Abstract
In pursuing world unity and peace, the role of a global auxiliary language cannot be overstated. This study examines the critical decision of whether to adopt a current living language or use an artificial language like Esperanto for this purpose. It discusses the merits and challenges of both approaches, considering sociolinguistic, cultural, and practical factors. The use of a current living language, such as English, as a global auxiliary language offers immediate advantages in terms of accessibility, as many individuals worldwide already have some degree of proficiency in these languages. However, it raises concerns about linguistic biases, potential cultural dominance, and the challenge of selecting a fair and equitable language, though the selected world language would change beyond recognition. On the other hand, adopting an artificial language presents an opportunity to design a neutral, culturally unbiased means of communication. Nevertheless, the adoption of an artificial language may need more support due to the need for extensive promotion and adoption efforts. This abstract also considers the role of technology in facilitating the widespread use of a global auxiliary language, whether natural or artificial. Advances in machine translation and language learning tools have the potential to bridge communication gaps more effectively. Ultimately, this paper acknowledges that the choice between a current living language and an artificial language is a complex one, intertwined with political, cultural, and linguistic complexities. It advocates for a comprehensive discussion and evaluation of these options, focusing on achieving linguistic inclusivity and fostering international cooperation.
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
Communications and Linguistic Studies
KEYWORDS
Language, Universal, Auxiliary, Artificial, Unity, Peace, Communication,Culture, Diversity, Translation
