said, "Don't you see that the Esperanto mouvement doesn't accept critics (you are beautifull examples of it)." I'd have to agree. We ought to do better. I hope we can do better here.
I believed it was possible to respond to the ideas in Culver's essay without stooping to assassinating his character. I still think my analysis stands: He didn't like it when people said "Ne krokodilu!" The point is that there *are* Esperantists who act that way and come off as obnoxious snobs when people trying to speak other languages. My point is that we're not all like that: one shouldn't tar the whole movement based on the (probably well-intentioned) actions of a few. I don't know Chris personally and, for as much as he's trying to burn bridges now, he may decide someday that Esperanto is cool again. I did. Whether or not he decides to get involved again was not my point. My point was to try to show that I thought that although some of *observations* may be true, I don't think his conclusions make much sense.
Thanks again for sharing the link! I enjoyed reading the comments.
--
StevenBrewer
March 22, 2006 by limako, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Deeper than "Ne krokodilu"
The roots of Culver's leaving, and subsequently attacking, the Esperanto Movement lie much, much deeper than simply not liking being told "Ne krokodilu"--if that were the only problem, I don't think he would have stayed in the Esperanto Movement for as long as he did. But it's impossible to see his real reasons just from the essay, because much of it misrepresents the facts--both about Esperanto and even himself. Without having known him and the environment he was in (I, for example, also worked in the Central Office of UEA and found the reality to be quite the opposite of the "nut house" he describes), it's near impossible to see the whole picture judging by his text alone (i.e. just taking his word for it). I don't think it's "character assassination" to try to provide a context for his essay.
March 22, 2006 by J. Amis, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Esence mi samopinias
I see a couple of problems here: It's not clear where the "center of the Esperanto movement" is (Rotterdam? Tokyo? Vienna? Paris? La Chaux-de-Fonds?) What "the movement" looks like depends very much on the the experiences of individual Esperantists, which are largely dependent on their age, interests, financial means, etc. As an Alaskan, because of distance, air ticket prices, and family responsibilities, it has never been easy for me to participate in E-o activities even on the national level, let alone attend world congresses regularly. Of course it's also a matter of priorities and taste; as a practicing Christian I would be less inclined to attend a SAT congress than something else, and as an "oldulo" I have never attended an IJK. Those are both places where I would expect to find people who both dislike my mother tongue _and_ perhaps would like to see E-o supplant ethnic languages. At least Lanti certainly wanted to see that happen, though perhaps modern SAT-anoj don't follow his league. On the other hand, it seems there's a (psychologically understandable) tendency of E-o activists to sieze on a simplified, easily understandable slogan which seems like it might capture a mass audience... despite all the _caveats_ that might occur to one after a bit of thought. The idea that promoting E-o will automatically save endangered languages from the all-devouring English-language juggernaut is just such an appealing slogan, just as "E-o is 10 times easier to learn than other languages" was. It seems to me that we simply have to be honest about such things, while trying not to be too long-winded. There _are_ people who use Esperanto ("for any purpose whatever", which makes them Esp-ists by Zamenhof's definition) who would like to see it replace ethnic languages, just as there are also people who support E-o because they want to _save_ endangered languages.
On one point I _certainly_ agree with you: Trying to censor blog postings on this website, because they criticize ELNA or the E-o movement, makes little sense. At some point we may need to terminate this particular discussion simply for reasons of space, but there's no point in trying to "muzzle" Chris or anyone else just because we don't find his criticisms pleasant.
George Partlow
March 18, 2006 by pricerbumanto, 4 years 25 weeks ago
Esperanto movement, SAT and Language Diversity
I agree with George that Esperantists should be more honest in the way they present the language and its community to outsiders. The idea that Esperanto could save endangered languages from the "killer language" English is silly on two accounts. For one thing, it is not only English, but quite a few other languages that are gradually taking the place of the lesser-used languages that go extinct. The other thing is that there is no plausible reason to think Esperanto wouldn't do the same if it became everybody's second language. I have attempted to debunk a few of the conjectures about Esperanto's putative future role as a "savior" of ethnic groups and their languages on my own website: http://home.arcor.de/gmickle/skk/92kuldiv_en.html .
