4 ms·

Esperanto has a far worse problem with linguistic imperialism than English does. Esperanto is a hobby/philosophy for denizens of rich Western countries to play

Esperanto has a far worse problem with linguistic imperialism than English does. Esperanto is a hobby/philosophy for denizens of rich Western countries to play with. English, while not being a fully neutral playing ground, is orders of magnitude better able to connect disparate communities and give the underprivileged greater opportunities.

Mediterraneo10 7y ago
> Esperanto is a hobby/philosophy for denizens of rich Western countries to play with. I am a long since ex- Esperantist who is not keen to defend the language and movement, but your post is way off the mark. Esperanto was a decently big fad in the former Eastern Bloc, because learning it allowed you to correspond with exotic foreigners and maybe even get visa invitations to go visit other countries (for Esperanto events) you otherwise might never dream of. Sure, some of those countries are now much more prosperous and developed, but they weren’t then. My memories of European Esperanto congresses decades ago are a lot of Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, Hungarians, and Romanians clearly on the lookout for a Western European spouse, or stuffing their suitcases with local goods they could sell back home. Similarly, West Africa has always had its own local Esperanto scene, for roughly the same reasons of being able to get visas etc. There was a lively Esperanto community in Yugoslavia, which was a non-aligned country that had more travel opportunities, but still wasn’t a "rich Western country".
chillacy 7y ago
It’s not perfect but I’ve spoken to enough Esperantists in Asia who have remarked that English is way way way harder and speakers are less forgiving.
- D-Coder 7y ago
  "It’s not perfect but I’ve spoken to enough Esperantists in Asia who have remarked that English is way way way harder and speakers are less forgiving." Anecdote: We had a Japanese Esperantist visiting a local meeting in the US and of course asked if Esperanto is really ten times easier than English for Japanese speakers. His reply (in Esperanto): "No. It's a hundred times easier."
greatpatton 7y ago
No English is not at all a fully neutral playing ground. It's in many countries a strong differentiator between rich/elite class and poor people. It's already the case in a big part of Europe and even more present in the rest of the world. For most Europeans, Esperanto can be learned quickly as grammar is very simple and vocabulary share a large root with European languages. On the other end, English is a big mess of exceptions (grammar and pronunciation). This requires extensive training to reach a basic level.
StevePerkins 7y ago
I am... not sure about your grasp on the term "imperialism" here. You hail English as "able to give the underprivileged greater opportunities". But the reason for that is that English is more widely spread, and dominant in the most wealthy areas. Which is... well... imperialism. It sounds like you're simply dismissing Esperanto as a niche hobby for a handful of white nerds. Which, in terms of practical benefit, might well be accurate. But it is BIZARRE to invert the definition of imperialism to over-state this point.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

Mediterraneo10 7y ago

> Esperanto is a hobby/philosophy for denizens of rich Western countries to play with. I am a long since ex- Esperantist who is not keen to defend the language and movement, but your post is way off the mark. Esperanto was a decently big fad in the former Eastern Bloc, because learning it allowed you to correspond with exotic foreigners and maybe even get visa invitations to go visit other countries (for Esperanto events) you otherwise might never dream of. Sure, some of those countries are now much more prosperous and developed, but they weren’t then. My memories of European Esperanto congresses decades ago are a lot of Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, Hungarians, and Romanians clearly on the lookout for a Western European spouse, or stuffing their suitcases with local goods they could sell back home. Similarly, West Africa has always had its own local Esperanto scene, for roughly the same reasons of being able to get visas etc. There was a lively Esperanto community in Yugoslavia, which was a non-aligned country that had more travel opportunities, but still wasn’t a "rich Western country".

chillacy 7y ago

It’s not perfect but I’ve spoken to enough Esperantists in Asia who have remarked that English is way way way harder and speakers are less forgiving.

D-Coder 7y ago
"It’s not perfect but I’ve spoken to enough Esperantists in Asia who have remarked that English is way way way harder and speakers are less forgiving." Anecdote: We had a Japanese Esperantist visiting a local meeting in the US and of course asked if Esperanto is really ten times easier than English for Japanese speakers. His reply (in Esperanto): "No. It's a hundred times easier."

greatpatton 7y ago

No English is not at all a fully neutral playing ground. It's in many countries a strong differentiator between rich/elite class and poor people. It's already the case in a big part of Europe and even more present in the rest of the world. For most Europeans, Esperanto can be learned quickly as grammar is very simple and vocabulary share a large root with European languages. On the other end, English is a big mess of exceptions (grammar and pronunciation). This requires extensive training to reach a basic level.

StevePerkins 7y ago

I am... not sure about your grasp on the term "imperialism" here. You hail English as "able to give the underprivileged greater opportunities". But the reason for that is that English is more widely spread, and dominant in the most wealthy areas. Which is... well... imperialism. It sounds like you're simply dismissing Esperanto as a niche hobby for a handful of white nerds. Which, in terms of practical benefit, might well be accurate. But it is BIZARRE to invert the definition of imperialism to over-state this point.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]