Random Gibberish

I am an American living in Belgium since 1974. Dall’arrivare here, I’m hearing the mantra &; ldquo; To be a good European, you should learn a lot of the languages & rdquo;. Almost from the outset, I suggested to go the other way: & ldquo; To be a good European, everything should learn a single language & common; rdquo;. This idea was not well received. Some people fiercely debated: & ldquo; Nobody is going to give up their mother tongue; our language is too much a part of our culture. & Rdquo; And nearly all said: & ldquo; Well, of course you Average English. & rdquo; They were wrong on both counts. Firstly, no one would be required to give up their mother tongue, but more would be required to learn the language. Secondly, I did not necessarily mean English. There is the denial that English would have a strong claim to be Europe & rsquo; common language of s. However, any language would, provided that all agrees on it. When I started this discussion about 30 years ago, there were only nine members of the European Union, so there might be some justification for refusing the idea of a common language. Now that there are 27 members (and waiting in the wings), the entries that denigrano the need for a common language have largely silent fallen. From any measure, the current situation is indefensible. Consider for a moment. Someone born in Madrid obviously speak Spanish and probably learn Portuguese, French and possibly Italian. Someone born in Copenhagen obviously speak Danish and probably learn Swedish, German and perhaps English. So here we have two very cultured people, both citizens of European Union and both speakers of four languages – but still not able to communicate with each other. Since the new countries join the EU, this terrible situation can only get more defective. The question we are no longer do we need a common language, but how should we go around and get it put it into practice? The process certainly will not be easy and certainly take a long time – decades rather than years. However, just like the replacement of Europe & rsquo; large number of s national currencies with today & rsquo; the euro s, the time and effort will be eminently useful. The selection and achieve the common language will be an important development not only for almost 500 million people, but also for more than 6 one billion people that populates the rest of the world. If Europe & rsquo; s that the disparate nations (such fairs of their differences) can accosentiree on a common language, then the dream of a single language that unites the entire planet will cease to be theoretical. Already will be good over meaning to realization. I have no panacea for the selection and implementation of common language. But I would propose a programme of the attack base. Of course, there are still many details that should be solved, but in the profile is here. It consists of three points. 1. Political commitment For the first time in centuries, with the EU structure is now in place to indicate a common language policy from political rather than military force. So the first point would ensure that the European Parliament formally declares the need for a common language Community and to establish a Commission for selecting choose. There is a clause in this first important point: The House must agree in advance to accept what language the Commission could propose selection. Why? Because unless accosentano in advance whatever the committee chooses, the member states disparate almost certainly open a new, the debate on the subject acrimoniosa no programme and over the sink. Convincing member states to accosentiree in advance will be a erculea. For the Parliament is therefore crucial develop clear, unambiguous test for the common language. It establishes a Board of selection with time, expertise and the resources needed to find a language that compierebbe the tests. 2. Language selection The second point would ensure that the Commission selection examine and evaluate all candidates possible. The major languages such English, French and Spanish would claim evident. However, there may be refused because choose one of these would have given the pæse home a distinct economic advantage. German probably would be refused for historical reasons, while the smaller languages such as Danish, Dutch, Basque and would like the issue of who would have taught them. The committee must then be free to select any language it deems appropriate. This should not necessarily be a language community; their investigations were able to extend universally. For me suggest strongly the Swahili, the common language of East Africa. The committee should also consider power an artificial language, which the esperanto would be only a possibility. They could even choose to create a language entirely new. 3. Execution The third point would be to invent a program and set a timetable for implementation. For bodies such as the Parliament itself and the European Commission (EU & rsquo; the executive branch s), stabilente a time should not be too difficult. For example, within ten years of language that is announced, all trade within the EU & rsquo; structure s official should be conducted in the language. This will give all with ambitions to work in the EU & rsquo; decade of SA to prepare. The manufacture of official language during the member states would take longer and obviously depend on language and the resources available achieve it. Among other things, the execution would introduce the language as compulsory in all schools. If found to be an important language such as English, French or Spanish, detection and teachers training and preparing the materials of text could go reasonably quickly. However, if it proves to be a secondary language, a non-European language, or an artificial language, the execution could take much longer. There undoubtedly would be other practical obstacles to the committee itself would have to identify and overcome. In any case, that this program would be possible to imagine the EU with a common language official in 25 to 30 years later and the rest of the world in the next half century. This may seem a long time, but is a very complex problem that can only be resolved over time. But clearly, a world united by a single common language is a well dream worthy of pursuit. I have 65 years. Don & I; rsquo; thinks t be around long enough to see the dream satisfactory, Europe and much less universally. However, I think be around long enough to see the process well under way. I can barely wait to get started. Philip Yaffe is a former feature producer / reporter with the Wall Street Journal and a consultant on communications sales. Currently teaches a course in good writing and good talk in Brussels, Belgium. His book recently published in & ldquo; I & rdquo; the storm: the secrets of simple & writing; amp; Speaking (almost) as a professional is available from the publishers of history Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).