NationStates Jolt Archive

Someone mentioned Esperanto in another thread, but I thought I'd make a specific Esperanto thread so we could get into more detail.

Poll coming:

Already expressed (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10809626&postcount=48) myself.

Stupid commies!

Esperanto isn't too bad as a constructed language, but it's a terrible choice for an auxilliary one.

I know wot it is know! it is that universal language crap! english IS the universal language as over half the world's pop speak it anyway so that IS it already.

PS all delegates please endorse my proposal 'Linguistical Common Sense Act'.

english IS the universal language as over half the world's pop speak it anyway so that IS it already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers

I asked if it was a type of Coffee.
Is it?

Although I encourage conlanging and I want to learn Esperanto, I think that the purpose of Esperanto is horrible. Auxillary languages only decrease the need to learn other languages which leads to less spoken languages going extinct. Possibly even all other languages going extinct, even though that's unlikey because dialects always arise.

Ah it is a stupid Communist plot to comple the massesto speak jibberish.

Too much Portuguese influence and it doesn't have that German or English ease of creating new words on the fly.

English is already the language of International Air travel. If you want to keep American English from becoming an even more global standard, bring back Latin.

Personally I have several friends from Ghana who think we should all speak Twi (Akan).

Ĉu vi parolas Esperanton?

I know wot it is know! it is that universal language crap! english IS the universal language as over half the world's pop speak it anyway so that IS it already.


^more ppl speak chinese than english in the world if anything everyone should speak chinese..............thats my thoughs


i think esperanto is a good auxilliary langua but it's easier for some to learn it so its not exactly fair.

The whole world should use it for communist plotting over a cup of coffee.

Seriously: Esperanto is never gonna make it. The dominating power imposes its language. Not through force; there is no need for that. The rest of the world will bend over backwards to learn the language of the dominating power, and the dominating power will simply refuse to speak any other language than their own.

That's what happened with Latin 2000 years ago: the Romans wouldn't learn the languages of their provincials. That's why Arabic is the dominant language in the Islamic world. That's what happened with English since the 19th century: Brits and Americans, in their vast majority, suck at foreign languages because they can't be bothered and their is no need either, since the rest of the world speaks theirs anyway, and that's why coming generations will eagerly learn their Chinese graphs and syllable tones. But, alas, they will not learn Esperanto.

I asked if it was a type of Coffee.
Is it?
No. Its not spam either.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Esperanto http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Esperanto
...I think that the purpose of Esperanto is horrible.
I thought its intent was to be the modern lingua franca and not favor any nation or group of people.
A rather nobel goal now unachievable.
Ĉu vi parolas Esperanton?
Jag vill inte tala esperanto.

^more ppl speak chinese than english in the world if anything everyone should speak chinese..............thats my thoughs


i think esperanto is a good auxilliary langua but it's easier for some to learn it so its not exactly fair.

Less than a sixth of the world speak Mandarin, more than half English.

Less than a sixth of the world speak Mandarin, more than half English.
I have a link. Do you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers

Less than a sixth of the world speak Mandarin, more than half English.

Where do you get that from? I doubt that 3 billion people speak English. Every source I've seen, including the previously linked wiki article, put Chinese well ahead of English in number of speakers. Though English speakers ARE more widespread than Chinese, who are very few outside Asia.

Gotta count the second language speakers, too. English wins.

1)China has more than one language.
2)40 million Chinese live in caves.

I thought its intent was to be the modern lingua franca and not favor any nation or group of people.
A rather nobel goal now unachievable.

I would prefer that everyone learn multiple languages. Harder, but oh well.

Gotta count the second language speakers, too. English wins.
Psst ... the total number of English and Chinese speakers are in the link. Mandarin Chinese alone has more speakers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers
1)China has more than one language.
Its standardized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Mandarin

Psst ... the total number of English and Chinese speakers are in the link. Mandarin Chinese alone has more speakers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers



I stand corrected.

IIRC there are more active speakers of Marc Okrand's thlinghan'hol than Esperanto.

Hell, AFAIK the only contribution to global culture Esperanto was ever involved with was when it was used in the psudo-horror film "Incubus" (starring a young William Shatner... still acting badly, but in Esperanto)

I would prefer that everyone learn multiple languages. Harder, but oh well.
That is what is going to happen anyhow.

