The Sporum - The Official Spore Forum
  [Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent Topics   [Hottest Topics] Hottest Topics   [Members]  Member Listing   [Groups] Back to forum index 
[Login] Login 
One Global Language  XML
Forum Index » Science and Spore
Poll
Do you think we should have 1 Global Language?
Yes! 65% [ 152 ]
No! 23% [ 54 ]
Not Sure! 7% [ 16 ]
What are you on about!? 5% [ 11 ]
Total Votes : 233
Author Message
sporemasterjoe


Spore Master

Joined: 09/12/2008 06:58:40
Messages: 26
Location:
United Kingdom

Offline

Since there is not a General discussion forum/Anything similar to that, I might well post it here:

We humans should have one language, maybe a mixture of words from different languages to make one, it would be a way lot easier and is quite annoying having to learn other difficult languages too, especially when we come in first contact with aliens they would be really confused all our different ones!

So who agrees on we should have one global language?




www.spore.com/view/profile/SporeMasterJoe
www.spore.com/view/profile/Monster
[WWW]
Pirwzy


Microbe

Joined: 09/11/2008 19:01:53
Messages: 68
Offline

Well, English is getting there in the business world.
driesdd


Microbe

Joined: 09/14/2008 12:21:07
Messages: 1
Offline

There have been ideas on this, and several artificial languages have been made. The best known is Esperanto, which is a mixture of many languages (and easy to learn, too).

But like pirwzy said, English is already the most important language (more people speak Chinese, but only in China).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/14/2008 12:32:34

Danicus


Multicellular

Joined: 09/09/2008 04:01:14
Messages: 108
Location:
Australia

Offline

I'm gonna say no but with a small proviso...

Your language is an important part of your identity, culturally and personally. One of the main things that identifies me as an Australian is my language. One of the main things that encourages the formation of a unique and distinct culture and identity is the inability to speak to the tribe over the hill. This encourages bonding, empathy and solidarity with the people who DO know how to talk to you.

If you were to remove this you would have one less thing that makes you unique from the vast majority of the rest of the human population. I'm sure language has lead to much ill fortune in human history though

Where I could see a global language being beneficial is as a traders tongue (english is probably already fulfilling this role) like you see in a lot of sci-fi/fantasy. Basically, this involves a simple language that everyone can speak which allows you to communicate with everyone else but also allows you to keep your own cultural identity by retaining your own language.

Maybe I'm biased. I find language fascinating and have studied both Italian and Japanese concurrently at school (which was almost 10 years ago now...>_> and am making plans to learn some Mandarin and Nynorsk (one of the 2 main Norwegian dialects) and if I could find someone to teach me I'd have a go at one of the 14 main Aboriginal languages spoken here in Queensland.

My 2 cents

A fine quotation is a diamond on the finger of a man of wit, and a pebble in the hand of a fool.
FractalDice


Microbe

Joined: 09/12/2008 02:25:55
Messages: 56
Offline

sporemasterjoe wrote:So who agrees on we should have one global language?

There's a difference between "should" and "can". The evolution of language is something I have to admit I don't understand as well as I'd like, but although tiny languages are being extinguished quickly these days, those that have achieved a critical mass where they can generate culture in new mediums (print, radio, tv, wikipedia) seem in little danger of disappearing at least not in a timescale I can imagine. Just ask yourself if you would prefer the single language chosen was one you don't currently speak ... feel that visceral defensiveness.

The economic power of the English-speaking world is not an assured thing - we've simply had a blip in history where the title of dominant superpower in the world passed from one English-speaking country (UK) to another (US). In another century or two, another part of the world will likely rise to displace the US (based purely on the fact that no empire has yet ever lasted forever ... which may be flawed logic, but I'll stand by it).

But, if could play games with the world and make a single language dominate all others .... would I? I honestly don't know. We humans are not terribly tolerant of a failure to communicate leading to some nasty business. But forcing us all into an ever-less-diverse culture feels self-destructive ... I think diversity of thought is a good thing, that mono-culture cultures, like mono-culture crops are vulnerable to implosions when some destructive meme/disease sweeps over them.

(interestingly in playing Spore so far, I've mostly gone with monocultures except at the space stage - I haven't yet explored what is or isn't possible)
Orgath11


Microbe

Joined: 09/13/2008 04:47:04
Messages: 57
Offline

I don't think Sporemasterjoe is saying we should replace all of the languages of the world with one universal language. I think Sporemasterjoe is saying there should be a universal language for dealing with international affairs.

Let's say you work for an international company. Instead of having to learn Chinese, Spanish, German, Japanese, etc. you just need to learn one language. At home you can speak your own language, but when abroad you can speak the international language, instead of trying to find someone who speaks your same language.

So yes, I think an international language would be a good idea. With the global economy that we have today a universal language is a necessity. It would cure a lot of headaches in the business world.

FractalDice


Microbe

Joined: 09/12/2008 02:25:55
Messages: 56
Offline

Ok, that is a slightly different question (having a universal trade language vs one-and-only-one).

I used to have a coworker who was pretty fanatical about Esperanto (much simpler than English ... well, except for those of us who already know English). I fear that when it comes down to it, I'm just too lazy about learning other languages
Aurinoch


Microbe

Joined: 09/12/2008 05:24:52
Messages: 24
Offline

Your language is an important part of your identity, culturally and personally. One of the main things that identifies me as an Australian is my language. One of the main things that encourages the formation of a unique and distinct culture and identity is the inability to speak to the tribe over the hill. This encourages bonding, empathy and solidarity with the people who DO know how to talk to you.