As to the opinions on language matters that prevail in SAT (which I am a member of): SAT's members have a wide range of opinions on just about anything, including languages, the political implications of their use and the linguistic future of the planet. I admit that SAT has some members whose Esperanto-related ideas include a disdain for English, but certainly no more than the UEA-oriented milieu does. Unlike the UEA, however, SAT has a fair number of members who understand and openly discuss the political implications of ideologies that demonize English and worship ethnicity and ethnic "authenticity". When Renato Corsetti sought people to translate an essay by Charles Durand (keynote speaker at the 2003 World Esperanto Congress, and advocate of a "clash-of-civilizations" theory that pits the English-speaking world against everyone else), SAT was the place where he met with politically motivated resistence. He found his translators elsewhere.
Historically, the anationalist faction within SAT (not all of the organization) did adhere to the idea that Esperanto would or should one day supplant other languages. These days, that idea is less prevalent, even among the anationalists, though there are many (including myself) who doubt the feasibility of preserving most of the languages that are classified as endangered, regardless of whether Esperanto does or doesn't ever become the international language. Many of us also believe that arguments relating to loss of cultural diversity through loss of ethnic distinctions (as expressed by language difference) are oversimplifications. Cultural diversity has more dimensions than just the ethnic. A postethnic society does not necessarily lack diversity.
I would add that SAT is not the only place in which the idea of Esperanto (or a successor of Esperanto) supplanting other languages has been viewed favorably. None other than Zamenhof said the following (in "Essence and Future of the International Language Idea", 1900):
"We confess that however we rack our brains we cannot comprehend what exactly would be the misfortune for humanity, if one fine day it turned out that there were no longer any nations and national languages, but instead just a single all-embracing human family and a single all-embracing human language."
March 24, 2006 by Gary Mickle, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Maybe
Thank you for your on-topic contribution in a thread which has wandered off and gotten hysterical.
You may be right -- it's an experiment that no-one's tried. I will say two things are in favor of Esperanto *not* having the same effect as a national language. The first is that it's not a national language. If it *did* become a national language, with "native" speakers being produced at more than a nominal frequency, then I think it could become a danger just as easily as national languages. (The reason why it isn't so now, I believe, is bound up in the second point). The second point is that Esperanto isn't (generally) transmitted the same way national languages are. English, as a language, "came of age" when people were largely illiterate. I will hazard that there isn't such a thing as an "illiterate esperanto speaker" (with the exception of a very small number of very small children who quickly do become literate). I suspect that a big part of the irregularity of languages derived from being transmitted primarily in the absence of texts: children learned their language as it was spoken by their parents. Most people don't learn Esperanto that way. I think, for that reason, it's likely to evolve slowly and remain to easy to learn as a second language. National languages are probably not easy-to-learn because it's valuable to people to be able to distinguish in-group from out-group. National languages evolve to be hard to learn for a good reason. For that reason alone, I think using one's own national language is always a mistake for international usage. At least let everyone use a second language. And if you're going to use a second language it seems to make more sense (to me) to use Esperanto.
Sorry for a long, convoluted, non-paragraph, but that's what you get on a Friday afternoon. Thanks again for your thoughtful contributions!
--
StevenBrewer
March 25, 2006 by limako, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Hysterical?
Did you have to include the hysterical comment?
March 25, 2006 by esperantisto, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Not censorship
It is not censorship for ELNA to not have anti-Esperanto comments on their own website. There is no place for those comments on our website.
