|
 |
Esperanto a waste of time? | ||
 Language Learning Forum : Esperanto |  | |
| Enriquee Triglot Groupie United States esperantofre.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5126 days ago 51 posts - 125 votes  Speaks: Spanish*, Esperanto, English | Message 281 of 351 18 November 2010 at 10:34pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
I wish Gusutafu would think before writing: >All of it. The number of people "from different cultures" you >can coomunicate with in English, which you already know, >is about a thousand times greater. Within 2 months from my first contact with Esperanto, I was already communicating with people from other countries ... including the USA. It took me another 10 years of learning English to be able to communicate in English. Then, even if there are that many English speakers in the world ... Are they willing to use their time to communicate with me? Will they be willing to show me around their towns? Most of the people that speak Esperanto, learned it to be able to speak with people from other countries. So they are willing to meet and expend time with other Esperanto speakers. If I were to travel to Australia, it will be much easier for me to find friends using Esperanto than using English. >You can use it for travelling, Yes. English is good for buying an airplane ticket, participate in an English speaking tour, and sometimes to get into a hotel. Near Beijing, China, I stayed in a hotel where nobody understood English. My Esperanto friend helped me with all the arrangements. >reading millions of books, many of the best of which >were written in English in the original. How many books did you read in other languages, to know that the best are English originals? Good authors, and good books, exist in most languages. (not in those languages that don't have a written form, or have very few speakers) Sprachprofi wrote: >Also, it makes a lot more sense to me to, say, raise a kid in >German and Mandarin and have him learn Esperanto later >on his own; much more efficient than raising him in >German and Esperanto and have him learn Mandarin later. I don't understand this. If you really thing this way about German and Mandarin ... why not raise the child in German, Mandarin and Esperanto from the beginning? I believe that a child should be raised to understand all the languages spoken by family members, and the local languages. (not if daddy speaks 18 languages) Teaching Esperanto is also possible for people that doesn't speak Esperanto, but can learn it while teaching the newborn. I believe that this is not possible with other languages. In comparing the efficiency of different languages, please always think about how little time goes from the moment somebody starts to learn Esperanto until being able to communicate using Esperanto. Languages have different purposes. I learned Esperanto, and I learned English. But I used Esperanto during many years before being able to communicate in English. (I started to learn English much earlier than Esperanto) And ... nothing that you learned and use ... is a "waste of time". Jeff_lindqvist wrote: >What about all this "Esperanto makes you learn other >languages a lot easier"? True or false? True. It helped me to understand English. Thousands of Esperanto speakers know this. Of course, not all the people that learned Esperanto went on to learn other languages. But I believe many people that were reluctant or had bad experiences studying languages, were more inclined to start again after learning Esperanto. Some of them, as consequence of using Esperanto with people that spoke other languages. 5 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gusutafu Senior Member Sweden Joined 5312 days ago 655 posts - 1039 votes Speaks: Swedish* | Message 282 of 351 19 November 2010 at 9:46am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
Just use couchsurfing instead. there are many more people that speak English that are interested in meeting foreigners, than there are esperantists. It should be especially easy to find people eager to speak English in china. re books, you must have misunderstood me. but there are certainly more books originally written in English than in esperanto, probably more than have been translated to esperanto even. your esperanto friend, doesn't he speak English also? it may be easier to learn esperanto, but most people already know English. you probably learned it before you learned esperanto too, didn't you? in that case esperanto didn't add very much. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| CheeseInsider Bilingual Diglot Senior Member Canada Joined 4913 days ago 193 posts - 238 votes Speaks: English*, Mandarin* Studies: French, German | Message 283 of 351 20 November 2010 at 1:32am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
I am scared that if everyone learns Esperanto that there will be no work for interpreters and translators...
2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Enriquee Triglot Groupie United States esperantofre.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5126 days ago 51 posts - 125 votes Speaks: Spanish*, Esperanto, English | Message 284 of 351 20 November 2010 at 4:03am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
Gusutafu wrote:
>there are many more people that speak English that are >interested in meeting foreigners, than there are esperantists. By absolute numbers you maybe right. I prefer to speak with people that doesn't speak English; with people that still aren't biased by the cultural imports carried by the English language. >It should be especially easy to find people eager to speak >English in china. Most of those that have studied English during many years wish to do that. But they aren't capable. To learn English takes many years and not all the people have the time to keep studying to reach communication skills. >but there are certainly more books originally written in >English than in esperanto, No discussion here. The Esperanto numbers are low comparing with English, but high enough compared with most of the other 6000 languages. >your esperanto friend, doesn't he speak English also? No. Most of the people of the world do not understand English. >most people already know English. Not in the countries whose languages aren't English. >you probably learned it before you learned esperanto too, >didn't you? You didn't read my message. I intended to be clear when I said that I used Esperanto during 10 years before being able to communicate in English ... even if I started to learn English before I discovered this marvelous language. >in that case esperanto didn't add very much. I prefer and enjoy more to speak Esperanto than to speak English. I use English, because I live in USA, But visiting other countries I am much more comfortable speaking in Esperanto. And it is my only choice when I receive visitors that speak Esperanto and don't understand English. In the few occasions where visitors claimed that they knew English, it was much easier to understand them in Esperanto than in English. The nature of many English native speakers, makes them willing to force the people of the whole world to expend half their life to learn English, but they themselves aren't willing to study Esperanto during a few weeks. To the foreigner, that behavior looks like a very easy and egoistic approach. CheeseInsider wrote: >I am scared that if everyone learns Esperanto that there >will be no work for interpreters and translators... Why would we need translators, if today, according to Gusutafu, all the people of the world speak English? Those huge numbers of translators are witnesses that not all the people speak English. Even within the USA there is plenty of work for translators. But you can rest in peace. It will never happen that the whole humanity will speak Esperanto ... nor English. 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
 jeff_lindqvist Diglot Moderator SwedenRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6700 days ago 4250 posts - 5710 votes Speaks: Swedish*, English Studies: German, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, Mandarin, Esperanto, Irish, French Personal Language Map | Message 285 of 351 20 November 2010 at 8:28pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
I started with Esperanto in January, and was conversing after a couple of months. I felt that my basic "conversational skills" were way better than in Russian/Chinese. The number of hours I had spent on Esperanto? How about 30-35.. I can read articles and books, listen to podcasts... Whether this means that Esperanto (itself) is easy (for me?), or that I simply suck at Russian/Chinese despite having studied them for a few years, I don't know... But the grammar, "international vocabulary", flexibility, word order etc definitely help. Now, I don't think anybody will have to devote +10 years before being able to converse in English. There is hardly any excuse for not being able to get decent skills in English if you live in Europe. Many of us are surrounded by the language everyday through popular media. And it's even possible to get by with pidginized English. Native speakers of English are used to it. In another thread I wrote: You almost have to isolate yourself in the wild without any access to media in order not to be exposed to English. The simple verb conjugations and lack of case system are factors that make English quite easy to get the hang of. And you can more or less speak "English" with strange syntax, omission of copula, dummy verb etc. (almost to a pidginized level) and still be understood, as in: I hungry. Store no open. I no can buy food. Something that might not be the case in "grammar intense" languages where it seems to be the end of the world if a speaker uses the wrong ending/gender/aspect/tense...
Did your friend speak Esperanto with the Chinese?
Why shouldn't it?
Highly subjective - although I admit that I achieved skills quite quickly.
So I thought. Sprachprofi's statement seemed quite odd from an Esperantist's point of view.
This goes for any language, really. All this being said, I'm happy that Esperanto has given you great pleasure. I see some positive things with it, but don't think it's Miraculous Medicine. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Enriquee Triglot Groupie United States esperantofre.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5126 days ago 51 posts - 125 votes Speaks: Spanish*, Esperanto, English | Message 286 of 351 21 November 2010 at 8:41pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
jeff_lindqvist wrote: >Whether this means that Esperanto (itself) is easy >(for me?), or that I simply suck at Russian/Chinese >despite having studied them for a few years, Exactly. Most of us are very bad at language learning. Even that, we can learn Esperanto in a rather short time. >But the grammar, "international vocabulary", flexibility, >word order etc definitely help. I agree. That is part of the structure of Esperanto. >Now, I don't think anybody will have to devote +10 years >before being able to converse in English. I believe most people in the world don't have the chance to attend intermediate school, much less a university. They aren't prepared to learn any thing. They aren't used to learning a subject. They have to work hard most of the time and don't have time for study. Also, English courses could be expensive. Not only took me more than 10 years to be able to communicate in English, but people still feel they must correct my pronunciation, and sometimes they don't understand a particular word that I mispronounced. Many times I don't understand a word or a sentence. But I see that many natives spend lots of time asking from other natives: "What did you say?" >There is hardly any excuse for not being able to get >decent skills in English if you live in Europe. Most of the people of the world don't live in Europe. I don't believe most people from France have decent skills in English. I believe this is true for most countries in Europe. I know that from The Netherlands to the north, many people speak English. Not so many in Spain, Italy, or Poland. >Many of us are surrounded by the language everyday >through popular media. Most people that have time for the media (not