NationStates Jolt Archive

Finally, a decent proposal has been written (by me). Please endorse it, so that we can speak in a neutral language.

Here's the proposal:


End Linguistical Imperialism!

For many years, world powers have imposed their languages on the international scene and on another countries. First the romans, and now, the English and the Americans, that have imposed their language as an international language.

To this organization, I ask: Why has the international language has to be English? Can't a neutral language be created to be used internationally?
Therefore, this resolution proposes:

**Rule #1**
The mandatory usage of a new neutral international language, Esperanto, in all international debates and events between countries.
Should this resolution be aproved, then the international language will no longer be English, but Esperanto, and this language shall be compulsory on all international summits and events.
UN countries will still have right to have their own official language internally, so there is no interference on national sovereignity.

**Rule #2**
An international academy, "The International Language Agency", will be created to ensure that no nation imposes its language on another one and that rule number 1 of this resolution is respected.

This, obviosly, does not mean that we will post in Esperanto, but that, IC, we will roleplay as if the international summits were spoken on the said language.
What do you think?

Remind me why people shouldn't be allowed to speak whatever the hell language they want again?

Remind me why people shouldn't be allowed to speak whatever the hell language they want again?

Remind me why people shouldn't be allowed to speak whatever the hell language they want again?

You have misunderstood the proposal. People will still be able to speak any language they want. This proposal just states that Esperanto will be the new international language for relations and messages between countries. The countries will need to speak in Esperanto, a neutral language, to each other, but common people will still be able to speak any language they want to.

It seems to me that the entire NationStates world already speaks English, anyway.

So what we're doing here is preventing linguistic imperialism by forcing a particular language on everyone? Esperanto's a joke of a language, too. No one uses it.

Wouldn't the International Language Academy have to make sure that this rule isn't enforced? Rules 1 and 2 seem to me to be quite conflicting.

It seems to me that the entire NationStates world already speaks English, anyway.

So what we're doing here is preventing linguistic imperialism by forcing a particular language on everyone? Esperanto's a joke of a language, too. No one uses it.

Wouldn't the International Language Academy have to make sure that this rule isn't enforced? Rules 1 and 2 seem to me to be quite conflicting.

The players behind the nations speak english, but not all the nations themselves

And this resolution doesn't force Esperanto. Countries will still be able to speak in their own language. This resolution just states that Esperanto is the international language.

Oh. I see. You're trying to mandate that a dead, artificial language be revived so that only those with the wealth and time to study it can negotiate between nations? Won't that create a class structure?

Evidently we're trying to pick a language no one speaks, for the express purpose that no one speaks it. The oddness of that goal aside, why create a massive industry to train and translate when everyone already speaks the same language?

You said yourself, all of the players (ie: representatives) speak English.

It also seems rather odd to call for an end to "linguistic imperialism" (which, in this case, is defined as forcing international negotiations to be conducted in English) by forcing (or IC-forcing) international negotiations to be conducted in a different language - namely Esperanto.

The fact that Esperanto is a "neutral language" is neither here nor there. The argument could very easily be mounted that because English (or, before that, French or Latin) has become the global lingua franca it's as good as a "neutral language" too. See below:

English = mobile telephone
German = das Handy

English = weekend
French (or some French people at least) = le weekend

English = Christmas
Chinese/Japanese (can't remember which) = Kurisumasu

And these are only three glaring examples. If I knew French or Latin, I could probably find examples there as well. It also works the other way around:

French = carte blanche
English = carte blanche

German = Schadenfreude
English = Schadenfreude

and so it goes. As far as the delegation of the Electorate of Enodia is concerned, English is a sufficiently international language as it stands now.

The people of Londana take offense to the suggestion that Esperanto is a "neutral" language. As we all know, Esperanto was devised by an elite intellectual who decided to come up with a language that was mildly similar to the *majority* of *European* languages. Esperanto is in no way neutral. It is classist, elitist, and eurocentric.

Londanians, for example, do not speak *any* of the European languages on which Esperanto is based. Only diplomats such as myself are trained in some of them. We agree that English is not a neutral language, but Esperanto is no more neutral itself.

Seeing as the majority of nations *already* speak English, it would be less difficult to have non-English-speaking nations adapt to this standard than have the entire world resurrect a dead, artificial language, to satisfy the musings of elite intellectuals.

The fact that the language is to be imposed upon the speakers is an issue I hadn't even addressed previously. The nation of Enodia is one which came together largely by happenstance and certainly not by a governmental decree - indeed, I am hard-pressed to think of any nations which were brought into existence by decree.
Likewise, the Enodish language (Enodischer Mundart Deutsch) evolved of its own accord. While spelling and grammar have become standardised of late, this is the only real time that an external authority has had any say in the language. To turn something as fundamental as the words that come out of our mouths over to a body based elsewhere is ludicrous.

Seeing as the majority of nations *already* speak English, it would be less difficult to have non-English-speaking nations adapt to this standard than have the entire world resurrect a dead, artificial language, to satisfy the musings of elite intellectuals.

Full agreement here.