March 19, 2006 by esperantisto, 4 years 25 weeks ago
I have no experience with
I have no experience with SAT gatherings, but having been to IJK I can say that the people there didn't seem to hate English (assuming that is your "mother tongue" which you mentioned :) nor did they want Esperanto to supplant ethnic languages. Rather they seemed to enjoy and value diverse languages. Same with other various events I've attended (KEF, UK, IJS, IS, not to mention ELNA congresses).
March 18, 2006 by russ, 4 years 25 weeks ago
Mia propra sperto similas
(simple ĉar mi komencis E-lingve, mi tiel daŭrigos la afiŝon!) Mia sperto estas plimalpli sama. Se temas pri izolitaj Esp-istoj, kiujn mi konas per retpoŝto, helikpoŝto, Uzreto, aŭ hazarda renkonto, preskaŭ ĉiuj efektive interesiĝas pri etnaj lingvoj. Tamen manpleno malamas la anglan, eĉ pli akurate la usonangla, tiu "kokokola mikimusa lingvo" de t.n. kultura imperiismo. Mi supozas, ke egala nombro da denaske angleparolantaj Esp-istoj simile kritikas aĉajn ecojn de la lingvo! (la ELNA-bulteno siatempe arigis ekzemplojn de dubsenca anglalingvaĵo). Ĝis nun mi neniam renkontis tian sintenon inter gastoj aŭ gastigantoj de Pasporta Servo. Kaj ĉiuokaze, mia propra sperto en Esperantujo apenaŭ estas "valida statistika kontrolo"! Tamen mia ĝenerala konstato estas, ke precize kiam mi opinias, ke mi trovis akcepteblan priskribon de "ordinara" aŭ "averaĝa" Esp-isto, mi renkontas dateno kiu neas ĝin. Ekzemple... Iam mi pensis, ke Esp-istoj estas vojaĝemaj, sed tuj konatiĝis kun sperta Esp-isto al kiu vojaĝoj simple tute ne plaĉas (li estas franclingvulo, kiu tamen loĝis diverslande; pli specifa pri lia idento mi ne volas diri). Laŭ la difino de Zamenhof kiun mi citis antaŭe, Lee Sau Dan, ĉino kiu en soc.culture.esperanto kostante atakis Esperanton, en sufiĉe klera E-o, ja estas Esp-isto. Simile tiu rasisma dano, kiu en la sama forumo atakis islamanojn, ankaŭ estas Esp-isto. Miaopinie, se ni neas la ekziston de tiaj homoj, ni simple prokrastigas la seniluziigo de homoj, kiuj, aliĝante nian komunumon, poste renkontos ilin (aŭ similajn homojn). Oni eble diru, ke lingvo ne respondecas, por tiuj homoj kiuj ĝin scipovas!
George Partlow
March 18, 2006 by pricerbumanto, 4 years 25 weeks ago
La organiza retpagxo reprezentu la organizon
Mi tute konsentas kun esperantisto - la organiza retpagxo reprezentu la *organizon* kaj gxiajn celojn. Opinioj, kiuj kontrauxas la agadon de ELNA, devas ne aperi en gxia retpagxo, ecx en la bloga sekcio, ecx en la formo de ligilo al iu malprava, malgxusta, refutebla kaj refutinda opinio. La opinioj kaj diskutoj de unuopaj homoj prefere aperu en la personaj retpagxoj, ja versxajne plejparto de usonaj esperantistoj havas sian propran retejon, kaj ne malfacilas arangxi ankaux sian blogon.
March 18, 2006 by Jxenja A., 4 years 25 weeks ago
Not appropriate
It is absolutely not appropriate to use ELNA's website to allow Mr. Culver to advertise his anti-esperanto ideas. This is a waste of my support of ELNA and hurts our image to outsiders. This is exactly why I am against having a blogging site at out website. We should run an organizational website that is sanctioned by the organization and all other communication should be on a seperate site.
