Is one-world-language a good idea?

[Aoi Magi]

<rant> I wish I knew spanish! I want to learn it so bad, but I never can make enough time to take a course and I don't have anyone nearby who speaks it T_T </rant>

[Losty]

<rant> I wish I knew spanish! I want to learn it so bad, but I never can make enough time to take a course and I don't have anyone nearby who speaks it T_T </rant>

I could probably help you in skype call lessons, Rosetta Stone is also a decent way to learn though some of the words are so formal that most people don't actually use them.
If you ever get a chance, spend a few months somewhere where no one speaks English. You will see yourself pick up the language quickly. Good luck

[Thumpalumpacus]

I like that there are different languages. Different experiences give different words to different people, and by exchanging those words, we can learn a lot. Homogeneity has a tendency to pigeonhole, and given that we usually think using our language, it seems to me that having one world language might trim too many twigs, at the expense of verdant thinking.

Having a common language is one thing; having only one language another. The first is great, an international superhighway; the second is dreadful, because it represents the channelization of thought.

[Aoi Magi]

@Losty, hmm I might take you up on that offer of skype lessons.

@Parkers tan: exactly, that's why I don't wanna remove any of the existing or emerging languages, rather have an additional language for worldwide communication. For example if you are in the navy and you are stranded, you can use morse code to communicate easily with any nearby vessels or ports, irrespective of what language they speak. Almost everybody in the profession knows it, and it is internationally accepted, and yes, even aliens alongside americans learn and use it as the Omniscient Hollywood has shown us. So I basically want to extend that concept of morse-code to a bit more structured language with everybody in the world would know alongside their native languages.

[emilynghiem]

I personally like the idea of having a single worldwide language. By that I don't mean abolishing existing languages, rather choosing one of the existing languages as the primary language for the entire world. That way, there would be a single global language which everyone will know and will be able to communicate in, alongside their local language/s if they want to be bilingual.

Positives:
+ Ease of communication.
+ Less confusion with future interpretations of texts, especially with religion.
+ Easier to relate with one another.

Negatives:
- Partial loss of cultural diversity.

I think if we get to that level it will happen naturally.

Such as trying to set up a global standard for Constitutional rights for all people.
and a means of redressing grievances civilly to prevent violence and oppression.

a lot of the mediation to reach agreement on this will be in English,
but after that it can be translated to reach all people of all nations.

I don't think it needs to be forced, but will be motivated naturally in order to form agreements on peace and justice by consensus among people. the language necessary will come from pushing forward the process of consensus building for democracy sake and equal protections and representation for all people.

[thesummerqueen]

No.

There are many words in different languages which have no one-to-one translation into other languages. It would be a shame to lose the frame of mind they put us in when we understand what the word means in its own culture's and linguistic terms.

---

Good examples:

http://mentalfloss.com/article/57660/12-...equivalent