Re: CHAT: Nov 11th

Raymond Brown wrote:
>
> If the list given so far of bloody - in many cases _very_ bloody - conflict
> between peoples speaking the _same_ language still doesn't convince a
> person that a common language does not per_se bring peace & harmony,
> nothing I guess will him/her.
>
        In fact, even Zamenhof, the creator of Esperanto, who was the most
idealistic of all conlangers, didn't think that a common language was
enough to bring peace all over the world. He did think that first (back
when he first released his booklet about _la Internacia Lingvo_) but
changed his mind very rapidly. For him, Esperanto was only the first
step, a means to propagate what he called the "international religion"
to the whole world, to give a common background of respect for all
people in the world. In fact, his "religion" had very little to do with
an actual religion (except the acceptance of the concept of God,
everybody being free to interprete this concept as they want, whether it
is monotheistic, polytheistic, pantheistic, cult of ancestors, etc...)
and could easily be summed up as a principle of reciprocal respect.
Unfortunately, the WWI broke out when he was trying to give some ground
to his ideas, and it broke his heart so much that he died not long later
(hey! I told you he was an idealist).

        So, if even the most idealist (and recognized as such, and sometimes
hated as such) of all auxlangers didn't think a common language was
enough to bring peace all over the world, why others do?

--
        Christophe Grandsire

        Philips Research Laboratories --  Building WB 145
        Prof. Holstlaan 4
        5656 AA Eindhoven
        The Netherlands

        Phone:  +31-40-27-45006
        E-mail: grandsir@natlab.research.philips.com