March 17, 2006 by esperantisto, 4 years 25 weeks ago
ne dauxru
Laux mi ni ne uzu la ttt-ejon de ELNA por disvastigi la opiniojn de cricxjo. Tia afero estas granda parto de mia kontrauxo al blogoj kiel cxef-ttt-ejoj.
March 15, 2006 by esperantisto, 4 years 25 weeks ago
Foje kiam oni volas mencii
Foje kiam oni volas mencii iun retejon, kun kiu oni forte malkonsentas, oni povas simple doni la URLon kiel teksto, sed ne kiel ligilo. Tiel oni ne donas al la retejisto helpon pri sia Google-rango.
---
jimhenry@pobox.com
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry
March 17, 2006 by jimhenry, 4 years 25 weeks ago
Esperanto and language preservation
Strictly speaking, Esperanto has not always made the proposition that Limako describes. Only in the last few decades have Esperantists been systematically touting the language as a panacea for the extinction of other languages. I think that this proposition needs a little more critical scrutiny. As a rule, very small language communities do not give up their language in order to avoid economic disadvantage, but because that language no longer provides any of its users a communicative advantage. This takes place when all speakers of the endangered language have become completely bilingual in both that language and the dominant language. Given the usual situation in which native speakers of both the threatened and the dominant language coexist in one region, and because the dominant language is indispensible for many purposes, its use is unavoidable, while use of the threatened language becomes more and more optional. It recedes and ultimately dies out.
If it were actually possible to introduce Esperanto worldwide and then mandate its use wherever native speakers of different languages come together, the result could only be that Esperanto itself would first become the language of public life, then the native language of an increasing number of people, and ultimately the dominant language in most regions where endangered languages exist. That is because these regions are rarely linguistically homogenous. In other words, the previously dominant language would be relegated to second place and the endangered language to third place.
Esperanto being easy to learn, it would, if adopted for worldwide use, become ubiquitous in more places and more quickly than English or any other language at present, and in the long run it too would threaten the existence of other languages. When this dawned on François Simonnet, founder of Libero por la lingvoj, an Esperantist group that advocates language preservation and the rights of speakers of disadvantaged languages, he began to toy with the idea that a sizable nucleus of monolingual speakers should be maintained within every language community. He seems to realize that no less than this – and not the adoption of Esperanto – can truly keep threatened languages from going extinct. Yet how is monolingualism to be foisted upon people who live in a bilingual or multilingual situation and who want the benefits that a second language can provide them?
Gary
March 11, 2006 by Gary Mickle, 4 years 26 weeks ago
Geraldine, I think that
Geraldine, I think that diversity takes priority over communication. I would rather have Babel, which is a quite beautiful state of affairs actually, then have some international language forced on everyone like the Esperanto movement is wont to do. I can't much admire your translation work when you treat foreign languages as an obstacle instead of a treasure. Furthermore, I must say that your writing of your name in Esperanto form when you are writing in English bespeaks a disrespect for your native language. Many Americans are sad their immigrant ancestors were forced to change their names to meet the standards of those already living here, yet you out of your own free will commit the same perfidy. And yet, everyone tells me I'm ever so wrong when I assert that Esperanto doesn't let one's native language flourish without harm like its supporters advertise.
Steve, this "nut-central" I was in was the very core of the Esperanto movement, the ones who decide its values and identity. The fantatics are the ones who receive all the funding, organise the important international congresses and seminars, and represent Esperanto to governments and non-governmental organisations. I know that some people on the periphery (and ELNA is nothing if not provincial) act differently, but as long as the core is rotten, you can't effect much change. Also, the periphery is often just as much nut-central as the core. At best, you all give tacit support to the nuttery. If you really don't like fanaticism, you should put pressure on the core to permit a greater appreciation of national languages. You should support UEA commitee member Jose Antonio Vergara who wants to make Universalaj Kongresoj general language festivals where Esperanto is but one single option among many other permitted languages. Since ELNA basically acts the same way as the core in what it claims Esperanto is for, in its refusal to admit that Esperanto is just *an* international language instead of "*la* international lingvo", and because it lets Vergara be a lone voice in a crowd, then it is perfectly legitimate to assume that you are just as bad as those who drove me from the movement in the European rounds.
