Roadmap to a Europe with a common language - commentaires

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

Europe with a common language

Just to add to my comments above : as a native English speaker, and as somebody who has passed an exam in Esperanto at C1 level, perhaps I am in a good position to compare the two languages. For a host of reasons, Esperanto is a far better choice than English, but the whole matter merits serious, evidence-based consideration.

It is very strange that the powers that be devote so little attention to this important question. Professor Robert Phillipson's book, « English-only Europe ? » was published in 2003 and an Esperanto translation, by István Ertl, appeared in 2004. Amazingly, 15 years later, this seminal book has not been translated into French, German, Spanish, Italian or Polish. A Europe of sleep-walkers ?

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

The author quotes that only 38 percent of EU27 citizens whose mother tongue was not English were able to hold a conversation in English in 2012. So 62 percent were not able. The author suggests that these others should learn English - but the reality shows : Usually they don't...

One main problem is the fact that English needs a lot of hours. The author suggests that a minimum target of 600 hours of guided English study should be adopted everywhere in the EU. This means nearly half a working year - without any salary... (Except for the salary for the teachers which is quite expensive.)

Esperanto can be learned a lot quicker. To reach the same level as with 600 hours of English it is enough to learn Esperanto for about 150 hours. Some studies are quoted here, in the Wikipedia .

One further advantage of Esperanto is that it can be learned up to a higher level than English. This means one day the learner is able to write articles in English - nearly without making errors. It is usually very difficult in English to reach such a level in a lifetime.

It seems that a lot of people have rather wrong ideas about Esperanto in general. The fact is that it is now a full language used for books, songs, Facebook, Wikipedia... It even is the mother tongue of some thousand Esperanto speakers.

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

Language is very important. The best approach is for a language to encouraged. Information and Communication Technology advances make it possible now to read foreign language texts on impulse. Even carry out live video conference conversation with speakers of languages you do not comprehend at all and without human mediation. So, keeping mind open on new language possibilities is wise.

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

Just two remarks :

– If 38% of some society can speak the same language, that is VERY good, a victory by itself.

– It is highly unlikely to expect a B2 level proficiency from teenagers, as such proficiency can never be reached unless the students set their personal lives, recreation and other discipline studies. Teaching anything over the course of six years with huge 4 month breaks is not effective, as most of this time it will be remembering what has been forgotten.

Moreover, it is unfeasible to expect a high second/English language proficiency in Europe, where there are large, relatively well-being and self-sufficient countries like Germany, France, Italy, Poland, etc. English is just not anywhere in the necessities of population there, a common person can live and work well there without a second language study.

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

I thank the author for raising this important topic. The lack of a language to express a common pan-European identity merits serious consideration. Having worked for many years as an Irish diplomat in several EU countries (Germany, Austria, Poland, Belgium), and having written a Ph.D thesis on language policy in Ireland and Québec, I have a strong interest in this area.

Should we be presenting a solution before this complex issue has been thoroughly and objectively discussed ? The subject has never been raised at EU inter-governmental conferences, as it is felt to be politically too sensitive.

The above article makes a good case for English, but there are several other factors to be considered.

1. The Swiss economist, Professor Francois Grin, published a report in 2005 which showed that the present international position of English is responsible for financial transfers of €17-19 billion per year to the UK economy, and about 4% of that figure to Ireland, at the expense of all other Member States. How can this massive financial transfer be reconciled with the concept of equal opportunity, which is fundamental to long-term political stability ?

2. How can the use of one national language as a lingua franca be reconciled with the EU policy of supporting and promoting linguistic diversity ? How does it contribute to linguistic diversity that over 90% of young Europeans study English in preference to all other European languages, even those of their closest neighbours ?

3. English is a world language, and the vast majority of its native speakers live outside Europe (even before Brexit). How can its use, therefore, contribute to the strengthening of a European identity ? Is it not more likely that the choice of English would further strengthen American cultural dominance of Europe ?

4. Your article mentions the B2 level as a desirable goal for learners of English. This goal, already very difficult to reach for the majority of learners, would put them at a permanent disadvantage as regards native speakers of English, who are all at the C1, and many at the C2 level. The 2012 Surveylang, the first to test language competence objectively in several Member States, did not even test for the C1 level, as those who reach this level of English are a tiny minority of the order of 1% of learners.

5. A recent publication, « Making Europeans and Governing Diversity », available in 9 languages at http://www.identitybilingualism.com, aims to give this matter more detailed and objective consideration. It is well worth reading. There are realistic alternatives to English, and some of them are outlined in this work by Judge Russell Blair.

Again, thank your for opening a debate on this crucially important topic. But let's not rush to conclusions without looking at the matter more comprehensively. It merits far more thorough consideration that it has received.

Best wishes.

Dr Seán Ó Riain

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

No one has ever tried to introduce « languages not associated with particular nations or peoples » anywhere, except in the Vatican. There is no reason not to try Esperanto, which works pretty well, at a larger scale.

Roadmap to a Europe with a common language

There is clearly a case for making wider use of Esperanto within Europe. Esperanto is a planned language which belongs to no one country or group of states. Using it brings speakers of different mother tongues together without having to resort to English or a strong regional language.

Not many people know that Esperanto has native speakers. See : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzDS2WyemBI