everybody have it) barely have time to watch, listen, or read the news in their native languages. This includes the English speakers. And then ... why would they watch TV (or radio) in a language they don't understand? >And it's even possible to get by with pidginized English. >Native speakers of English are used to it. I don't believe that. In China I had the chance to speak with young sales-ladies in a market dedicated to foreigners. They can talk about the goods they are trying to sell. I was trying to make a conversation but that was very, very difficult. (In case you ask, they didn't speak Esperanto) >Native speakers of English are used to it. Most of the USA speakers of English that I see every day don't understand that kind of English. Most of them don't like TV programs originated in England. >You almost have to isolate yourself in the wild without >any access to media in order not to be exposed to >English. Not everybody have that access. Even those that have English programs available in their TV's, will watch programs in their native languages (same as you do) Most people in the world don't understand foreign languages. >The simple verb conjugations and lack of case system >are factors that make English quite easy to get the >hang of. Sorry ... It took me very long time to get to understand written English, and another many years to understand spoken English. Even knowing the meaning of every word in a sentence, the meaning is not apparent. Even worse, many times they can assume the opposite meaning. In case of doubt, ask any person that learned English as a second language, what means: "I will take a rain check". ... which has a very different meaning of a sales person offering a "rain check". >And you can more or less speak "English" with strange >syntax, omission of copula, dummy verb etc. (almost to >a pidginized level) and still be understood, as in: Sorry again. When I started to speak English in New York City I was under the impression that people didn't want to understand me. Later I found that they did not understand me. This went on for long time ... and I was under the impression that my grammar was almost correct. For sure, my usage was not, neither my pronunciation. >Did your friend speak Esperanto with the Chinese? I could have spoken Esperanto ... My friend spoke Chinese with the Chinese. >>Teaching Esperanto is also possible for people that >>doesn't speak Esperanto, but can learn it while teaching >>the newborn. >>I believe that this is not possible with other languages. >Why shouldn't it? Because we are talking about teaching a new born. By the time I could learn and teach another language, the new born will be in college. >Highly subjective - although I admit that I achieved skills >quite quickly. Most Esperanto speakers say the same ... even if also exist many "eternaj komencantoj" (beginners for ever) >>To learn English takes many years and not all the people >>have the time to keep studying to reach communication >>skills. >This goes for any language, really. Exactly. Some languages take much longer than English. That is Esperanto main asset: people can learn it in a very short time. >but don't think it's Miraculous Medicine. I agree. Esperanto is a language, a means of communication that can be acquired in a small fraction of what takes to learn other languages. People that speak English shouldn't ask the rest of the world to invest lots of time and money to learn English while they don't collaborate to the problem. Everybody should expend a little time for this. I already did my part. (I also learned English) Enrique 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| jeff_lindqvist Diglot Moderator SwedenRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6700 days ago 4250 posts - 5710 votes Speaks: Swedish*, English Studies: German, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, Mandarin, Esperanto, Irish, French Personal Language Map | Message 287 of 351 22 November 2010 at 2:11am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
I try not to jump to conclusions based on any general assumptions. I've heard everything from "languages X is difficult/easy/has no grammar/has simple grammar"/etc. to "Most Dutch and Scandinavians speak English fluently" and "musicians are particularly good at languages". As for the last two examples, I have experienced just as many examples of the opposite. I still attribute my "success" with Esperanto to my overall "language intuition" rather than that it's "easy to learn". (I still ask myself: for whom?)
Now you're talking about several things such as economy and the education system, as well as your own difficulties with English.
People in general probably aren't (as) interested in languages (as we). But for those who really want to learn a language, a language that is spoken in many countries and cultures would be a good choice, due to pure exposure. It's literally everywhere. It's hard to pinpoint why so many people in the north of Europe seem to speak English well.
OK, there might be a dubbing/lack-of-subtitles issue here. In Sweden, movies and TV series in any foreign language are never dubbed (unless intended for very small children). They are subtitled. Everyone can read. There's a fair share of anglophone music on the radio. That's what I'm thinking of when I mean that English is "everywhere". It's not that those wanting to learn English never have heard the language, if you see what I mean. >And it's even possible to get by with pidginized English. >Native speakers of English are used to it.
Of course there are extreme cases. There will always be people with abominable pronunciation. And there will always be natives who don't "want to" understand. What I was thinking of was that native speakers (from say, the "inner circle") have heard quite many kinds of Englishes, from differences in phonemes (big or small) and prosody down to the "Me hungry." kind of English (which, albeit "incorrect", still is understandable). ----- I realize that I've strayed away from the original topic. I certainly don't want everybody to learn English (why not choose Swedish instead! ;)), but I think there is so much in your argumentation that has more to do with your personal issues and experiences with English (for various reasons) than the magic of Esperanto. One can't say that English is difficult, that it takes many many years to achieve conversational skills etc. etc. just as one can't say that Esperanto is easy, that it takes only months to be able to converse and so on. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||
| Gorgoll2 Senior Member Brazil veritassword.blogspo Joined 4937 days ago 159 posts - 192 votes Speaks: Portuguese* | Message 288 of 351 22 November 2010 at 3:36am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||
|
I studied Esperanto and I can say: It isn´t a waste of time: It helps for learning of
Modern and Classic Languages, and is a good way of communication. But, it exists problems: *Zammenhof´s diacritics don´t help and the equivallent´s aren´t estetic. *Esperanto is based in the most understood languages of the age of its creation - Your Latin and Greek words are a example. *The ideology of Esperanto in´t accepted for the world. But, though not as IAL, Esperanto is good, but at your way. 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