And before anyone here says again that I'm wrong, do point out how ELNA is trying to increase the use of national languages among Esperantists and reserving Esperanto as a last resort as is necessary to ensure intercultural contact and language diversity.
March 9, 2006 by crculver, 4 years 26 weeks ago
Driven out?
Would that be in the same way that the US Navy drove you out?
I hope it's not a trend.
March 19, 2006 by rdmiller3, 4 years 25 weeks ago
It seems to be a trend
Just to expand upon this:
* Not only did he become a conscientous objector, but supposedly also an idealistic Esperantist
* Before joining the Orthodox Church, he also went through a Roman Catholic phase and an Anglican phase (having been an agnostic to start with). Who knows what his next religious phase will be ;-)
So, it seems that it's not Esperanto that has the problem -- it's Chris Culver who has big time problems making lasting commitments...
March 19, 2006 by J. Amis, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Can we step back, please?
Chris Culver's current set of opinions about Esperanto can be, and have been in several venues, easily refuted. But dragging in his life history in an attempt to invalidate those opinions strikes me as getting awfully ad hominem. Ad hominem arguments do often win disputes, if not formal debates, but they usually leave a pretty bad taste in the mouth afterwards for all concerned (including outsiders who may read these comments).
Don Harlow
http://donh.best.vwh.net/esperanto.php
http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Literaturo/
March 20, 2006 by donh, 4 years 24 weeks ago
Let's take a look at some of
Let's take a look at some of Kriĉjo's premises and opinions, as expressed in the given comment.
> I would rather have Babel, which is a quite beautiful state of affairs actually...
I can't argue with preferences, but Babel is "a quite beautiful state of affairs" only for those who don't have to put up with it but can take a pleasant view of it from the outside. It's not clear to me how the inability to communicate because of language differences can be "a quite beautiful state of affairs".
> Many Americans are sad their immigrant ancestors were forced to change their names to meet the standards of those already living here, yet you out of your own free will commit the same perfidy.
That "many Americans" feel this way doesn't mean that all or even most do. Those who subscribe to this particular attitude, or who are simply lazy (like myself), are free to insist on spelling their names in the usual way in an Esperanto-speaking medium. I expect to go on being "Donald Harlow" (and not "Danld Harlo" or "Donaldo Harlovo" or whatever) -- my choice, just as the use of "Ĝeraldino Vrajto" is someone else's legitimate choice. This is not "perfidy", just an individual preference.
> You should support UEA commitee member Jose Antonio Vergara who wants to make Universalaj Kongresoj general language festivals where Esperanto is but one single option among many other permitted languages.
I've gone to a few (count them: five) UKs in my time, and I don't remember ever going there to experience Babel; I went there to enjoy a strictly Esperanto-speaking environment for a week, and to meet friends from around the world whom I wouldn't have had the opportunity to encounter otherwise. I remember dancing with three ladies of my acquaintance at the congress ball in Beijing (1986, not 2004); to communicate with them in the "language festival" atmosphere you want, I'd have had to speak all of Chinese, Japanese and Persian. This was simply not an option for me. Better that we all spoke Esperanto with each other.
> ... do point out how ELNA is trying to increase the use of national languages among Esperantists and reserving Esperanto as a last resort as is necessary to ensure intercultural contact and language diversity
(1) ELNA does no such thing, and cannot by its by-laws; it exists to promote and teach Esperanto (preamble, if I'm not mistaken), not to promote and teach Chinese or Lithuanian or Italian. Other organizations exist for that.
