Hyperboreus:This is why I don't think my nine years of studying latin weren't a waste of time...

Double negatives old boy!

Forigite

I know. I'm sorry, but it was just so tempting. I'll shut my trap now though because it's clear you did more Latin than I did and I don't want to be publicly embarrassed.

I had four years of Latin.

It was my choice to study it and I would have studied it for longer if my schedule had permit it (and if I'd had more levels available).

I can't say that it was a tremendous help when I studied Italian some years later (though the -abo/abas/abat/abamus/abatis/abant looked very familiar when I hit the Italian avo/avi/ava..., and the Spanish aba/abas/aba, etc.. "Hm," I thought, "Spanish dropped all the t's from this tense" )

Latin's greatest gift to me was an understanding of complex grammatical terminology, which has served me well when reading any traditional grammar. Thanks to Latin, terms like "predicate nominative" make complete sense to me, and it's easier to read and understand a grammatical text for another language.

Never a waste. My friends who took French or Spanish came out with basic language skills in a living language and I didn't, but I think my Latin served me well in the long run.

...though being able to read ancient Roman inscriptions was a complete bust. Who knew that the Romans abbreviated so many words, so that I'd have no chance whatsoever to understand anything but the most extremely simple text, or that their handwriting would be so weird that you'd need to practically learn another alphabet just to read it?

erinja:That would be true if you discounted language learning as being useless for any purpose other than communication when travelling abroad...

You never know when you might need a language, and Americans put themselves at an economic disadvantage when they refuse to learn languages...

Excuse the editing of the quote. I drew the conclusion on the proviso that the position you outlined was true and irremediable. I also meant the equation of Esperanto as a language solution between people speaking different languages. Let's recast it then as: 'for all kinds of communication, and not just when travelling out of the U.S.' If Esperanto could form a solution for local internal communication problems that would be great. Reading technical documents is probably a stretch because for good or ill people from everywhere write technical documents more and more in English, of a variety.

I'm certainly not pointing a finger solely at America in terms of foreign-language acquisition sloth because the truth of the matter is that although it might be more prominent in the U.S. it's actually true for a large number of other countries too. The culprit (as it were) is national language and the fierce defence of it. Unusually so for the U.S. because there is no official language as I understand it, it's just English because of tradition, propagation and numbers.

You find in Europe (particularly Western Europe) that there are simply fewer multiple language speakers than the claims would have people believe; despite this the myth persists even in Europe itself. There are a lot of liars who pretend to a fluent command of languages they can merely 'get by' in for the chic factor and they rarely get caught out because many others are equally incompetent and people use English anyway. This is very true in the Netherlands. I put German as a language on my profile page, but I'm not fluent. I could get around Germany, but if I was forced to give a speech I'd quickly ask the way to the toilets and escape through the window. Reading literature in the original language is also far less common than reading translations. True bilinguals are a rarity, let alone multilinguals.

There's a lot of moaning about Anglophone mono-linguists: 'everyone speaks their language' is the usual complaint. What are English natives supposed to do, learn everyone else's language just to balance everything out?! It's all just another argument in favour of Esperanto.

I had a peep at your profile Vestitor. Esperanto has a word for off-the-peg clothing (ie mass-produced in standard sizes). It is konfekcio. What to say for bespoke tailor, I not absolutely sure - fasona tajloro/laŭmenda tajloro?

There may be such a skill as 'learning how to learn a foreign language'. However, anybody who learns Esperanto first and then moves on to a national language might well abandon that task in despair at all the unnecessary complications which have little to do with engendering communication skills.

Two years to learn how to combine an adjective with a noun in German! Two years to learn how to conjugate a verb in French! What the :::: is that all about!

'Confectie' is also the Dutch word for standard sized or ready-made clothing. Bespoke is an unusual term because of it's meaning: that the cloth has been 'bespoken' or spoken for by the person ordering a garment. Made-to-measure is considered a rung down. To be honest I didn't know how I might translate it.

The American Esperanto friends are people more qualified to get boost Esperanto in the
world, just they are able to introduce the teaching of Esperanto in American schools.
It would be an excellent demonstration of peace, solidarity and justice to the world.
Excuse-me my english is so bad, I used google translate.

Vestitor:

ofnayim:

As to the original question Riotnrrd hilariously outlined the essence, and no country really wants to make the effort to step forward and set an example. All those translators/interpreters at the United Nations probably put a stick in the wheel as well.

I don't think that any of the professional translators or interpreters even know what Esperanto is nor do they care. I have known some and those who translate from French to Dutch do not fret too much about how much is done involving English.

robbkvasnak:I have known some and those who translate from French to Dutch do not fret too much about how much is done involving English.

Could you expand on this a little? I'm not quite sure I know what you mean.

Surely any translator, whatever s/he is translating (and I'm sure that even someone not translating English professionally is doing it to some level) would prefer the remuneration of translating several languages, as most do, than not translating at all because everyone is speaking/writing the same language?

I doubt very much that the majority of translators have never heard of Esperanto. Maybe they have extremely little regard for it, but that's a different matter.