Esperanto CAN-not and WILL-not, be an international language, simply because the vast majority of the population won't stand for it, as with most other IAL's..

Firstly the vast majority of the population have scarcely heard of Esperanto let alone what you laughably call other IALs (they are merely drawing board projects, which have not reached the stage of being full-blown languages and most likely never will).

Secondly the vast majority of the population have not developed a view on this subject - including those who have had to spend years of their lives learning English because of its lingua franca role.

sudanglo:I simply cannot understand the attitude of some who prefer to keep it quiet that they are an Esperanto-speaker. If you want to change attitudes you have to tell as many people as possible that you speak Esperanto, so that the public at least has heard of Esperanto, so that they can say 'Oh Esperanto, I have an uncle/ grandson/ neighbour etc who speaks that'.

Quite so. I get the feeling some people are far too sheepish about saying they are involved with Esperanto in any way. Perhaps even some advanced speakers who over time have developed a rather jaded vision of its future outside of technical discussion.
If I don't sound convinced and serious when I happen to mention Esperanto, I shouldn't expect anyone else to feel the same way. I generally bring it up if the moment allows and I've had everything from mild bewilderment to derision, but there are also people genuinely intrigued.

I don't know if I'd say "sheepish", Vestitor.

But this is how it went for me:

High school - excited that I was learning Esperanto, totally open about talking about it. Got made fun of a lot for it, though even in those early days, I got something out of it (lots of penpals in other countries). Jokes made about "Erin's international boyfriends" (we all know the demographics of Esperanto. It was mostly male friends I corresponded with)

University - didn't necessarily talk about Esperanto a lot but totally open about speaking it. Got made fun of for it.

Work - only brought up Esperanto when it somehow became relevant (usually with relation to my travel to foreign countries, and meeting up with local Esperanto speakers). People would constantly ask me "What's the name of that language you speak?" when introducing me to others ("She speaks this language, esper-ran-to" ). People I considered friends, who had reacted relatively positively when I first mentioned it to them, would make jokes about it because they clearly found it funny ("Hm.... how do you say that in esper-ran-to?" )

Current job - Tired of people making jokes about it in multiple previous jobs, even though I only ever mentioned it in a serious tone, in a context of the concrete benefits it gave me (visiting friends abroad, people showing me around foreign cities, meeting cool people, etc). Took the opportunity of a fresh start in a new workplace; no one there knows I speak it. I strictly avoided mentioning it when I was in the training phase for new employees. I'm out of the training class now and I'm no longer with a huge mass of gossips IM'ing constantly. I would be inclined to tell the people I'm friends with. But then again, I found it massively disappointing in past workplaces where I mentioned it to people I considered friends, who then proceeded to treat it as a joke for years. So I'd almost prefer not to give these friends a chance to disappoint me.

I should perhaps be more thick-skinned about it but in fact I think it's clear that I've gained a lot from speaking Esperanto, and still people make fun of it. If someone wants to make fun of me, I'm happy to joke along if it's something that's actually humorous, or an actual personal failing (I have many). Getting made fun of by monolingual people for speaking a foreign language = not funny. Esperanto is on my resume and I have talked about it in job interviews many times, but I'd rather not mention it to people I actually work with.

In the US, there are many, many people who simply cannot conceive of wanting to learn another language for any reason other than because you absolutely have to. For a job? Sure. For a college degree? Yeah, OK, if you want to study literature or be a translator or something. But just to learn it? It doesn't make sense. The idea simply doesn't fit into any kind of worldview that they can imagine. So they don't know what to make of it. Thus, it must mean you're "weird", because who else would just "learn a language"? I mean, you speak English, don't you? English is plenty fine for everyone else. Why isn't it good enough for you?

If you have no experience living in the US, that may be hard to comprehend.

I recently added Esperanto to my resume, under "other personal projects" along with my activity in local amateur radio communications - just to see what would happen. So far more people have commented on my work experience 30 years ago for a game company than about Esperanto by about five to none. I figure it can't hurt; at worst they'll just gloss over it or ask, "Where do they speak Esperanto?" If they do I'll be tempted to answer "Esperantujo", again, just to see what happens.

sudanglo:(they are merely drawing board projects, which have not reached the stage of being full-blown languages and most likely never will).

The only conlang most people in these parts know anything about is Klingon, and that's more of a prop for a movie that got out of hand and took on a life of its own than a language actually designed to be used. I've seen a couple of people on the net talking about the Na'vi language from the movie Avatar but never anyone talking in Na'vi. And that's it. They wouldn't know Interlingua from linguini and probably would think Ido was a techno band from Germany.

Forigite

Part 3 is a great lecture, well delivered. However I think I would take issue with the point that the structural or linguistic features have little to do with the role that a language plays.

It seems to me that the linguistic features of Esperanto have more than a little to do with its success in relation to other attempts to start a language from scratch.

And the success of English may not be entirely unrelated to the fact that probably of all the world's languages

1. English is the one that has most plundered other languages for the purposes of its own enrichment.

2. English has been used by more people for more different purposes than any other language and has thereby extended its compass.

3. English has succeeded in going part of the way towards the simplification achieved by Esperanto in ditching grammatical gender, irregular plurals, complex verb conjugations and so on.

@sudanglo
Have you watched the first two parts? In the first part the lecturer explains that linguae francae come up due to social circumstances, but not because of the languages structure. In the second part he focuses on English and concludes, that is so successful because all the important factors for becoming a lingua franca, came/come together in the case of English. I tend to agree with him, that the complexity of the language really doesn't matter. And even if it would: In the third part he points out some downsides of English, that make clear, that it ain't so easy after all ("..., palatalized consonants, 20 distinct vowels, ..." ).

Yes, I'm sure he is right in general about the determinants. Yet I still have a sneaking suspicion that the world's so ready acceptance of English has still got something to do with its vocab and the fact that at the early stages of learning it looks less complicated.

By the time the foreign learners find out how complicated it really is, they have too much invested in it to withdraw. People will often vigorously defend something they paid a lot of money for, or spent a lot of time on.

In the case of Esperanto the linguistic features are surely relevant. Consider only how many Volapukists switched and how all subsequent attempts at an IAL have failed on staying power, even if they excited some interest on launch.