Ha, Truong – L9919579
A global language is a language which is accepted and supported officially by international governments. A global language is used in all countries that allow everybody to communicate and trade worldwide much more easily. Therefore, choosing the most suitable language to be used as a global language is as an important job. In the article, “Esperanto, the hope of the world”, published in 2011, Yan Rado suggests Esperanto should be a global language, whereas in the article “What’s the point of Esperanto?”, published in 2011, Angla Sola presents that it is a false claim that Esperanto is the best choice for the world’s second language. This essay will critically analyze the arguments of both authors. In “Esperanto, the hope of the world”, Rado asserts that Esperanto should be the world’s second language. He goes further and states that Esperanto is better than English because it is faster. Because there is no irregulation and confused rules, English is easier to learn. Moreover, he thinks that it is culture free because it does not belong any culture. Unlikely English, Esperanto does not require learners to study culture while they study languages. Finally, he writes that Esperanto was designed to be very simple which would allow peace and neutrality. Whereas, in the article “What’s the point of Esperanto?”, Sola argues that it is wrong to believe that Esperanto is a better choice for the world’s lingua franca. Firstly, he states that Esperanto is not a good use of person’s time. Esperanto is not as popular as English so no any value are written by English. Furthermore, the author maintains that it is a biased language. For Asian people, it is hard to reach communicative competence whereas European people feel easier. Rado and Sola have very different ideas about the amount of time learners spend on studying Esperanto and English. Rado’s ideas seem to be more convincing than Sola’s. Esperanto is an easier second language in teaching and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document