3 ms·

If you were to start a new language today, wouldn't it make more sense to start with an existing common language, like English, and make simplifications to it u

by olau 7y ago

If you were to start a new language today, wouldn't it make more sense to start with an existing common language, like English, and make simplifications to it until you reach something like Esperanto? The only downside I can think of is that we're taught in school that slightly different spelling etc. is strictly incorrect, so there's a stigma you'd somehow have to overcome for the native speakers.

zozbot234 7y ago
So, like an English creole? There are plenty of these around, and none of them has become popular as an enduring cross-language standard in the way English itself has. (Modern English itself is mildly creolized compared to other major languages, though.) Esperanto actually makes a bit more sense from that POV.
- Freak_NL 7y ago
  I would argue that English already ended up with a simplified variant in the form of international English as practised by many second language learners of English. It's not American English, it's not British English, but it hovers somewhere in between, and tends towards leaving out the idioms that require a higher degree of literacy (and being well-read in particular). It's the language spoken at international conferences, colleges outside of the Anglosphere, and political summits; and countless bastardized variants are practised by tourists world-wide. Bear in mind that ⅔ of all the English speakers (over a billion people) are second language users of the language. Of course what you are left with is a language that doesn't really reach its potential for beautiful prose until you settle for a specific 'proper' variant of English — with all its bells and whistles, comparatively fixed orthography, and quaint expressions.
chillacy 7y ago
Isn’t that sort of Esperanto? When it was made French was the dominant language in Europe so most Esperanto words come from French, then the grammar was simplified but still allows for French word orderings.

by olau 7y ago

zozbot234 7y ago

So, like an English creole? There are plenty of these around, and none of them has become popular as an enduring cross-language standard in the way English itself has. (Modern English itself is mildly creolized compared to other major languages, though.) Esperanto actually makes a bit more sense from that POV.

Freak_NL 7y ago
I would argue that English already ended up with a simplified variant in the form of international English as practised by many second language learners of English. It's not American English, it's not British English, but it hovers somewhere in between, and tends towards leaving out the idioms that require a higher degree of literacy (and being well-read in particular). It's the language spoken at international conferences, colleges outside of the Anglosphere, and political summits; and countless bastardized variants are practised by tourists world-wide. Bear in mind that ⅔ of all the English speakers (over a billion people) are second language users of the language. Of course what you are left with is a language that doesn't really reach its potential for beautiful prose until you settle for a specific 'proper' variant of English — with all its bells and whistles, comparatively fixed orthography, and quaint expressions.

chillacy 7y ago

Isn’t that sort of Esperanto? When it was made French was the dominant language in Europe so most Esperanto words come from French, then the grammar was simplified but still allows for French word orderings.