(2) You seem to think that "intercultural contact" is only possible through the use of national languages. Intercultural contact is contact between people, whether directly or indirectly, and the language used is irrelevant as long as the persons contacting each other have mutual, and equal, access – not always possible across the boundaries laid down by Babel.
My particular interest in this matter is literature. I would never have had access to any of the literature of Sweden or Bulgaria, for instance, without Esperanto; my ability to read Swedish (predicated upon a terribly shallow knowledge of Danish that I picked up as an exchange student many years ago) is slim and my understanding of Bulgarian is effectively nil; yet I was able to read, understand and enjoy works from those cultures' literatures through Esperanto (I'm thinking specifically of Selma Lagerlöf's Gösta Berling and Ivan Vazov's Under the Yoke, both of which I read in my misspent Babel-avoiding youth; enjoying those two books was an eye-opening experience, not just because they taught me much about the literature and history of two cultures previously outside my ken, but also because they were a totally different experience from my attempts to plow through Caesar's Gallic Wars in the original Latin and various Danish short stories and essays with which I was confronted in school in Denmark – these were works I could read and enjoy, not just decipher).
Admittedly, study of Esperanto won't give you deep access to the details of any particular culture, but in my experience and that of almost everybody I've ever known a study of some ethnic language, unless carried on for years and years and coupled with immersion in that culture, won't either; and it's unparalleled for giving you broad access to a number of different cultures, particularly if you spend most of your life walled up behind the walls established at Babel.
Don Harlow
http://donh.best.vwh.net/esperanto.php
http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Literaturo/
March 18, 2006 by donh, 4 years 25 weeks ago
Does she or doesn't she (hate English)
>I can't much admire your translation work
That a shame, because everyone else who sees it thinks it's absolutely fantastic.
>I must say that your writing of your name in Esperanto form when
>you are writing in English bespeaks a disrespect for your native
>language.
Now THAT'S something I've never been accused of before!!!
The entire point I wanted to make was that I see Esperanto as one among many tools to help me communicate with people. Period. To the extent it does that, I will continue using it. Period.
Amike,
Gxeraldino Vrajto
gw_grin@yahoo.com
March 10, 2006 by Ĝeraldino Vrajto, 4 years 26 weeks ago
Where we disagree
I thank you for the most recent comment because I believe I now have a clearer idea where we disagree. You believe that Esperanto organizations should encourage the use of national languges for international communication. I think that's wrong for two reasons:
First and foremost, because it won't help: it won't do anything to address the fundamental threat to minority languages. As I stated in my original post, I believe a goal of the Esperanto movement is to remove the economic liabilty of not being a native speaker of the dominant language, thereby allowing people to have their own native language, rather than give it up in order to not suffer economic disadvantage. I also pointed out that English (and I believe no national language) can offer this. In other words, the adoption of Esperanto offers the potential of creating an environment where national languages flourish -- not as a means for foreigners to speak to one another, but for neighbors to speak to one another. I believe that as long as international communication is conducted using national languages, the economic pressures that are destroying minority languages will persist. No amount of encouraging second-language use of national languages can help address this problem. Even if every person who went to university majored in Latin, it would not bring Latin back from the grave.
Second, because Esperanto organizations are (and primarily ought to be) about helping people learn Esperanto (or learn about Esperanto). Time and resources, being limited, should be spent in ways that most advance the agenda toward which the organization is dedicated. I therefore believe it is beyond the purview of ELNA to encourage Spanish speakers to communicate with other Spanish speakers in Spanish. Or in any language, other than Esperanto. ELNA should use it's resources to help people find out that Esperanto exists and, should they want to learn it, to help them do so. It would be irresponsible of the leadership to do otherwise.
I don't disagree that I am rather provincial as Esperanto speakers go -- I've never attended the Universala Kongreso and have never worked in the Centra Oficejo. But for the reasons I've cited, I don't believe your approach can solve the problem: I believe that what you propose will ensure the destruction of minority languages. So, imperfect as the Esperanto movement is, I try to work within it and remain "one-who-hopes" that people will consent to pursue a path that could save our world's languages before all their native speakers are gone. After that, we will *only* be able to learn them as second languages.
