@johnmue, @sudanglo et al.,

I think the underlying problem here is that many people don't care about learning foreign languages in general, no matter how many people speak them - one comment on a blog post advertising Esperanto was, "I wouldn't even be motivated enough to learn Chinese even though it has a billion speakers - moreso for Esperanto".

In many parts of the U.S. and U.K., at least, a large portion of the population is not only monolingual, but profoundly monoglot: i.e., it simply can't be bothered with language. The perceived lack of practicality of Esperanto doesn't make them more disinclined to learn it than they already are. These kinds of people would only learn a language if it is directly necessary, i.e., if their job demands it, or if they are immediately inconvenienced by not knowing it.

A moe productive strategy, perhaps, would be to advertise EO with a more intellectually diverse/curious crowd - e.g., academics, humanities students, etc. I'm considering trying to start an Esperanto club at my (30,000-student) university. But it's still difficult to gauge what the interest level is here. I've mentioned that I'm an Esperantist to several students, most of them reacted either neutrally or with mild curiosity.

Koregan dankon, Alkanadi! Finfine pozitiva instigo en tiu paĝaro! Mi rigardis la videon kaj rerigardos ĝin. la ĝenerala ideo tute korespondas al la trovaĵoj de miaj esploroj por mia doktoriga verko: Aparteno kaj Integriĝa Motivado en Dualingva Akirado (2007). Mi studis dum 6 monatoj la progreson de fremdlandaj studentoj de la (usona) angla lingvo en kursoj ĉi-tie en Florido kun rilato al iliaj perceptoj de la denaskaj parolantoj de tiu lingvo. Ne surprizos ke tiuj kun la plej pozitiva impreso de la denaskaj parolantoj estis pli bonaj lernantoj. Sed vere surprizis min ke tiuj kiuj lernis bone la lingvon sed poste havas malbonajn spertojn kun la denaskaj parolantoj ĉar oni ne preparis la studentojn por kulturaj faktoroj suferis regreson kaj evoluis agreson kontraŭ la popolo de la denaskaj parolantoj.
Mi nun verkas pri mia teorio de "supervivema principo" en dualingva akirado, do la ideo ke ni homoj akiras la unuan kaj konsekvence duan aŭ trian lingvon pro sociaj kaŭzoj, nome ĉar ni volas integriĝi kun la parolantoj de tiu(j) lingvo(j) pro nia denaska deziro supervivi en ilia socio. Do lingvolernado kaj -akriado ne estas simple "aminda talento" kiel ludi pianon aŭ bone ĝardenumi sed estas ligita kun niaj bezonoj en certa socio.
Via video montras nin vojon por prezenti tian dezirindan socion. vere grandan dankon por tiu kontribuo!

sudanglo:

To make people Esperantists, it's not enough to make them say yes once. ....To make people Esperantists you need to convince them not only to say yes once, but to persistently learn, practice and use Esperanto over years.

Actually the problem is not so much creating dyed-in-the-wool Esperantists as making some (even a little) knowledge of Esperanto seem to be useful.

History demonstrates that there will always be enough 'spertuloj' dedicated to the language to keep it alive and fresh, and work on such things as the production of coursebooks, grammars, dictionaries, websites, translation of classics into Esperanto and the creation of original literature.

The prospects for Esperanto would be quite rosy if there were, say 250,000 spertuloj, and 50 million with basic Esperanto. This would largely defeat the argument that few people speak Esperanto so there isn't much point in learning it.

The prospect of being able to understand a menu in Esperanto in a foreign Restaurant, or being able to use it abroad to order a drink in a bar, or ask for directions, or get the heating turned up in your hotel, or report a theft to the police, or describe your symptoms to a pharmacist, would make the language much more attractive.

I agree; even a little usefulness would go a long way. Our main "killer app" feature now is the propaedeutic effect in learning other languages. We have the research, testimonials, a TED Talk (TED Talks are not incredibly popular, but they are widely known and targeted at "normal" people). I know there are organizations promoting this as the sole benefit, and I'm 100% behind that even if I am also a dyed-in-the-wool Esperantist. I'm particularly interested in what will happen when the Duolingo course goes live. I could see additional studies on learners' success rates in Esperanto versus other supported languages, providing more evidence to support the cause.

To keep beginners I think we should promote the news service that uses a simple subset of vocabulary (drawing a blank and haven't got the time to look it up), and have translation keys for vocabulary on other news sites to show how easy it is to read an article early on with only a dictionary. In this way not only are they using and practicing the language, but they are gaining value at the same time (international news).

Another idea I've had would be to provide educational materials for high-demand subjects (web design, programming, IT, etc.) available in Esperanto to lure newcomers from non-English speaking lands.

Our main "killer app" feature now is the propaedeutic effect in learning other languages.

But in English speaking countries the learning of other languages is in decline.

Also one has to take into account the influence of ever-improving machine translation, which will make investing time and effort in learning foreign languages seem ever more pointless.

So I would say that currently the main potential 'killer app' is the teaching of Esperanto for purely educational reasons, using the arguments that once were used for the teaching of Latin in schools.

In another thread many posters have commented on how Esperanto has improved their analytical skills and their understanding of grammatical concepts, leading to better self-expression in their mother tongue.

And of course, pedagogically, it is very sound to introduce pupils to thinking in another language with a language in which they may quickly progress to that point (not often achieved with school instruction in a foreign national language).

In a similar way simple instruments such as the Ukelele of the Recorder are used to introduce pupils to musical concepts, and music making.

Note, how parents will not object on the grounds that their son or daughter will never need to play such instruments later in life, and similarly it could be supposed that parents would not object to the teaching of Esperanto on the grounds that their little darlings will never need to speak Esperanto later in life.