I never stated my opinion, I stated the inferred opinion of Doktoro Esperanto. It'd be nice if we had a language other than English, Mandarian, Spanish, or Hindi to be used for international and intercultural means. However, as I stated in the first post, choosing Esperanto is no longer a viable means of achieving this, as there are native speakers.
IIRC there are more active speakers of Marc Okrand's thlinghan'hol than Esperanto.
I'm proud I had no idea what you were talking about until I looked it up.

IIRC there are more active speakers of Marc Okrand's thlinghan'hol than Esperanto.

Only if you include the Klingon Empire. :) I'm sure Esperanto is somewhat more common on Earth.

Hell, AFAIK the only contribution to global culture Esperanto was ever involved with was when it was used in the psudo-horror film "Incubus" (starring a young William Shatner... still acting badly, but in Esperanto)

It's interesting that Shatner has connections to TWO fairly popular conlangs.

Psst ... the total number of English and Chinese speakers are in the link. Mandarin Chinese alone has more speakers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers

Its standardized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Mandarin
You call it standardised i call it Commie Oppression.
Never the less 40 Millon Chinese live in caves.-2001 Stats.

IIRC there are more active speakers of Marc Okrand's thlinghan'hol than Esperanto.

Hell, AFAIK the only contribution to global culture Esperanto was ever involved with was when it was used in the psudo-horror film "Incubus" (starring a young William Shatner... still acting badly, but in Esperanto)
When did he start acting well?

Only if you include the Klingon Empire. :) I'm sure Esperanto is somewhat more common on Earth. Not sure about that. http://www.kli.org/

About the Klingon Language Institute
In operation since 1992, the Klingon Language Institute continues its mission of bringing together individuals interested in the study of Klingon linguistics and culture, and providing a forum for discussion and the exchange of ideas. Our membership is diverse, including Star Trek fans with curiosity and questions about Klingon language, RP gamers wishing to lend some authenticity to a Klingon character, as well as students and professionals in the fields of linguistics, philology, computer science, and psychology who see the Klingon language as a useful metaphor in the classroom or simply wish to mix vocation with avocation. Though based in the USA, the Institute is actually an international endeavor, presently reaching thirty countries, and all seven continents.

The interesting thing about tlhIngan Hol is that it is not an amalgam of extant languages - with all the trouble that involves (see Esperanto and Lojban), but an entirely novel and complete language, with its own vocabulary, grammar, and usage.

It's interesting that Shatner has connections to TWO fairly popular conlangs.
And he can't act in either of them. :p

Already expressed (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10809626&postcount=48) myself.
Agreed.

You call it standardised i call it Commie Oppression.
Oh - noes! - the yoke of Swedish Commie Oppression (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Swedish) is upon me! :rolleyes:
Never the less 40 Millon Chinese live in caves.-2001 Stats.
I Googled "40 Million Chinese live in caves" and got nothing but this (http://www.class.uidaho.edu/arch499/nonwest/china/).

I thought its intent was to be the modern lingua franca and not favor any nation or group of people.
A rather nobel goal now unachievable.
We had one of those, it was called latin and it was the language of the educational community, but it turns out that having such a thing isn't all that desirable, because no one speaks latin anymore.

We had one of those, it was called latin and it was the language of the educational community, but it turns out that having such a thing isn't all that desirable, because no one speaks latin anymore.
That's because the European nobels became Francophiles. Which then became the lingua franca (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua_franca#European_languages_which_have_served_as_a_lingua_franca).
By all definitions, English is the contemporary lingua franca.
I really have no idea why German and Polish are counted in my link, as it defeats logic. What about Russian?! Oh, wait, Russia is not in Europe. Silly me. :rolleyes:

For me, as a (relatively) experienced linguist, the biggest problem with Esperanto is the lack of attached culture. I see little value, and even less interest in learning a language with nothing relying on it from behind.

Much as it irritates me (mainly 'cos I get angry at anglophones who refuse to learn foreign toungues), English is the main international language. Even countries in the former USSR, and in the countries of Francophone, and French influenced Africa, people are beginning to use English rather than Russian or French as an international lingua franca.

While Esperanto would be fun to play with, simply for 'linguistic curiosity', I see no useful future for it.

That's because the European nobels became Francophiles. Which then became the lingua franca (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua_franca#European_languages_which_have_served_as_a_lingua_franca).
By all definitions, English is the contemporary lingua franca.
I was refering to the "not prejudicial" part, as far as having a "lingua franca"? Well that'll just happen on its own, whoever has the biggest economy gets to dictate the terms on which they speak, and the little fish will just have to learn to get on with themselves in spite of any perceived insult.
I really have no idea why German and Polish are counted in my link, as it defeats logic. What about Russian?! Oh, wait, Russia is not in Europe. Silly me. :rolleyes:
Wha . . .? Was that in response to something I did, or are you just grousing?Either way, Russia is culturally distinct from Europe, and never made it into the "Western Club", so they aren't generally thought of when the word "Europe" is mentioned.

I was refering to the "not prejudicial" part, as far as having a "lingua franca"?
Oh - right - noted. Didn't get that.
Wha . . .? Was that in response to something I did, or are you just grousing?
That'd be grousing.

Psst ... the total number of English and Chinese speakers are in the link. Mandarin Chinese alone has more speakers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers

Its standardized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Mandarin

Not quite correct. Note that the data given there is primarily for native speakers and not total speakers. The number they give for second language speakers is almost certainly too low, given the numbers of native speakers and that it's widely taught as a second and foreign language.

Not quite correct. Note that the data given there is primarily for native speakers and not total speakers. The number they give for second language speakers is almost certainly too low, given the numbers of native speakers and that it's widely taught as a second and foreign language.
Then we get into the zone of, "Can they say a few words in English?" or "Are they competitent in English?" I find the numbers to be quite realistic. Just counting everyone that has been taught English is no way to gauge the size of the English speaking population.

For me, as a (relatively) experienced linguist, the biggest problem with Esperanto is the lack of attached culture. I see little value, and even less interest in learning a language with nothing relying on it from behind.

Much as it irritates me (mainly 'cos I get angry at anglophones who refuse to learn foreign toungues), English is the main international language. Even countries in the former USSR, and in the countries of Francophone, and French influenced Africa, people are beginning to use English rather than Russian or French as an international lingua franca.

While Esperanto would be fun to play with, simply for 'linguistic curiosity', I see no useful future for it.
i agree. its silly to think that you can invent a language and expect people to use it in preference to ones that acutally exist and are used by millions.

id take up klingon or elvish before id bother with esperanto

Then we get into the zone of, "Can they say a few words in English?" or "Are they competitent in English?" I find the numbers to be quite realistic. Just counting everyone that has been taught English is no way to gauge the size of the English speaking population.

The point remains that that link does not count the total number of speakers as you claimed.

It is also of note that, as I suggested, the numbers given are questionable. For example, the number of English speakers in the USA and UK exceeds the number of total native speakers they give. Even given the number of non-native speakers in those countries, the numbers are quite far off, especially when you start adding the populations of other native English speaking questions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom
Population 59,834,300

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States
Population 298,540,066

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_total_speakers
English 308 million native

In short, can we have another source please? I find the single source given to be lacking.

Someone mentioned Esperanto in another thread, but I thought I'd make a specific Esperanto thread so we could get into more detail.

Poll coming:

Oh, and on topic (;)), why didn't you post this in Esparanto? :p

And the poll is seriously lacking. You might have added an option for "I've heard of it and it's lame" (not evil commy, just lame).

I have a link. Do you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_by_total_speakers

I'm not going to discuss the topic of Esperanto, because quite frankly I know nothing about it, however, on the international language topic Wikipedia is an absolutely horrible source and should never be taken as is and that table only lists numbers as first or second languages. Whereas quite a few people speak three languages; their native language, a fun or school taught language, and English.

However, on the discussion of "Would English or Chinese be better for an international language" it comes down to who speaks more. Because China is so much larger, of course there are going to be more speakers however the amount of speakers is isolated to Asia, seeing how very few people outside of Asia speak Asian languages. Whereas the English language is known throughout the world as is.

Less than a sixth of the world speak Mandarin, more than half English.
1080 million Chinese speakers, 510-515 million English speakers.

