Skip to the content

Anglic - the possiblity of an esperanto version of English

by Thehouse, March 29, 2007

Messages: 25

Language: English

Thehouse (User's profile) March 29, 2007, 6:14:25 PM

Do you think an esperanto version of english will emerge and become the true international language?

I read a fair amount of sci-fi novels and I've noticed in several stories they mention that in the future everyone speaks "Anglic" (or similar name). "Anglic" refers to a simplified version of english or an english which contains lots of spanish, french, and chinese elements. After studying esperanto I've come to think of this "Anglic" as an english with basically the rules of esperanto.

It seems that it would be pretty easy to make an english with completely regular grammar rules and much improved spelling. It would probably be 3-5 times easier to learn than English. And it would take native english speakers only a 1-3 weeks to adjust to it. Because of China and India, there are soon to be more secondary english speakers then native speakers. Do you think something like an esperanto version of english will emerge?

Islander (User's profile) March 29, 2007, 6:26:27 PM

English already is much more simpler than most other germanic languages and than any romance language. And it also already includes lots of elements from French and some from Spanish (not that much Chinese yet, however).

Combined with the economical power of the US and the commonwealth countries as well as their cultural influence is what makes English already, in my opinion, the established international language. The difference is that isn't an auxiliary language.

erinja (User's profile) March 29, 2007, 6:35:44 PM

Thehouse:
It seems that it would be pretty easy to make an english with completely regular grammar rules and much improved spelling. It would probably be 3-5 times easier to learn than English. And it would take native english speakers only a 1-3 weeks to adjust to it.
I think it would take longer than that for English speakers to adjust; it is hard to suddenly change your entire way of speaking your native language, because it comes out of your mouth without a thought.

Plus, I don't think English speakers would generally support a drastic change of the English language, of this nature. I wouldn't.

Mendacapote (User's profile) March 29, 2007, 6:41:13 PM

Several English pidgins are in full swing and development right now. Nevertheless I’m afraid that “Anglic” won’t ever become an International, Regular, Neutral, Balanced, and Vivid language. Would you accept to speak a “trimmed” version of English, just to “fit” the international trend? I wouldn’t do it if the language involved was Spanish! If any national language ever becomes “universal” it won’t be through a trimmed version. We better keep working on Esperanto, just in case our good luck turns up!

EL_NEBULOSO (User's profile) March 29, 2007, 9:10:09 PM

Hi,

I don't thint that "Anglic" would be an interesting alternative. People who want to learn a simple, logic language should learn Esperanto. People who prefer English should learn English. To try to reform a "natural" language is very difficult, also politically.

We had a reform of German writing within the last decade. It was a very difficult step. The idea was to simplify some of the complicated grammar rules and to also make the writing more logic/easier. Anyway, due to cultural/political... reasons they stopped half way (or even less). So we had a reform, but the benefits are very low. Considering that it was still a big effort, it's rather questionable.

In fact some federal parts in Germany decided not to stick to the new rules ... Then part of the rules were taken back. Some newspapers did not use the new style. Others used it, but went back to the old style after some time. So we had the old style, then the new and old styles were used in parallel for several years. Just before the new style was obligatory, a reform of the reform was necessary (in the eye of some stupid politicians who need somebody to write their presentations, anyway...). Then most parts of Germany (+Austria and Switzerland) accepted it, some didn't...

Of course, that's exactly the way it should not be done. Even most academics have trouble to write German correctly and don't know a lot of grammar rules. The reform removed some difficulties, it also seems that for young pupils it's easier now to avoid (too many) mistakes. Older people, however, have more difficulties than before.

A huge reform of English would be nearly impossible. The question would also be, if the many countries that use English as official language would concur...

And to use English, Esperanto and Anglic (or whatever) in parallel, would not make anything easier...

Gerald

DesertNaiad (User's profile) March 30, 2007, 1:35:55 AM

As an American, I can't help but notice that we were too stubborn to even switch to the metric measurement system, in any significant way. I have trouble imagining the US switching to a simplified version of English, for any reason, no matter how good.

RiotNrrd (User's profile) March 30, 2007, 1:59:01 AM

About 20 years ago, the State of Oregon, here in the US, voted in a measure that made "employe" the "official" spelling of the word "employee". In all state government documents, the new spelling was used.

I can't tell you how much I, personally, hated it. It stood out like a sore thumb. Official or not, it was a misspelling! Every time I hit it when reading government documents, or filling out forms, etc., I would just cringe. Apparently I wasn't the only one who couldn't stand it, and, as far as I can tell, at some point the law was rescinded. I haven't come across that particular spelling in quite a number of years.

And that was a change to just ONE word. I shudder to think how a broadscale change would go over. My guess is that it wouldn't be well received at all.

T0dd (User's profile) March 30, 2007, 2:01:45 AM

I have to agree that native English speakers are unlikely to support, or even learn, a "simplified" version of English.

In fact, one of the sponsors of Lernu! is the English-based conlang "Esata" http://www.beginnersgame.com/esata.html It's interesting but I don't foresee it taking off.

EL_NEBULOSO (User's profile) March 30, 2007, 9:35:50 AM

Yes, the (non)acceptance of the metric system in the US is a good example.

But even in the EC, where one of the main goals is the standardisation of many things, this is sometimes very cumbersome. Especially the British and Scandinavians (and French?) often want to have it their own way, just as a principle, even if it means a disadvantage in terms of economy or politics...

The British and US Americans don't even manage to have a common writing, this is of course also confusing for people who learn the language. So I think a reform of the whole language would be close to impossible.

Also, like in Germany, there would be politicians who "save" the people from the evil that comes with a change. These people would always fight a reform because they know that a lot of "simple" people are against any reform...

Also reforms always have this nimbus of being implanted from "those people" in the government or from some strange scientists that have no idea about the real world...

OK, not to be too much OT, I just want to mention that a change of the language also has a lot of emotional/cultural implications.

Gerald

erinja (User's profile) March 30, 2007, 1:20:30 PM

T0dd:I have to agree that native English speakers are unlikely to support, or even learn, a "simplified" version of English.

In fact, one of the sponsors of Lernu! is the English-based conlang "Esata" http://www.beginnersgame.com/esata.html It's interesting but I don't foresee it taking off.
I looked at it; it looked harder to learn than Esperanto, it seemed complicated.

Interestingly, there is *already* a simplified English conlang, and it never did take off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_English
http://www.basic-english.org/

Back to the top