You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The need of a Universal Language
I would love to see some phonetic examples of Esperanto to make the comparison. I concur that English is "tricky" in pronunciation (not to mention the dialects and accents!), and limited verbally and adjectively speaking, not because of an embedded hindrance and limitation, but because most English speakers rarely have a vocabulary of over 800 words. Only comparing verb conjugations with, for instance, romantic languages; we can see a HUGE gap of information that is "lost in translation".
I think the biggest gap of information exactly comes from information that has to be embedded in our words, that isn't there in some source languages. This brings about a huge amount of incorrect interpretation of sometimes intentionally vague wording. Esperanto has the capacity to express things really exact, but in my opinion still has too much detail in its wordings to provide a true Universal Language. Other than that, for general international use I cannot see any way it would be worse than English for international use :) except maybe getting up to speed in the very first step...