본문으로
댓글 쓰기

The unique scalability of Esperanto

글쓴이: mkj1887, 2017년 4월 8일

글: 8

언어: English

mkj1887 (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 8일 오후 5:49:34

Esperanto scales. English does not. The scalability of Esperanto is why Esperanto will ultimately prevail as the international auxiliary language. The non-scalability of English is why there are various regional varieties of English: British English, American English, Indian English, and so on. Moreover, the non-scalability of English is not ‘fixable’, any more than the situation regarding entropy described by the second law of thermodynamics is ‘fixable’. Those who believe otherwise (trying to build perpetual motion machines) are just spitting into the wind.

This post is in answer to this post. So, yes, ‘international English’ will continue to diverge from the Queen’s English, and itself will be made up of an increasing number of distinct regional varieties.

Altebrilas (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 10일 오전 9:56:23

Could you explain to low-level english speakers but who are interestes by the topic what is exactly "scalability"? Is it some mechanism to limit its growth? How do you translate this concept in esperanto?

Vestitor (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 10일 오전 11:02:46

Let's just say that other words could easily have been employed, but these probably didn't have enough intellectual prestige.

The conclusion is false in any case because English already has increased its scope and capacity numerous times throughout history (and is still doing so) whilst remaining relatively unchanged yet structurally cohesive, because it is actually a very flexible and accommodating language. The fact of so-called 'many Englishes' doesn't undo the fact that teaching of English all over the world is generally congruent.

The application of 'scalability' to English here is misplaced. It does not at all demonstrate the reason for regional English; that phenomenon is no different to the reason why people from different countries speak Esperanto with a certain accent (just listen to German Esperantists as opposed to Italian ones or East Europeans) and seem to choose or build or 'invent' (legitimate Esperanto) words and compounds that more reflect their own particular cultural and geographic background.

Of course I think Esperanto is more suited to international communication, but that won't be made convincing by inventing false inadequacies regarding English.

Altebrilas (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 11일 오후 10:15:22

" Let's just say that other words could easily have been employed, but these probably didn't have enough intellectual prestige."

If they still can, a definition would be more useful, without spoiling anybodys intellectual prestige.

Vestitor (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 12일 오후 4:08:52

Altebrilas:" Let's just say that other words could easily have been employed, but these probably didn't have enough intellectual prestige."

If they still can, a definition would be more useful, without spoiling anybodys intellectual prestige.
You're right. It's not my prestige I was thinking of. There is likely a definition at Wikipedia (which is where the link should have directly gone, rather than through a gateway site).

Basically it means the ability for a system to adapt and deliver more output with the necessary addition of resources.

Altebrilas (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 14일 오후 4:10:21

It seems interesting, but I don't understand what are resources (grammar, lexicon?) and ouput (??) in the case of esperanto.

amigueo (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 14일 오후 6:27:30

please some examples about compared scability of english and esperanto?

Vestitor (프로필 보기) 2017년 4월 16일 오후 12:17:40

Altebrilas:It seems interesting, but I don't understand what are resources (grammar, lexicon?) and ouput (??) in the case of esperanto.
That's for the OP to answer, but it's probably a waste of effort because the claim is false anyway.

다시 위로