this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2023
139 points (96.0% liked)

Programming

17374 readers
151 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Assume mainstream adoption as used by around 7% of all github projects

Personally, I'd like to see Nim get that growth.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Someone already said that either the created language takes from too few source languages and alienates speakers of languages with no common characteristics or takes from every language family and becomes a horrible mess that's hard to speak for everyone.

So if a world language is a bad idea no matter what languages you use as a source, why not have Esperanto or something similar for Europe/English speaking world and then a different language for Asia, and another one for Africa. You've reduced the number of translators needed and left most people with a language close to their mother tongue. You could also break the suggested regions in to smaller sections eg give Germanic Europe a common Germanic language. West/south Europe get Esperanto, east Europe sets a common slavic language. You still get languages that don't neatly fit like Hungarian but its better for most language learners than the last example.

Personally I'd not propose universal languages as a utopian idea and instead promote indigenous languages such as Catalonian, Breton, Irish and promote learning many languages in a post work society.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah we can invent yet another language, and go through the motions of including everyone. But by god make sure you don’t forget anyone. Let’s throw in Chamicuro, Warlpiri, Liki, Tanema, Ongota, and Dumi, just to make sure. Don’t want to upset anyone….

Or we could stop inventing new ways to accuse things of not being inclusive enough. It’s getting bonkers… Not saying Esperanto is the best language, and it has its flaws as others have so vehemently stated, but if inclusivity is the primary motive when designing a language, then I can almost certainly guarantee that new language will be much worse.

I mean English is basically the world language. It’s used by pilots, scientists, global finance, and diplomatic efforts. I’m gonna assume that almost no one would classify English as inclusive in its vocabulary. Unless you’re German, Dutch, or French of course. Esperanto is at least more accessible and easy to learn and carries Latin roots… shared with lots of languages. And it was invented by a member of a repressed minority in the old Russian Empire. What’s not to love?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

My problem is not with inclusivity but with promoting uptake. If you are familiar with the grammar or phonetic sounds or some of the vocab, you are more likely to find that language easier to learn.

Both English and Esperanto share the same problems of universal languages that I mentioned. English does have the advantage of number of speakers but it is a mess of a language for people to have to learn.

Again to reiterate my counter to universal languages, why not learn and potentially help revive your local indigenous languages. In a world where universal translation exits on our phones everybody being able to speak the same language matters less.