1080 million Chinese speakers, 510-515 million English speakers.

The Wikipedia page is crap, none of the numbers add up when compared to population and they only discuss Native or Second Language speakers. So, if you want to argue numbers you need a better source.

In short, can we have another source please? I find the single source given to be lacking.
You're right, OmniWiki condradicts itself here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language#Geographic_distribution) and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers).
About 377 million people use one of the versions of English as their mother tongue, and an equal number of people use them as their second or foreign language.
That makes it: 377 + 377 = 754 million total English speakers
#3 or #4 as a native language (near-tie with Spanish);
#2 in overall speakers
Spanish: 390 million total
English: 510-515 million total

This (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/pie-T/lan_eng_spe) gives between 469 167 843.5 and 487 566 582.5 million English speakers included in their fact gathering.
This (http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=eng) may shed some light on it: claims 508,000,000 total speakers, but I actually added up all of the numbers they gave and got 269 074 444 + as I could have goofed.
Interesting (http://global-reach.biz/globstats/refs.php3) site.
The British speak. (http://www.britishcouncil.org/english/engfaqs.htm#howmany) Around 750 million they say.
Wha...? (http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/sunpub/geneva/news/2_6_2_TC29_SLICE_S1.htm) Questionable source.
Too bad the internet isn't a reliable way to gauge the total number of any speakers, (http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats7.htm) it seems to be the most widely available information. Anyhow, this site says: 1,125,664,397 total English speakers and 1,340,767,863 total Chinese speakers.

All in all, it looks like the breed 'em by the dozen Chinese will keep the title for teh biggest language.

All in all, it looks like the breed 'em by the dozen Chinese will keep the title for teh biggest language.

Nobody will ever pass Chinese for biggest language because of their reproduction rates. They have more people, and therefore have more babies per year, which means more people learning their language per year. It would be seemingly impossible to pass unless a huge mass of their population passed away, or the language became illegal.

Although, very few people speak Chinese outside of Asia. There is a massive group of people who speak it, but they are primarily isolated.

I'm not going to discuss the topic of Esperanto, because quite frankly I know nothing about it, however, on the international language topic Wikipedia is an absolutely horrible source and should never be taken as is and that table only lists numbers as first or second languages.
*points to next to last post*
Every source is argueably - I'll just say it - crap.
Whereas quite a few people speak three languages; their native language, a fun or school taught language, and English.
That's true, but what I'm concerned about is the level of speaking. I could say that I speak over at least ten languages, but am only competent in three: English, Swedish, and Spanish - in that order.
However, on the discussion of "Would English or Chinese be better for an international language" it comes down to who speaks more. Because China is so much larger, of course there are going to be more speakers however the amount of speakers is isolated to Asia, seeing how very few people outside of Asia speak Asian languages. Whereas the English language is known throughout the world as is.
The thread's about Esperanto, which was suppose to address that problem. However, now it can't in my opinion, as there are native speakers of Esperanto. So, whether we choose English, Chinese, or Esperanto we'll be giving somebody a pat on the back.

Although, very few people speak Chinese outside of Asia. There is a massive group of people who speak it, but they are primarily isolated.
That's true.

India is suppose to claim the throne of "the biggest population" in the next couple decades. Only thing is, they have dozens upon dozens of official and official languages within their borders.

I think this source (http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/languages.htm) adresses the problem fairly well.

What are the world's most widely spoken languages?

This question is a very interesting one that has a rather complicated answer. Estimates of how many people speak a language are quite general and can vary considerably. For example, English estimates vary from 275 to 450 million, Spanish from 150 to over 300 million, Hindi from 150 to 350 million, and Russian from 150 to 180 million.

To further complicate matters, the definition of “speaker” can be vague. Some surveys of languages give information on native speakers only. Others count both native speakers and secondary speakers (those who use the language regularly or primarily even though it is not their native language).

Lastly, it is important to consider not only the population (number) of language speakers, but also the geographic distribution of these languages. Some languages have relatively large populations of native speakers but are used almost exclusively in a few countries. On the other hand, other languages have relatively small populations of native speakers but are used in many different countries as an official or national language.