--
StevenBrewer
March 9, 2006 by limako, 4 years 26 weeks ago
A couple of corrections
I noticed from my referrer logs that you linked to my essay from here. Thanks for a level-headed and to-the-point response to my arguments. I'm so used to getting irrelevant personal attacks in response to my essay etc. I must make two corrections, however.
The first is that I do not claim that Esperanto is presently suppressing language diversity on a large scale. Instead, I merely note that within its small population of speakers, Esperanto suppresses language diversity for them. And that is demonstrably true. The amount of languages I gained proficiency in during the past year--compared to the amount I learned during my ten years of heavy E-o activity--stands as proof. As does the treatment I and other ex-Esperantists experienced. So many of the people I met in the Esperanto movement refused to speak in their native language with me--even we had been E-ists for years (so there was no need for them to practise for improvement like for beginners) and when I visited their homes or vice versa privately outside of the world of congresses. It's not even limited to the learning of foreign languages. Heck, when I was working in the CO of UEA, I was prohibited from speaking my own native language of English with the other native English speakers there, even off duty and outside the office, and the situation among the CO workers is a good indication of the mood in the movement in general.
Also, I don't claim that attending language courses in minority languages directly contributes to a greater number of speakers. Instead, world attention can provide two important things, one being funding, and the other being pressure on the national government to end persecution of a minority language. If just a couple of thousand people showed up every summer for the Mari course at MSU, for example, then maybe Markelov and Putin would realise that it is a treasure instead of a language whose speakers need beatings and unemployement.
March 6, 2006 by crculver, 4 years 26 weeks ago
the CO of UEA?
Heck, when I was working in the CO of UEA, I was prohibited from speaking my own native language of English with the other native English speakers there, even off duty and outside the office, and the situation among the CO workers is a good indication of the mood in the movement in general.
I worked in the CO for a year and I just want to comment that no one in the CO has ever objected when I chose to speak English or Dutch there. I remember there even being a comment there about the T-shirt which says Esperanto: La Regxo de Lingvoj (Esperanto: The King of Languages) and that a few CO employees objected to it being too against the diversity of languages to imply that Esperanto is the best.
As far as visiting homes, I think you should respect the right of your host to choose which language he/she would like to communicate with you. I even remember hearing of an Esperanto speaker in Quebec who asked his Esperanto guests to speak French, because they could both speak French (although not natively). There is always room for improvement with languages. You never completely master a foreign language, there's always more you can learn (even in Esperanto).
For example, this weekend two German Esperanto speakers visited me who are both very fluent Esperanto speakers, but we all chose to speak in English and German most of the time, and only occasionally in Esperanto when we wanted to be absolutely clear about something. There's a Russian Esperanto speaker that I speak with quite often with whom I generally speak to in English.
I think you should respect the right of people to speak Esperanto. Trying to suppress people from speaking or learning Esperanto is just as bad as others trying to "suppress" your right to speak other languages at an Esperanto conference.
March 20, 2006 by amuzulo, 4 years 24 weeks ago
It was only reasonable to expect...
I can't claim to know what working for the Central Office was like, but your experience there certainly doesn't match up with anything I've run into.
It is somewhat understandable though, don't you think, that if you were so entheusiastic about Esperanto as to work at the Central Office that people would assume you shared the same desire to promote Esperanto as others who assist them movement.
Perhaps the reason you see so many "ad hominem" responses to your arguments is that people are trying to say, "HEY CHRIS! YOU'RE DOING IT AGAIN! CUT IT OUT!" You seem to be looking for the one, perfect meaning in life. You find something, throw yourself into it, then when you find out it's not so perfect you become an "objector".