You can dress this up as propaedeutic, but that justification is weakened when learning other national languages is in decline.

However the argument that learning Esperanto is purely educational, aimed at understanding of grammatical concepts and forcing awareness of their own language is no more touched by the number of Esperanto speakers than the learning of Latin was seen as irrelevant because it was a dead language.

sudanglo:
...
In a similar way simple instruments such as the Ukelele of the Recorder are used to introduce pupils to musical concepts, and music making.

Note, how parents will not object on the grounds that their son or daughter will never need to play such instruments later in life, and similarly it could be supposed that parents would not object to the teaching of Esperanto on the grounds that their little darlings will never need to speak Esperanto later in life.

You can dress this up as propaedeutic, but that justification is weakened when learning other national languages is in decline.

However the argument that learning Esperanto is purely educational, aimed at understanding of grammatical concepts and forcing awareness of their own language is no more touched by the number of Esperanto speakers than the learning of Latin was seen as irrelevant because it was a dead language.

That is an interestingly similar feature; I'd almost say "purely educational reasons" is a subset of the propaedeutic effect. The reasons it is a good educational language are the same reasons it is a good first foreign language: ease of use, grammatical regularity, etc.

The recorder/tin whistle/ukulele analogy is very fitting for Esperanto. These "beginner instruments" don't offer many difficult obstacles to a new learner, and a newcomer can quickly go from no knowledge at all to playing simple music that is pleasing to the ear. The uke, for example, has lower string tension than a guitar due to its size (easier to hold chords), has fewer strings to master, and good strumming technique is easily learned. On the other hand you have an instrument such as the violin, which requires advanced skill to play in tune (no frets) and requires one to master bowing technique. The humble guitar might be our analogy for English; many can play a few popular songs around a campfire, but few are lead jazz guitarists.

Another key reason this is a good analogy is that the simpler instruments can be just as musical as the "expert" instruments, and Esperanto is no less capable than any national language. Case and point:

While My Guitar(Ukulele) Gently Weeps

Thriller

I also wonder with the advent of newer learning websites/apps like duolingo, memrise, etc. if self-taught language learning is on the rise even if formal language learning is in decline.

One of our problems is the way we have packaged our "product". Since I first became involved, Esperanto has been promoted as being easy to learn. But in a largely monolingual culture in which most people don't develop foreign language skills in ANY language to the point of fluency, the majority of the people do not know what acquiring a language consists of. They learn of Esperanto and approach it (with our blessing) thinking that they're going to take a few grammar lessons, learn a few words, and be thoroughly bilingual after just a few weeks. Then, when that doesn't happen, many get frustrated and lose interest.

Yes, COMPARATIVELY-SPEAKING, Esperanto grammar is simpler to learn--but A. there is STILL a considerable learning curve, and B. acquiring a language involves MUCH more that just learning to navigate its grammar. Many people have no idea about that. Also, while the agglutinative nature of Esperanto roots DOES make word building simpler, learning to decipher the combinations of roots and affixes and make sense out of them takes time, practice, and the development of a certain feel for the way the language works. Many people stay in the "Eternal Beginner" stages because they have absolutely no idea how to proceed after learning that initial stock of words and the rudiments of basic grammar.

If we're going to succeed in proliferating Esperanto, we need to grapple with misconceptions like these about language acquisition in general and the supposed "ease" of Esperanto, in particular. Language skills take time and much exposure and practice to develop--in ANY language--and people need to know from the outset that this is a marathon, not a sprint. The grammar may be simpler, but it's still a language, and there is no such thing as an "easy language". We also need to be ready to show REAL RELEVANCE by showing what we, personally, are able to do with the language.

For me one of the greatest benefits of Esperanto has been trying to formulate somethings in an international framework, i.e. devoid of ethnic references. That alone is an exercise that requires a great deal of thought and attention. proclaiming the use of Esperanto as form of understand plural culturalism might be a good start.

robbkvasnak:For me one of the greatest benefits of Esperanto has been trying to formulate somethings in an international framework, i.e. devoid of ethnic references. That alone is an exercise that requires a great deal of thought and attention. proclaiming the use of Esperanto as form of understand plural culturalism might be a good start.

I don't think that in countries where the majority is monolingual because they don't attribute any value to studying a foreign language, there will be much interest in understanding plural culturalism.

If you don't even bother with a foreign language, why should you bother with a foreign culture?

Many people stay in the "Eternal Beginner" stages because they have absolutely no idea how to proceed after learning that initial stock of words and the rudiments of basic grammar.

If you are referring to Eternaj Komencantoj in clubs and at Congresses, I would think that the issue is more one of motivation.

Having reached a certain stage these people can feel themselves to be members of the Esperanto fraternity and enjoy themselves at Esperanto events understanding most of what is said, and if they are unable to wax lyrical and are limited to halting conversation, they are not bothered.

Whilst not denying that a good active command of Esperanto requires some investment, a tolerable passive command of the language is really quite easy to acquire.

I recall from my own youth how attending my first international Esperanto Congress I could, after a few months home study of perhaps half an hour a day, understand 99% of what I heard, whilst taking some time to put together a sentence.

However I thoroughly enjoyed the experience at that congress, and could have looked forward to further adventures in Esperantujo without further investment in the language, if I had so chosen.

I don't think that in countries where the majority is monolingual ..., there will be much interest in understanding plural culturalism.

I have to agree with you on this point Nornen.

Appealing to such high-flown idealistic motivation isn't going to get us 50 million speakers.

And in a world in which there are 50 million Esperanto speakers, one could derive much practical value from Esperanto when travelling in foreign parts, without any desire to embrace the funny ways of foreigners.