"Some idealists set out to build a new community from scratch. They saw themselves as unusually clear-headed and logical - people determined to build a society based on reason rather than on the accidents of tradition. If there was a better way to do something, they wanted to find it. At first, the experiment went smoothly. They shared work, rotated responsibilities, and debated policy late into the night."
"But before long, they started to complain about English. It's irrational, they said. Silent letters everywhere, no phonetic consistency, spelling rules that dissolve the moment you learn them. Why do "though," "through," and "tough" all look the same but sound nothing alike? And the idioms! Why should "kick the bucket" mean "die"? Surely a truly rational society can do better, they thought."
"One faction rallied around constructed languages - Esperanto, or perhaps Lojban. Why cling to a broken tool when we could use one optimized for ease of learning and communication efficiency? Another faction pushed for Mandarin. It was already the most widely spoken language on Earth. If children should be prepared for the future, shouldn't they learn the tongue of global commerce and power?"
Some idealists formed a commune to build a rational society and questioned inherited norms. Early cooperation gave way to complaints about English's irregularities, silent letters, inconsistent phonetics, and idioms. When children were born, factions argued over which language to teach: constructed languages like Esperanto or Lojban for ease and efficiency; Mandarin for its global prevalence and future utility; or Latin for its venerability and usefulness as a foundation for learning other languages. Each faction presented coherent but incompatible reasons. Because no faction could persuade the others, no consensus emerged and the community failed to agree on a single language.
Read at Big Think
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]