Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!chou
From: chou@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Pai Chou)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Global Cultural Prototype
Message-ID: <18291@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 12 Oct 89 19:59:01 GMT
References: <3366@ccnysci.UUCP> <2145@avsd.UUCP>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: chou@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Pai Chou)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 26

In article <2145@avsd.UUCP> childers@avsd.UUCP (Richard Childers) writes:
>GLOBALCP@UVVM.BITNET (Melcir Erksine-Richmond) writes:
>...
>Agreed. I submit Esperanto as the only logical choice, as it is equally
>strange to all, and thus allows nobody to gain an upper hand or occupy a
>position of superiority without having earned it, independently of his or
>her culture and language of origin. I think that is _very_ important.

Esperanto is a Latin/Romance/Spanish based language.
The sound system can be very difficult for  many people in the world
(e.g. consonant cluster, stressed rather than tone, ...)

Grammatically, certain languages rely on syntax while others rely on
morphology (still others are implicit) to express various attributes
of the sentence.  It is not natural or intuitive for many people.

Moreover, a language is not a closed thing.  It changes over time
and is used differently in different societies.  It is inevitable
that the language will borrow words for things specific to a given
culture.  Sometimes culture and languages cannot be separated.
Japanese language has many ways to express humbleness and politeness.
If they say the same thing in Esperanto then people from another
culture will find it strange (why are they apologizing all the time?)

I don't think having one single language for all people can work, especially
if the language is an artificial one.