Unity through a Universal Language

The exact origin of language is unclear and wholly unknowable without the ability to travel backwards in time. What is knowable, or can at least be assumed, is that it’s always been used as a source and representation of power. When England was invaded by the Normans in 1066, the official language of government became French. All the noblemen and ladies spoke French, because to speak it was to have power, while the peasants spoke the “unsophisticated” Anglo-Saxon (also known as Old English). English today holds a power comparable to that of French over the past millennium. It’s been forced over the whole world as an international auxiliary language due to the United State’s standing as the most powerful country. Anywhere that the U.S.’s tentacles meander through is oppressed, whether the U.S. or the country affected realize or not. Language oppression is a very cruel means to assimilate the minority, and many people don’t realize it’s happening. What the world needs is an easy to learn language with an already decent standing and simple phonetic inventory; the world needs Esperanto. Not only would this solve the problem of language oppression, but it could halt arguments between speakers of dialects of the same language.

A normal language such as English could take a decade to master, whereas Esperanto could take half, even a quarter of that time to become fully fluent in (Haynes, Morley). Tim Morley in his TEDx Talk speaks about how useful it is to teach students Esperanto before teaching them a language such as French. He explains that 1 year of learning Esperanto alongside 3 years of learning French is the same as taking 4 years of French. This is very important because it shows that not only is Esperanto quite easy, but it can also help with the acquisition of more widely spoken languages. It’s a fantastic arguing point and all the more reason to push Esperanto.

For speakers of non Indo-European languages (languages in the Indo-European language family such as English, French, Russian, German, and Farsi), it’s even more difficult to grasp the grammar concepts of English. For example, Mandarin completely lacks inflection, which is something that English uses often (and is used even more often in the Romance languages)(FIS). Esperanto introduces inflection in a not too intimidating manner, which can actually possess traits comparable to the non-inflected Mandarin. The simplicity of the vocabulary is also quite helpful to foreign learners because words tend to build on one another. For example, “the suffix -eg- means "very big, very much so." So a big house might be a granda domo, but a mansion would be domego…. from "rain" pluvo you can make "downpour" pluvego, from "good" bona you can make "excellent" bonega, from "happy" feliĉa you can make "overjoyed" feliĉega (Esperanto USA).” The list goes on and on from there.

Awad Ibrahim explains in his article Will They Ever Speak with Authority? that the variety of French known as Parisian French is more highly valued than Ontario French, however, teachers in French Ontario schools tend to speak Ontario French. Ibrahim analyzes this, saying, “we enter a ‘linguistic war’, where the struggle is no longer about language... but about power.” If you have the ability to control an individual’s language, you control that individual. We can see this effect throughout history, like with French during the Norman Conquest, and can even see it happening currently. For example, what many people think to be “proper English” is merely a way to oppress minorities who speak different dialects. Black Americans are told that the way they speak is “incorrect” and are called lazy for speaking so, when in fact they are speaking one hundred percent correctly in AAVE (African American Vernacular English). A strong example of people assuming that something is incorrect when it actually is correct in AAVE is the quote “Some people don’t think it be like it is, but it do.” It’s become somewhat of a joke online. An instinctive response when you see a sentence like that as a speaker of Standard American English is to be confused, annoyed or even angry. A person might even characterize the individual who said that as unintelligent. However, if everyone spoke the same non-political second language, Esperanto, they could simply speak in it and forget having to argue about what is correct and what isn’t. This would take away that linguistic aspect of oppression from society, and could bring communities like the black and white community closer together.

One of the biggest arguments against using Esperanto is the idea that it is not sufficiently international. The claim is that it isn’t fair to those who don’t speak an Indo-European derivative. However, if you look at a chart published on Verbix Languages (see following page), you can see that Indo-European languages are spoken pretty much all over the world, either as a first language or a second. By learning Esperanto, you get a head start on learning all those languages that you need to know to get around Europe, the Americas, Australia, and even most of Africa. With European languages being so widespread, it’s extremely fair to say that Esperanto is an extremely international language.