The Summer Institute for Linguistics (SIL) Ethnologue Survey (1999) lists the following as the top languages by population: (number of native speakers in parentheses)


Chinese* (937,132,000)
Spanish (332,000,000)
English (322,000,000)
Bengali (189,000,000)
Hindi/Urdu (182,000,000)
Arabic* (174,950,000)
Portuguese (170,000,000)
Russian (170,000,000)
Japanese (125,000,000)
German (98,000,000)
French* (79,572,000)

* The totals given for Chinese, Arabic, and French include more than one SIL variety. See chart for full details.

The following list is from Dr. Bernard Comrie’s article for the Encarta Encyclopedia (1998): (number of native speakers in parentheses)

Mandarin Chinese (836 million)
Hindi (333 million)
Spanish (332 million)
English (322 million)
Bengali (189 million)
Arabic (186 million)
Russian (170 million)
Portuguese (170 million)
Japanese (125 million)
German (98 million)
French (72 million)


The following list is from George Weber’s article “Top Languages: The World’s 10 Most Influential Languages” in Language Today (Vol. 2, Dec 1997): (number of native speakers in parentheses)

Mandarin Chinese (1.1 billion)
English (330 million)
Spanish (300 million)
Hindi/Urdu (250 million)
Arabic (200 million)
Bengali (185 million)
Portuguese (160 million)
Russian (160 million)
Japanese (125 million)
German (100 million)
Punjabi (90 million)
Javanese (80 million)
French (75 million)


However, in terms of secondary speakers, Weber submits the following list:
(number of speakers in parentheses)

French (190 million)
English (150 million)
Russian (125 million)
Portuguese (28 million)
Arabic (21 million)
Spanish (20 million)
Chinese (20 million)
German (9 million)
Japanese (8 million)


Thus, if you add the secondary speaker populations to the primary speaker populations, you get the following (and I believe more accurate) list:
(number of speakers in parentheses)


Mandarin Chinese (1.12 billion)
English (480 million)
Spanish (320 million)
Russian (285 million)
French (265 million)
Hindi/Urdu (250 million)
Arabic (221 million)
Portuguese (188 million)
Bengali (185 million)
Japanese (133 million)
German (109 million)


The following is a list of these languages in terms of the number of countries where each is spoken. The number that follows is the total number of countries that use that language (from Weber, 1997):

English (115)
French (35)
Arabic (24)
Spanish (20)
Russian (16)
German (9)
Mandarin (5)
Portuguese (5)
Hindi/Urdu (2)
Bengali (1)
Japanese (1)


The number of countries includes core countries (where the language has full legal or official status), outer core countries (where the language has some legal or official status and is an influential minority language, such as English in India or French in Algeria), and fringe countries (where the language has no legal status, but is an influential minority language in trade, tourism, and the preferred foreign language of the young, such as English in Japan or French in Romania). For a complete breakdown of each and an accompanying chart, click here.

After weighing six factors (number of primary speakers, number of secondary speakers, number and population of countries where used, number of major fields using the language internationally, economic power of countries using the languages, and socio-literary prestige), Weber compiled the following list of the world's ten most influential languages:
(number of points given in parentheses)


English (37)
French (23)
Spanish (20)
Russian (16)
Arabic (14)
Chinese (13)
German (12)
Japanese (10)
Portuguese (10)
Hindi/Urdu (9)

According to all of the links given as of now, English has official lingua franca status while China has more speakers than any other language alone. We've officially come full circle everyone. Now, lets get back on topic. Which is, in case you forgot, posted below.

Do you like Esperanto?

or the language became illegal.
I think we can rule that one out.

I think we can rule that one out.

It was a hypothetical jest.

According to all of the links given as of now, English has official lingua franca status while China has more speakers than any other language alone. We've officially come full circle everyone. Now, lets get back on topic. Which is, in case you forgot, posted below.

Do you like Esperanto?

I think the idea of an artificial & international language is idiotic. I enjoy culture, and I enjoy having different languages. I choose to learn languages because I like how they sound and I don't like the idea of it being almost necessary to learn a language.

I think the idea of an artificial & international language is idiotic. I enjoy culture, and I enjoy having different languages. I choose to learn languages because I like how they sound and I don't like the idea of it being almost necessary to learn a language.
Good points.

However, English is almost necessary these days. Then again, it has culture.