|View Poll Results: What should be the IOC's official language policy?|
|French, English, and the local or national language, as is now the case.||16||39.02%|
|The local or national language only.||5||12.20%|
|The national and local indigenous languages.||0||0%|
|The six official languages of the UN plus the local or national language if different.||1||2.44%|
|An international auxiliary language like Esperanto plus the dominant local language.||14||34.15%|
|Voters: 41. You may not vote on this poll|
I did say generally. lol Specifically, well, it depends upon the discipline. I find Latin to be more descriptive than other languages when it comes to the classification of forms of life, for instance. Inuits have a variety of terms for "snow" whereas we have only a modest few.
In my opinion I would say that we should stick with the tradition. English and French are the two international languages. They are languages of international art and culture. More people speak english and french (as native or secondary languages) than any other languages in the world according to a study. Having the home nations language(s) is good as an accompanying language but should be last. As french preceeded english in its forth coming into the world, it should be first, english second, and the native language 3rd, as it is today. If we used EVERY language of the UN we would have an olympics that "welcome" would consume the first 15 minutes of the olympics! Just imagine if china hosted them again and wanted the various dialects separate plus the UN languages! I think the way it is now is the most efficient. Many people know english, and if you don't you probably know french (well should, it is the languages of the educated and international business lol).
...though I might be biased because I speak both fluently lol. But oh well...
In my opinion I would say that we should stick with the tradition.
English and French are the two international languages.
They are languages of international art and culture.
More people speak english and french (as native or secondary languages) than any other languages in the world according to a study.
If we used EVERY language of the UN we would have an olympics that "welcome" would consume the first 15 minutes of the olympics! Just imagine if china hosted them again and wanted the various dialects separate plus the UN languages!
I think the way it is now is the most efficient. Many people know english, and if you don't you probably know french (well should, it is the languages of the educated and international business lol).
...though I might be biased because I speak both fluently lol. But oh well...
Now this I find totally hilarious. Lunar Winds, NDP (and so we'd think a very socially conscious individual always concerned about equal rights for all)proposing the continued hegemony of two of the world's major hysterical imperial languages; and then Ironsides, from the big, bad, imperial USA coming up with a solution which, though not my first choice, is nonetheless arguably more egalitarian in its approach by not giving any group any special privilege not afforded to others. Each country would certainly have an unfair advantage when it hosts the Olympics, but at least each country would have its turn in this unfair position. In that respect, we could say it balances itself out to a degree nonetheless.
I think Ironside's proposal makes the most sense and is probably the cheapest.
I still think for an international event, some kind of international language could be useful in the future. Seeing that such a language is not in wide enough use yet, then I do agree Ironside's proposal would probably be the best option for the time being. It's just funny though that not only would his proposal be cheaper and more efficient, but more importantly, would also be more fair to all by giving each national language a chance to go up to the plate, this when many anti-American Canadians are so quick to judge the US as barbaric and savage. And it's especially funny when contrasted with an NDP proposal essentially in favour of maintaining the privileged position of former imperial languages around the world.
Based on our national stereotypes of the NDP being so progressively minded, and the US so barbaric, should their roles have been reversed?
We would, in theory, have to make a new one that adopts traits from every major language.
Machjo, I am NDP but that doesn't mean that ALWAYS agree or take the stance of a stereotypical NDP. I was just thinking logically of how the world works today. Do you really think that countries would try and construct a language for international use, or would even adopt one and have it taught in schools? Not in this decade, and probably not in decades to come.
First off, every time I read your reply it makes me laugh (not a bad thing) that you dissect my posts. lol I commend you on this work..
But now back to the subject. Yes I do understand that, I am not saying we shouldn't try, but it will take a lot of effort, and I for one have other things in my life that I place more important which is a personal problem and not necessarily representing other NDPs.
Yes we are pioneers but within our own country the language barriers must be fixed first. I think what is a big misconception is that our political party is more interested in the Canadian citizen first and then setting an example for the world. Maybe I am wrong, but that is definitely how I feel the party acts.
But yes, I think that when the time comes a good pioneering move Canada could make is host a language conference to start plans for devising a language. Canada has always been the mediator in many matters, so why not for languages. I think that by doing this it would show the world how fair the initiative is. It is a good idealist dream, but we must also face the reality, just like anything else it will be met with criticism and no support. Many nations will not like it...etc.
HOWEVER! I do not think that this language should be spoken in nations as their official language, I think cultural preservation should be key and native languages should be kept, for it is a shame when languages die out. It would allow nearly every human to have some common form of communication, yes. We will just have to wait and see. I am a supporter of such a movement, but only time will tell. I hope that such a movement happens.
Well yeah I do agree with you on your points. I know that many nations won't like it but when they see the benefits it might change their minds. Our neighbour to the south, would probably not adopt an international auxillary language as they still feal they are sovreign over world business, per say. Since there is no forum to vote on for countries except for the UN, we would have to start an innitiative with the nation, and then present it to the UN. Canada has much power and pursuasion. Though, if we were to create a language, it would have to be one that appeals to all. Something very grammatically simple (ex. No useless conjugations and exceptions) and fair. I would even venture as far to say maybe one with its own writing system, but more and more language are dually writing with their indigenous and with the Roman alphabet (such as Japan with the Romaji). I would like to see such a language and hopefully it will come soon, but I am not going to let my dreams go out of reach of reality. In college, I had to make a beta language in my linguistics class (I had to take it because I was a French Education/Music Education Major). It wasn't hard to come up with a language really. You just had to keep your brain from thinking in the way of english and french. Because I studied Japanese for a long time, a language far different from English, it was a little easier and I introduced some concepts of the language that were useful in the new language (Particles...etc). ...Quote has been trimmed, See full post: