Universal Language..why not?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Universal Language..why not?
Plumbers and roofers are still human, but they don't have to converse much; farmers will be needed for a while yet, but cows don't care what language you speak, it's all two-legs gibberish to them.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
Ha, good one. I am not necessarily in favor of a universal language, but we are drifting towards one anywayAlias wrote:But aren't pilots and programmers about to be replaced by computers anyway?
Plumbers and roofers are still human, but they don't have to converse much; farmers will be needed for a while yet, but cows don't care what language you speak, it's all two-legs gibberish to them.
- Frewah
- Posts: 45
- Joined: September 30th, 2018, 3:30 pm
Re: Universal Language..why not?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Universal Language..why not?
Again, that's a subjective assessment. It depends on what your first language was, what your ears and mouth and pattern-recognition hardware adapted to at age 0-3, when your brain was forming around language-acquisition. After that age, learning new languages becomes progressively more difficult, and the ones most unlike your own in structure and sound will be the most difficult to master.
If English is your first language, all the Indo-European languages with the same alphabet will be relatively easy to learn - at least to the level of mundane conversation. Arabic, Hebrew and Russian will be more of a challenge; East Asian, African and Native American languages will be most difficult. I suspect it's easier for the Japanese, Russian and Iranian to learn English (or, for that matter, Dutch or Spanish) than the other way around, simply because of the the streamlined alphabet - and of course, all the peoples under European colonial rule have already been exposed to, and retained, the language of their respective conquerors.
At the moment, English still has an advantage in international commerce and diplomacy - not to mention the thriving espionage and mercenary markets - but as America sinks into self-immolation and economic decline, that will no longer be the case; as we approach the universal availability of electronic translators, knowledge of grammar will be as redundant as learning the times tables is now; soon after that, the very borders will cease to exist, erased by millions of climate-refugee feet. The survivors will figure out how to communicate, according to who wins the final showdown.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
I disagree. While the US will do what it will in the future, that's not the question. The question is what is going to be the universal language? In order to gauge this, you shouldn't count the number of native speakers (Mandarin would win by a long shot) you should count the number of non-native speakers, ie those who are seeking to learn the language as a marker for it's utility. English far outstrips any language on the planet in that regard and is alone in that it is the one dominant language that has more non native speakers than native speakers.Alias wrote: ↑November 1st, 2018, 10:40 amAgain, that's a subjective assessment. It depends on what your first language was, what your ears and mouth and pattern-recognition hardware adapted to at age 0-3, when your brain was forming around language-acquisition. After that age, learning new languages becomes progressively more difficult, and the ones most unlike your own in structure and sound will be the most difficult to master.
If English is your first language, all the Indo-European languages with the same alphabet will be relatively easy to learn - at least to the level of mundane conversation. Arabic, Hebrew and Russian will be more of a challenge; East Asian, African and Native American languages will be most difficult. I suspect it's easier for the Japanese, Russian and Iranian to learn English (or, for that matter, Dutch or Spanish) than the other way around, simply because of the the streamlined alphabet - and of course, all the peoples under European colonial rule have already been exposed to, and retained, the language of their respective conquerors.
At the moment, English still has an advantage in international commerce and diplomacy - not to mention the thriving espionage and mercenary markets - but as America sinks into self-immolation and economic decline, that will no longer be the case; as we approach the universal availability of electronic translators, knowledge of grammar will be as redundant as learning the times tables is now; soon after that, the very borders will cease to exist, erased by millions of climate-refugee feet. The survivors will figure out how to communicate, according to who wins the final showdown.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Universal Language..why not?
I'm not counting number of current speakers, I'm guessing what will become most profitable/advantageous to learn for the future. If the US no longer dominates global economy, it won't be English, because GB is not coming back as a world power. Mandarin was a half-joking guess; the dominant economic language might be Hindi or Arabic or Spanish.LuckyR wrote: ↑November 1st, 2018, 3:37 pm I disagree. While the US will do what it will in the future, that's not the question. The question is what is going to be the universal language? In order to gauge this, you shouldn't count the number of native speakers (Mandarin would win by a long shot) you should count the number of non-native speakers, ie those who are seeking to learn the language as a marker for it's utility. English far outstrips any language on the planet in that regard and is alone in that it is the one dominant language that has more non native speakers than native speakers.
But my bottom line was: No foreign language learning will be required when your cell-phone can translate instantly from any to any other.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
Huh? Ok so the US is not dominant, it is one of, say five major players in the economic world. China, Germany, Japan, India and the US.Alias wrote: ↑November 1st, 2018, 4:04 pmI'm not counting number of current speakers, I'm guessing what will become most profitable/advantageous to learn for the future. If the US no longer dominates global economy, it won't be English, because GB is not coming back as a world power. Mandarin was a half-joking guess; the dominant economic language might be Hindi or Arabic or Spanish.LuckyR wrote: ↑November 1st, 2018, 3:37 pm I disagree. While the US will do what it will in the future, that's not the question. The question is what is going to be the universal language? In order to gauge this, you shouldn't count the number of native speakers (Mandarin would win by a long shot) you should count the number of non-native speakers, ie those who are seeking to learn the language as a marker for it's utility. English far outstrips any language on the planet in that regard and is alone in that it is the one dominant language that has more non native speakers than native speakers.
But my bottom line was: No foreign language learning will be required when your cell-phone can translate instantly from any to any other.
English has >700 million non native speakers scattered all over the world
Hindi has about 320 million non native speakers, BUT almost all of them live in India
Mandarin has less than 200 million and a majority live in China
German has 56 million
Japanese has less than 1 million
Spanish, Malay and Arabic have better numbers than German and Japanese but no chance of being the dominant economic power.
French is the only possible rival to English, third highest number of non native speakers, none live in France, and the Francophonie could be a power if Africa could get it's stuff together, though I will not be holding my breath.
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Universal Language..why not?
My main points were: not numbers but the future of world economics and
that learning a second language will very soon become obsolete.
No universal language - just a universal translator.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
I want to make sure I understand, in the future folks will know their native language and use Siri with those who don't speak their language?
Personal question: do you commonly use professional translators?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Universal Language..why not?
Of course not! I could recite the times tables by age 9 and parse a sentence in Grade 9. Obsolete skills.
I'm from the past. I don't even have a cell-phone glued to my thumbs.
But even I use Google Translate now, as well as the maps and satellite photos and statistics and newspaper archives.
Technology happens, and it changes things.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
Well I do, and I can tell you they are infinitely better than Google Translate.Alias wrote: ↑November 3rd, 2018, 12:07 amOf course not! I could recite the times tables by age 9 and parse a sentence in Grade 9. Obsolete skills.
I'm from the past. I don't even have a cell-phone glued to my thumbs.
But even I use Google Translate now, as well as the maps and satellite photos and statistics and newspaper archives.
Technology happens, and it changes things.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
The “ideal” is not to have a universal language, but to have a universal culture of learning languages.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Universal Language..why not?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023