How many students are learning the English language in the world?

In Europe it should be about 95% learn the english language.

Yes, English is a difficult language, but if you whant to communicate with other world english is the only way out. And there are no need to learn some English dialects, I quite sufficient for the global English language. If you know some English, you can read news from all over the world. You can to watch TV, read books. It is not necessary to speak fluent English.

vincas:How many students are learning the English language in the world?

In Europe it should be about 95% learn the english language.

Yes, English is a difficult language, but if you whant to communicate with other world english is the only way out. And there are no need to learn some English dialects, I quite sufficient for the global English language. If you know some English, you can read news from all over the world. You can to watch TV, read books. It is not necessary to speak fluent English.

Look, it is not my problem whether English is/will be a global language. Let it be/let it be not. My opinion is that choosing English for a global language would be unfair to 90% of world population. It would be a very costful and low-effective solution. That is all.

You can to watch TV, read books. It is not necessary to speak fluent English.

No 'to' after 'can', but you can say 'able to'

That's an important point Vincas. That English can be quite useful without spoken fluency. It's relatively easy to learn to read in English.

Watching TV in English can however be quite challenging for the non-native speaker. Actually, I would rate that as more challenging than face-to-face comprehension.

sudanglo:Watching TV in English can however be quite challenging for the non-native speaker. Actually, I would rate that as more challenging than face-to-face comprehension.

My command of English is at an average level. I can easily watch American TV and movies where British ones present many difficulties to me - I just can't understand British spoken language, unless it is very clear - the language of the Queen perhaps. And what if English will split into many different dialects in the future? It is you, English and Americans, who will have to learn new English, as it is spoken by 90% of the world - or stay out of the mainstream. Consider that.

Sudanglo, do you remember your thread - "it is English but not as we know it"?

sudanglo:

You can to watch TV, read books. It is not necessary to speak fluent English.

No 'to' after 'can', but you can say 'able to'

Thanks, I know this rule, but still made ​​a mistake.

sudanglo:Watching TV in English can however be quite challenging for the non-native speaker. Actually, I would rate that as more challenging than face-to-face comprehension.

Jes, Watching TV in English is quite difficult, but despite this, I often watch TV
in English. Every day I watch BBC world news

geo63: It is you, English and Americans, who will have to learn new English, as it is spoken by 90% of the world - or stay out of the mainstream. Consider that.

If that were to happen, I would love it. Sometimes I actually wish American English was different enough to Australian English that I could then actually learn "American".

(from an objective standpoint though, a "new english" would be convenient for the world as it would disassociate the English they speak from the English spoken in "English" countries. I do wonder though if perhaps that might be easier with say Chinese, since the Chinese are probably used to linguistic diversity in their own country despite efforts to promote Mandarin as the primary first/second language of the nation, where as English speaking countries aren't blessed with that - instead in the English sphere we have "English accents", "native languages" and "celtic languages" (which strangely sometimes are treated as "native languages", despite English also being a "native language", and everyone in britannia having roughly the same amount of celt/anglo-saxon blood anyway). Alas because the only true sister language to English in the Anglosphere is the barely spoken Scots, we aren't used to the idea of a "new English" without thinking it's "wrong". The Chinese might be more forgiving of an "international chinese". Esperantists would be more complicated, since they both want Esperanto spoken internationally, but might not be entirely prepared to give up the language they've cherished and kept preserved to be taken by people who honestly couldn't give an rats-arse about the issues of preventing esperantidos etc).

geo63:My opinion is that choosing English for a global language would be unfair to 90% of world population. It would be a very costful and low-effective solution. That is all.

In this way we can talk about any language.

What is the way out?

vincas:

geo63:My opinion is that choosing English for a global language would be unfair to 90% of world population. It would be a very costful and low-effective solution. That is all.

In this way we can talk about any language.

What is the way out?

Give up caring and love the bomb.*

Languages or inability to speak them after all aren't the real problem. It's all the things we put the language requirement on when it's either not needed, or shouldn't be a requirement (e.g. why the heck in this modern day do we have planes carrying hundreds of passengers which can in the end have their safety compromised because some guy can't speak English? Why are laws so impractical and serving a system that's based more on arbitrary wants and cowardice than being so logical that no one has to learn complex legalese in multiple languages to survive as a world citizen involved in activities where they are at risk/others are at risk?

And so on.

*Esperante, la origina titolo:
D-ro Strang-amo, aŭ: Kiel Mi Lernis Ne Maltrankviliĝi kaj Ami la Bombon

I want a T-shirt that says "Ĉesu Zorgi kaj Amu la Bombon".

vincas:In this way we can talk about any language.

What is the way out?

No, there is Esperanto, ready to be used:

1) fair
2) easy
3) precise
3) cheaper
4) doesn't belong to anyone
5) to be used to comunicate with foreigners only, so to preserve local languages

Why is it not chosen? Perhaps because most people just think the same way as you. Choosing esperanto doesn't mean to get rid of English. Esperanto helps in learning foreign languages, so if it was taught for the first 2 or 3 years in all schools around the world and then other languages were introduced, then, I think, the average command of foreign languages would increase - there were studies on the subject and the results were very promising (French + esperanto). Choosing English as the first foreign language to learn is not really good - the language is hard and students are lost, it takes many years to learn English that way. In Poland children learn English 6 years in primary school, 3 years in secondary and 3 years in high school = 12 years. After that long only about 30% of them can actually use the language. The rest use broken English. Because English is that hard to learn, younger and younger children start learning it - even from the age of 3 or 4!!! But only rich parents can afford this. Is that fair?

And if so many people have difficulties with English, then they could perhaps learn Esperanto good enough (it is 5 times simpler). If you failed to communicate with them in English, you could switch to esperanto and continue. But I know - it is way too beautiful ever to happen.

geo63:But only rich parents can afford this. Is that fair?

That's the point. I like this financial aspect.
There's, however, more to it than that. Think about the money made by private, organized courses in Poland and elsewhere, schools of English in GB and The USA, let alone private lessons of English, very much in fashion in post-war Poland. Money, money, money...

Thus, if a lot of people make money on teaching English, why should they all of a sudden switch over to Esperanto?
Esperanto is a finacial enemy, a real thread to those who get a profit from teaching English.

Needless to say there are many poor families who can neither afford private lessons nor paid courses. Their children will always remain "uneducated".