It's amazing that you've clung to Emacs so long. ;-)
March 19, 2006 by rdmiller3, 4 years 24 weeks ago
proof and courtesy
I just wanted to address your "proof." "Your story" doesn't stand as proof. It is an example. My story is a counter-example. I have learned (at least the beginnings of) more languages since I started learning Esperanto than I had before that point (even though I had tried). I attribute that to both the "understanding how to learn a language" phenomenon and simply being exposed to more languages.
Oh, and that makes me want to address another point, that you are asked not to speak English with other English speakers in front of Esperantists (krokodili). Well, I have to admit that "crocodiling" seems just plainly rude. If I'm in a discussion with a group and I suddenly start telling secrets to the person sitting next to me, it just isn't courteous to the rest of the people in the conversation. Sure, I may have a low-level intimate interaction, but how would a non-English speaker from another culture know that I wasn't being secretive if I was speaking in English. For me, not speaking English in front of Esperantists is a matter of courtesy.
March 17, 2006 by nehundo, 4 years 25 weeks ago
Culver's essay
Since you wrote in English, I will reply to you in English.
I went to your web site and read your essay, and quite frankly, I find your comments not very relevant to why I got interested in Esperanto, so they obviously will not convince me to abandon it. I am the prime mover behind the multilingual content on a website sponsored by my church. We are trying to reach out to people of all the nations represented in our international denomination, but heavens! there are a lot of languages, and the number of countries increases yearly. I began putting Esperanto content on our website to communicate with people whose languages will not be represented for a long time, if ever. In the few months that we have had Esperanto content, we have already made contacts that we wouldn't have made otherwise. Even if the person who wants to read the message doesn't speak Esperanto, one of his/her countrymen who does can translate.
We are also facing communication problems at our own church international conferences, where there is no guarantee whatsoever that the person you need to speak to can speak English. Of course, each person can learn some of the languages. I myself speak Portuguese and Spanish, and am learning German. But what if someone who speaks Polish or Japanese or Urdu or whatever needs to talk to me? I see Esperanto as a tool that we can use in those situations where there is not a sharing of fluency in one or the other's native language. If a significant fraction of our members learn Esperanto, there will be at least one shared language. Certainly I don't need to use Esperanto to talk to Brazilians, since I know Portuguese. But an Esperanto speaking Pole or Pakistani or Japanese would have a lot better time of talking to me than if they had to depend on me speaking their native languages. Although we are led to believe that "everyone speaks English", my own experience is that LOTS of people do not. Furthermore, many people who say they do don't speak well enough to really communicate.
Finally, I certainly have not experienced the arrogance you say exists. Although I am a novice, make loads of mistakes, and have to fall back on my native language at times, no one has given me any grief whatsoever.
Amike,
Gxeraldino Vrajto
gw_grin@yahoo.com
March 7, 2006 by Ĝeraldino Vrajto, 4 years 26 weeks ago
A couple thousand!
Hey! If a couple of thousand people showed up every summer for the NordAmerika Somera Kursaro... Wow. I'm still in shock just thinking about it...
I don't mean to discount your experience, but I do think you were probably in nut-central as far as the Esperanto community goes. Things aren't like that everywhere. My experience has been very different. Well, not all of it. I did write the following haiku about the Esperanto movement, once upon a time:
Gutoj malgrandaj
Ja traboras graniton
Cxu vian kapon?
Having learned another language to fluency before Esperanto, I have to say that there are simply no words to describe the magic I experienced when I went to my first Esperanto congress. So I can understand why people respond so negatively to your essay -- you're telling people, not what your experience was, but that their experience is false and a lie. That's not a way to win friends and influence people.
I'm sorry you were so bitterly disappointed by your experience with the Esperanto community -- If you ever find yourself in the Northeast, I hope you'll visit the Esperanto community I belong to and discover that at least not all of it is as false and evil as you represent in your essay.
--
StevenBrewer
March 6, 2006 by limako, 4 years 26 weeks ago