#1
Random I know, but I always wondered. I know a few phrases from back when I was a Red Dwarf fangirl and learnt some phrases. (anyone who's seen it will know what I'm talking about) and I've learnt some more since then for no apparent reason.


Anyone?
#2
i just remember that scene where rimmer is learning it and lister knows them all but rimsey doesn't know any thing pretty funny.
I'M GONNA GIVE YOU A BAD CASE OF SOMEONE SHOT ME IN THE HEAD!!!
#4
I wiki'ed it, and it sounds completely useless. Who the hell believes in world peace as more than a nice conceptal, unreality anyway? A language to foster greater peace and understanding (in other words, a method of working towards world peace) is just...not useful...

Edit: I should state I'm a realist. "It is or it isn't."
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Sep 14, 2010,
#5
Quote by Fassa Albrecht
Random I know, but I always wondered. I know a few phrases from back when I was a Red Dwarf fangirl and learnt some phrases. (anyone who's seen it will know what I'm talking about) and I've learnt some more since then for no apparent reason.


Anyone?



Bonvolu alsendi la pordiston? Estas rano en mia bideo.
LtBrenton

Quote by Douglas Adams
The art of flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.


Quote by soulflyV


If I didn't have a mudkip in there, I'd sig that.


http://ltbrenton.wordpress.com My blog. Check it out.

☠ ☠ ☠
#7
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
I wiki'ed it, and it sounds completely useless. Who the hell believes in world peace as more than a nice conceptal, unreality anyway? A language to foster greater peace and understanding (in other words, a method of working towards world peace) is just...not useful...

Edit: I should state I'm a realist. "It is or it isn't."



it's useful because it draws on existing langages and the similarities between them rather than differences. It also simplifies language a lot more than a naturally evolved one, as there are few irrgular verbs, word endings are the same across all words and there is a clear difference between verb meanings.
#8
Quote by Fassa Albrecht
it's useful because it draws on existing langages and the similarities between them rather than differences. It also simplifies language a lot more than a naturally evolved one, as there are few irrgular verbs, word endings are the same across all words and there is a clear difference between verb meanings.


It's a really interesting idea, but I think it suffers from a bit of a Catch-22. People are barely learning French anymore, why learn a minority language like Esperanto - very few people speak it - not *worth* learning, so very few will, so few people will speak it, etc.
#9
I agree with the guy earlier who said it's a bad idea that would never work. Language is an integral part of culture and identity, taking that away or replacing it with something else would steam roll a lot of tradition and so on. So, that means "No, I don't speak it".

EDIT: Or even if people were taught it as a second language, how many people do you think would want to learn it? Or even bother to get good at it? I like languages as they are, thanks very much.
Last edited by Matt_Malmsteen at Sep 14, 2010,
#10
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
I wiki'ed it, and it sounds completely useless. Who the hell believes in world peace as more than a nice conceptal, unreality anyway? A language to foster greater peace and understanding (in other words, a method of working towards world peace) is just...not useful...

Edit: I should state I'm a realist. "It is or it isn't."

So the language is stupid because the man that created it wanted world peace?

Flawed reasoning is flawed. (or maybe I'm just not catching your drift).

Anyways, the concept of the language itself was great. But it would have never caught on. A shame though. It looks damn easy to learn.
Last edited by GogglesVK at Sep 14, 2010,
#11
No, but I do speak elvish, the black tongue and klingon.


... Yes, I have life
#12
Quote by gabcd86
It's a really interesting idea, but I think it suffers from a bit of a Catch-22. People are barely learning French anymore, why learn a minority language like Esperanto - very few people speak it - not *worth* learning, so very few will, so few people will speak it, etc.



French tends to be off-putting for its complicated grammar and seemingly endless grammar rules (and this is coming from someone who's spoken it a good portion of her life).

Esperanto is gaining popularity simply for the fact that it's the opposite, and many people who have learnt it are people who struggle with grammar.
#13
Quote by Matt_Malmsteen
I agree with the guy earlier who said it's a bad idea that would never work. Language is an integral part of culture and identity, taking that away or replacing it with something else would steam roll a lot of tradition and so on. So, that means "No, I don't speak it".




The introduction of a new language to a native culture can also foster harmony between that group and others.

Look at Latin: the Romans introduced it to every country they invaded, and the resulting lingua franca allowed for the administration and smooth running of the world's largest empire for close to 1000 years.

As for the part about 'steamrollering' culture, it doesn't have to. This is why there are so many variants on French and English, because the local culture adapts the language to suit.
#14
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
I wiki'ed it, and it sounds completely useless. Who the hell believes in world peace as more than a nice conceptal, unreality anyway? A language to foster greater peace and understanding (in other words, a method of working towards world peace) is just...not useful...

Edit: I should state I'm a realist. "It is or it isn't."


#15
Quote by Fassa Albrecht
The introduction of a new language to a native culture can also foster harmony between that group and others.

Look at Latin: the Romans introduced it to every country they invaded, and the resulting lingua franca allowed for the administration and smooth running of the world's largest empire for close to 1000 years.

As for the part about 'steamrollering' culture, it doesn't have to. This is why there are so many variants on French and English, because the local culture adapts the language to suit.

That's exactly the problem with universal languages like Esperanto. Unless every person on Earth is equally educated in the language, it's going to wind up fragmenting and becoming new dialects and possibly new languages entirely.
Quote by dudetheman
So what? I wasted like 5 minutes watching DaddyTwoFoot's avatar.


Metalheads are the worst thing that ever happened to metal.
#16
Quote by Fassa Albrecht
The introduction of a new language to a native culture can also foster harmony between that group and others.

Look at Latin: the Romans introduced it to every country they invaded, and the resulting lingua franca allowed for the administration and smooth running of the world's largest empire for close to 1000 years.

As for the part about 'steamrollering' culture, it doesn't have to. This is why there are so many variants on French and English, because the local culture adapts the language to suit.



Whilst you're right that it may bring harmony if it became popular, we know it won't. Look at how many people speak English as a native language and second language and there's not much harmony between those people. Plus it's a so-called "global second language" developed by a European, based primarily on European languages, using sounds and semantics mainly from Europe. That's not that global to be honest.

As for regional variations; that would kind of defeat the point of a global language if regions were to vary parts of it. Loads of 'regional variations' are almost unrecognisable when compared to the countries official language - take Shanghainese and Mandarin for instance, or Scouse and normal English
#17
Quote by DaddyTwoFoot
That's exactly the problem with universal languages like Esperanto. Unless every person on Earth is equally educated in the language, it's going to wind up fragmenting and becoming new dialects and possibly new languages entirely.



As long as the fundamental base of the language remains the same grammar-wise and (for the most part) vocabulary-wise, then the language will remain mutually intelligible between anyone who knows it.

Worked for Latin, works for English.
#18
Quote by Fassa Albrecht
As long as the fundamental base of the language remains the same grammar-wise and (for the most part) vocabulary-wise, then the language will remain mutually intelligible between anyone who knows it.

Worked for Latin, works for English.

Look at how much English has changed just in the last 150 years. Yes, it's still intelligible, but think of how long it would take to teach the entire planet (nearly 7 billion people and rapidly counting) the same language.

Universal languages are a cute idea, but not really a good one.
Quote by dudetheman
So what? I wasted like 5 minutes watching DaddyTwoFoot's avatar.


Metalheads are the worst thing that ever happened to metal.