Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: What is your choice for a single European language?

Voters
69. You may not vote on this poll
  • English (top 10 world languages)

    32 46.38%
  • Spanish (top 10 world languages)

    1 1.45%
  • Portuguese (top 10 world languages)

    1 1.45%
  • Latin

    13 18.84%
  • Esperanto

    4 5.80%
  • German

    3 4.35%
  • French

    0 0%
  • A new hybrid

    15 21.74%
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 176 to 179 of 179

Thread: European Common Language - The Poll

  1. #176
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Coriolan's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-12-12
    Posts
    185
    Points
    8,552
    Level
    27
    Points: 8,552, Level: 27
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 198
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Switzerland





    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    It doesn't matter imo. America is still the dominant force in the world. In the heydey of Rome you spoke Latin whether you lived in Britain or North Africa or Israel.

    The world is even more inter-connected and global now. You need English for aviation, the internet, science, medicine, business, the academic world etc. Asians, Africans, Latin Americans aren't going to learn English and a European language, even supposing the Europeans could stop squabbling and agree on one.

    This ship has sailed unless and until a new superpower takes over.
    People in the Roman Empire spoke Latin, but Europe is not an American colony yet. And in fact Latin wasn't spoken much in the Eastern Roman Empire, where Greek was the dominant language for administration, and neither were spoken by common Middle Eastern folk.

    I don't see the problem with three languages. Everybody does it in Switzerland or Scandinavia, and it didn't turn out too bad for the people.

    French is as widespread in Africa as English is. And Indian people have over 20 official languages, so one more one less...

    English can remain the international language but that doesn't mean that countries cannot have their own official language(s), even the EU.

    In my opinion, speaking many languages is an opportunity and makes culture richer and people more open-minded. We should a name is having a single language replace all other languages. That would be a huge loss for humanity.
    Last edited by Coriolan; 24-04-17 at 20:51. Reason: by

  2. #177
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Daemon2017's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-11-16
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    14
    Points
    2,572
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,572, Level: 14
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 178
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a-YP1020
    MtDNA haplogroup
    V7a1

    Ethnic group
    Russian
    Country: Russian Federation



    I think, that international pan-European language must be Eurōpājóm.

  3. #178
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-12-17
    Posts
    11
    Points
    1,544
    Level
    10
    Points: 1,544, Level: 10
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 6
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Denmark - Faroe Islands



    Hej,
    I didn't vote, I don't want a common language for the european union. I want the european union dead and every country or group of people speaking their own languages.

  4. #179
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience Points
    Alcuin's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-12-17
    Posts
    80
    Points
    701
    Level
    6
    Points: 701, Level: 6
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: UK - England



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    I was shocked, that such usefull words, are not useing - but everything is "you" and "your".
    thou and thy
    Thou and thy mean the same as you and your. What difference would a greater prevalence of two archaic synonyms in spoken English make?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ike View Post
    That's exactly why I used it. Because there is no connection, and it makes no sense, but it somehow has meaning in English
    In Portuguese it is 'laranja sanguínea'
    In French it is 'orange sanguine'

    Are Portuguese and French primitive languages too?

    Most languages have nouns, particularly those pertaining to animals, geographical features, etc that appear to be compounds of unrelated words. A butterfly is not a fly coated in butter. If you are so intellectually-lacking that combinations of familiar letters/words render you incapable of comprehending a new term, particularly something as simple as 'blood orange', then I'm afraid it is you that is primitive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    I showed you this time how many possibilites have other language - how many words can you create and give them meaning by your own.
    In the place of retel you can put any other word, native or borrow, it doesn't matter. But from any word you can create millions new words.
    That means, that language, who can do this, is more developed, and this one, who cannot do that, is more primitive.

    But what is analitical method? Some think like that: John loves Mary

    but when I write: Mary loves John, it means totally differt thing.

    And when I write: Mary John loves or loves John Mary - that means nothing.

    In fusional language, it is always very precize and almost always has meaning.

    Jan kocha Marię.
    Marię kocha Jan.
    Kocha Jan Marię.
    Kocha Marię Jan.
    Jan Marię kocha.
    Marię Jan kocha.

    Every construction has a meaning and in all cases means
    exactly the same. There is no doubts: John loves Mary in
    every cases. And we need for this only one vowel!

    So which tounge is more usefull, developed, precise, rich,
    clear, understandable and advanced? Analitic or fusional?
    If your language allows you to rearrange words in sentences in any form, without the meaning ever changing, then that would strike me as a primitive feature.

    Mary loves John - this informs us of Mary's feelings for John
    John loves Mary - this informs us of John's feelings for Mary
    John and Mary love each other - both Mary and John love each other (platonic)
    John and Mary are in love - both Mary and John love each other (sexual overtones)

    It's not hard to understand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rethel View Post
    This examples are showing, that such construcions are in the neandethal cave level :)
    Simple enumerating words which have no meaning
    Neanderthals appear to have been rather intelligent and capable of abstract thought. Perhaps that explains why Anglophones are capable of perfectly understanding meaning through intonation, context and the many nuanced words in our huge vocabulary (with its many near synonyms). In England, a person who needs everything spelling out to them in the simplest, most-mathematical of forms would be considered childlike, cretinous or, in your words, 'primitive'.

    Perhaps, one day, Poland will achieve relevancy and its language will supplant English as mankind's lingua franca. Fingers crossed!

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-07-14, 23:32
  2. What are generally common aspects of European conservatism?
    By Vexillologist in forum Politics & Governments
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-07-10, 06:06
  3. Which European language as one of my electives ?
    By Minty in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-08-09, 10:24
  4. English-language European history books
    By ricecake in forum European Culture & History
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-08-06, 16:58
  5. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 24-04-05, 23:34

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •