NationStates Jolt Archive

Tell me what you think:


NOTING that many Nations currently speak completely different languages, many of which have totally different structures; EMPHASISNG that differences in languages creates large barriers in much negotiation between countries, and also damages significantly tourism to countries with more obscure languages; NOTING FURTHER that citizens of countries with less well-known languages are very often forced to become multi-lingual, and that the words from much more widely-spoken languages often seep into the dictionaries of such countries;

RESOLVED:
-A new language, designed to be logical, easy to learn and poetic, bearing resemblance to no one existing language more than any other, will be created;
-Said language will be taught as a second language in the curriculum for all nations within the UN;
-A small commitee will be created voted from all participating nations, for the purpose of evaluating new words, and deciding whether they will be added to the dictionary;
-Said commitee will be responsible for the creation of the language;
-The dictionary of said language will not be edited or added to by any single nation without the word being submitted to said commitee, which will then vote on whether this word, or edition of a current word, or its definition, should be added to the dictionary;
-The dictionary will be the same for each nation, and no nation will have a version edited or different from that of the rest;
-Said language will be the first language of no nation, and will be taught only as a second language.

SUMMARY:
In order to break down barriers between nations caused by differences in languages, as well as to cut down on the amount of new words being entered into the dictionaries of many less-spoken languages, and to stop citizens some nations having to learn more second languages than others, there will be a universal language, taught in all nations in the UN as a second language, but not replacing the nation's first language. The language will be designed to be logical, very easy to learn, and poetic. A commitee will be voted from all participating nations for the creation and maintanance of this new language. This commitee will first designate the creation of the new language to an individual or organisation chosen by the commitee, and then work with said individual or organisation to create the language. Once the creation is complete, the commitee will recieve additions or editions to the dictionary, and will vote on whether or not they should be entered into the dictionary. If the vote is passed by at least 90%, the word will be entered into the dictionary of all participating nation. This will be the only way that the dictionary can be edited.

We don't see any problems with the way it is written, other than the use of the words "more obscure" to characterize some of the native languages of our member nations.

(typos: the spelling of EMPHASIZING {and i'm not talking about the S/Z issue}, the spelling of maintenance)

While the people of Guaifenasin are against this proposal, and will vote against it should it reach quorum, our UN delegate will be supporting it in this phase, as we respect the right of the UN member nations to vote on this matter.

First impression: "Oh my God, it's Esperanto!"

Second impression - it's still Esperanto. There's nothing much wrong with the way the proposal is worded, but *I* won't be voting for it. Simple languages cannot convey the depth and underlying meaning of naturally occuring language.

It's like trying to simplify a map. Sure, you can draw the roads as all straight lines, but it's not exactly accurate, and you can only use it to get from point A to point B. I want to see the mountains and lakes and waterfalls, and a simple map won't do that. Give me a topographic map, and I've a much better understanding of the geography.

Language is a map of the underlying culture. In order to understand the whys of that culture, you must understand the native language.

A waste of time. You see how well the Esperanto language did in real life. There are just about 6 billion people on the earth who didn't bother to learn it. Your language will suffer the same fate, whatever name you give it.

Eh? tha wat? Everybugger down't'pub ad a reet owd chinwag bout this one. Grand idea, but tha shud be reddy fer us Northen cloth cap blokes to arse it all oop wi' our reet proper way o'speaking. Tha pronunciation thingummy gon't'be oop spout straight off.

By Eck,be nice if it'ud work though, ne'er mind eh?

Alf Baggybottom - Minister fer education and black puddings.

No.

This idea of an international language is absurd, first of all IF the UN decided to pass it, who would decide upon the language? Over 1000 delagets? A rather long, laborsome process. Perhaps, if we were lucky, it would only take a few decades. We stand strongly with France and Germany and Frisbeeteria. How you others so much as think of passing this, I do not know.

I think it is an appropriate UN consideration.

Just because you disagree with a proposal doesn't mean you shouldn't support the right of the UN member nations to vote on it.

It is an appropriate consideration to bring before the UN. Therefore, I will support it.

Then I will vote against it, because our people do not believe this is worth the expense it will incur to the UN, among other reasons.

But I respect the right of the member nations to vote on this proposal and will use my UN delegate status to support this to bring forth for a vote.

It's the new Esperanto. It will fail. It would take a great deal of linguistic knowledge to make the language.


-----------------------------------------
"But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality."
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!

http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg

Language is a process of evolution, not creation.

Society changes, adapts, and synthesizes language on its own. There is no reason the UN, or any government for that matter, should intervene.

1: Yes, I know it's Epseranto.

2: I know it didn't work out in the real world, but then prostitution isn't legal in the real world, and no countries have forced vegetarianism or 100% income tax. One of the main reasons that it didn't work in the real world is that it never reached this stage.

3: I already said that a council would be elected, so there wouldn't be 1000 countries arguing over it.

It's like trying to simplify a map. Sure, you can draw the roads as all straight lines, but it's not exactly accurate, and you can only use it to get from point A to point B. I want to see the mountains and lakes and waterfalls, and a simple map won't do that. Give me a topographic map, and I've a much better understanding of the geography.

Erm, I did already mention that it would be designed to be poetic, just as was the real Esperanto. Note also that your analogy is annacurate, a better analogy would be comparing a map where symbols mean more than one thing, the squares are a variety of sizes, and the roads are drawn vaugely near where they should be, with a topographic map.

And note that, no, it wouldn't be a perfect language, as it wouldn't have evolved, but it wouldn't be used or treated like a natural language anyway, it would be used only in certain situations.

And a last point, words from one language become commonly used in another is 99-100% an undesired effect, and often a problem for some, which is one of the uses of this language.


Thanks for all constructive comments, no thanks to unconstructive comments.

The Clan of APE will not sanction such a proposition.
Who will pay for this education? Do you have any idea how hard it is to get an APE to speak? We would need the UN to provide us with the educational resources. Would UN Nation States agree to that? I doubt it.

I hate esperanto. Don't get me started on it.


-----------------------------------------
"But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality."
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!

http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg

i nominate english.