Viestejä: 18
Kieli: English
Evildela (Näytä profiilli) 12. huhtikuuta 2012 23.55.22
What’s everyone else think? What do you think the future of Esperanto will be?
omid17 (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 0.33.07
As for Esperanto, I think it will be a great blow for the finvenkistoj, but as long as EO consists of a small community of people who want to make good friends by beautiful traditions such as pasporta servo and support peace and understanding among the people, it will survive. Other than that, Esperanto is a living language, with a bulk of literature and a number of speakers, so when technology advances to a degree when the idea of an International language will be a moot point, it would still be a living language like the rest of the spoken languages with some tradition attached to it.
Evildela (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 1.35.29
Anyways thank you for your input
![ridulo.gif](/images/smileys/ridulo.gif)
opalo (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 4.35.13
Evildela:And it's predicted within 50 years we will have automatic translation services on our glasses, languages will nolonger be a problem, it will than come to a point where you won't even realise someone is speaking a foreign language.They were predicting the imminent arrival of translating machines 50 years ago. In fact that was one reason that was always given for not bothering with Esperanto. Needless to say, no translating machines for the masses turned up until Google Translate, which in the year 2012 actually produces worse output than some of the programs from the 1970s.
Any kind of decent translation requires human-level intelligence. If computers achieve that then Esperanto is the last thing you will be worried about.
Demian (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 5.23.25
Evildela:Recently I've been reading articles, and watching films based on future technologies. And it's predicted within 50 years we will have automatic translation services...I haven't read Chomsky's theories thoroughly. But from what I have gathered by superficial reading is that he believes (and his theories have held water for more than half a century now) that language is something innate. It's embedded into us/
I don't know what the current situation is but if that theory turns out to be universally accepted (there are still critics but I think they only form a mintority), it would be interesting to see how "innateness" will be introduced to machines.
Will technology have advanced sufficiently in next 50 years to accomplish this task? I don't know.
vejktoro (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 5.50.14
hebda999 (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 6.03.35
darkweasel (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 6.22.37
Demian:I don’t know about the majority of linguists, but during my research for the thesis about language acquisition I wrote for my final exam at high school I found out that there are many problems with Chomsky’s theories.
I don't know what the current situation is but if that theory turns out to be universally accepted (there are still critics but I think they only form a mintority)
Demian (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 6.35.17
darkweasel:...during my research for the thesis about language acquisition I wrote for my final exam at high school I found out that there are many problems with Chomsky’s theories.I am not aware of any serious piece of evidence against the theory. But again, I am not sure for I don't what the theory exactly says, what the consequences are and so on.
In any case, may I ask you what gaps did you find in the theory when you wrote the report? Meanwhile I will try read more about the theory, this time in a little detail.
darkweasel (Näytä profiilli) 13. huhtikuuta 2012 6.51.55
Demian:Wikipedia has some information in its Universal grammar article. If I find time for that later, I might translate here what I wrote in my report.darkweasel:...during my research for the thesis about language acquisition I wrote for my final exam at high school I found out that there are many problems with Chomsky’s theories.I am not aware of any serious piece of evidence against the theory. But again, I am not sure for I don't what the theory exactly says, what the consequences are and so on.
In any case, may I ask you what gaps did you find in the theory when you wrote the report? Meanwhile I will try read more about the theory, this time in a little detail.