But we are Human! Shouldn't we embrace that as our culture, our identity?

I think a global language would be great, though a bit hard to adjust to. If we find it's too hard too learn a language, or teach a children a language we don't know, we could just turn to cybernetics... and put computer chips in our head>.> <.< ... that teach us the global language or translate others. I also think that would help a lot of problems in our world; who knows how many wars have been caused by a bad translator?


We are the Aurinoch, bringers of peace, warriors of justice and followers of intelligence!

"May the light of Sentience guide you to your enlightenment."
Ashmo


Microbe

Joined: 09/11/2008 10:00:41
Messages: 73
Offline

The short answer? No.
The long answer? Yes, but.

It makes sense to have a common language, as is English as a second language in most European countries (though not for the entire populations: there is a fluent minority, a not-so-fluent majority and a huge number of agnostics).

It doesn't make sense to have ONE language. It actually may make sense, but it doesn't work. Even English isn't ONE language. In fact, even English English (aka British English) isn't ONE language, but several vastly distinct dialects (although most of them differ only in pronunciation, but that's enough to threaten mutual intelligibility).

Even dead languages like Latin are distinctly regional (compare, say, English-taught Latin vs German-taught Latin, or Church Latin even). Second languages are similarly regional and may differ from the first language equivalents so much they may even present distinct dialects (although not widespread and common enough to be of scientific interest) or pidgins.

Having similar VARIANTS of one language taught internationally sure helps communication, but in the end there still need to be translations because of the cultural differences -- British and Australian tv shows or films being dubbed or even re-cast in American English for the North American market is a perfect example in this (e.g. Mad Max). Even then there may still be oddities (think of the regional "pop" vs "soda" preferences in American English)

So, yes for there being a common language taught in schools as second language, but no for that language replacing the regional languages completely.

As a second-language English speaker, I'd hope more people would learn fluent English, though. INCLUDING native speakers, btw.

EDIT: Esparanto is a farce, though. It's heavily geared towards Romanic speakers and even for those it's not easier to learn than any other Romanic language.

Note that even if we magically all spoke the same language starting tomorrow, we'd still develop highly distinct regional varieties within a few months if not weeks because that's just how language works: it's a balance between assimilation (individual "languages", i.e. what one personally speaks, becoming more similar) and dissimilation (individual "languages" becoming less similar).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 09/15/2008 08:17:58

Guang


Microbe

Joined: 09/14/2008 16:16:30
Messages: 14
Offline

no. Not because it's not a good idea, because it is. The problem is, which part of the world gets to impose their norms on everyone else? There are several world languages right now, that can each be used in at least a dozen countries. English, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, and the central asian turkic mega-language. There may be more as well. Even if we went with Esperanto (based on commonalities between European languages), it would still be a surrender of national pride for much of the world.

Maybe if we could all speak in Binary or something? I just fail to see how it can happen without imperialist overtones.
Chethosk


Microbe

Joined: 09/15/2008 22:34:44
Messages: 17
Offline

Yes. Just as we soon all start using the Metric System.
Ashmo


Microbe

Joined: 09/11/2008 10:00:41
Messages: 73
Offline

Now, the metric system is something else. It's a standard for measurements.

Languages can't be defined that precisely. Major organisations world-wide have been trying for decades (or centuries, even) and still couldn't stop language from changing with time.

Language is not static.
xlapin


Microbe

Joined: 09/12/2008 09:07:40
Messages: 67
Offline

Now that would be boring. When I travel abroad I want to see, hear, read things I don't understand. That's the thrill. If I go to, say, Japan, I won't understand half of the things I see or hear, and I'll love the place for it!

Eventually english made it as the pesudo-universal tongue to use to make yourself understood.

The Goof Runner ©


"Did your parents ever tell you there are no such things as monsters? They lied." - The Nightmare Sporecast
Insanity42


Microbe

Joined: 09/10/2008 18:35:25
Messages: 45
Location:
Somewhere in the vicinity of Alpha Centauri

Offline

Here is a great website dedicated to languages, both natural and constructed.

Omniglot

Probably the most intriguing one for a binary language is 12480.

I've dabbled into the idea of developing a language for use later in a story.

This thread reminds me of the story of the Tower of Babel.

Do we think because we exist, or do we exist because we think?
People agree not to see what they are convinced cannot exist.
Humans are really hyper-social apes.
Omniquantism: If God is omnipotent and all things are possible, then it is possible that all religions are correct simultaneously.
ere4s3r


Microbe

Joined: 09/10/2008 02:17:03
Messages: 87
Offline

Now im probably sounding weird, but a binary language will never suceed, for one, because no language is like it, for 2, because english is working pretty well, just learn 3 languages you need most but have one of em allways be english, i dont see how thats bad..

Of course, then i call Indian Callcenter workers who supposedly speak english, just not from the same planet im from....

Even if someone came up with a truly universal language there needs to be a better reason to change, if someone doesnt speak english nowadays he wont even get a real job anymore, so the incentive is definitly there to learn it, this wont change in a while

I voted NO, by the way, for cultures should allways have their own language, make a device that can translate any speech in realtime, problem solved, no need for us to learn something extra, and no need for new languages (as if there arent enough allready)
[WWW]
 
Forum Index » Science and Spore
Go to:   
 
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © ( EA Dev Build 2013-06-21 16:12:06 ) JForum Team