7. Esperanto: language for international communication

This project, like the previous o­nes, is expected to take decades to evolve; the project is to gradually disseminate across the world a single language for international communication; we believe that o­nly Esperanto is fit for the purpose. Global world with the unified information network, unified economy, unified sphere classes and, in the future, an unified religion, needs a unified language. Serving o­nly the purpose of international communication, such a language is to supplement the languages already existing, rather than to replace them. The limitation by this function will not allow it to change the international communication by ethnic peculiarities of o­ne or another natural language.

English, spread widely today, cannot efficiently serve as an international communication language precisely because of its national specificity. English as the international communication language signifies social inequality among languages and cultures, which is the opposite of equality advocated in global world. Each ethnic group speaking a non-English language will be asking, "why is it the national peculiarities of English that are elevated to the position of the universal language?" Such a wide spread of English is tantamount to linguistic imperialism, which can be result in other kinds of imperialism. The English language domination causes suspicion, and more disharmony and cultural friction. Moreover, English itself has different versions: American, Australian, Caribbean, Canadian, South African, New Zealand, Irish, etc., which significantly impedes communication not o­nly internationally, but between Anglophone nations too. Also, English as the international communication language hardly helps to preserve the individuality of English culture. True globalism preserves, rather than eliminates, national singularity. Many sociologists have justly spoken about disadvantages and erroneousness of having English as the international language: A.Touraine, M.Veverka, M.Sasaki, T.Sudzuki, etc.

Moreover, why do Spanish, Chinese, Arab, African, and other language worlds have to use English for international communication? Why not the other way round? Such questions are absolutely legitimate and valid. Voluntary adoption of an artificial language equal for everyone would take these questions off the agenda.

For an international artificial language, Esperanto is the best choice: it has been tested for over a century and has millions (the figures quoted differ from 10 to 20 million) of advocates in nearly 120 countries; it is very simple and easy to use, write and pronounce. The Esperanto Declaration adopted in 1905 by the International Congress of Esperantists thus defines the essence of Esperanto and Esperantism. "Esperantism is the endeavour to spread throughout the entire world the use of this neutral, human language which, "not intruding upon the personal life of peoples and in no way aiming to replace existing national languages", would give to people of different nations the ability to understand each other, and would be able to serve as a conciliatory language of public institutions in those lands where different peoples fight amongst each other over language". And further: "Whereas in the present time there is no researcher in the whole world who already doubts that an international Language can be o­nly artificial [designed], and whereas out of all the numerous efforts made in the last centuries all researchers presented o­nly theoretical projects, and o­nly o­ne language appears effectively complete, thoroughly tested and perfectly viable and most suitable in all relations, Esperanto: for this reason the friends of the idea of the International Language, acknowledging that theoretical controversy leads to nothing and that the aim [of an international language] can be attained o­nly by practical work, have for a long time rallied around the language Esperanto and continually work towards its dissemination and for the enriching of its literature".

TetraSociology consolidates arguments for adopting Esperanto as a common auxiliary language, parallel to the national o­nes. It asserts that only Esperanto can be the adequate response to a global language challenge. Its arguments are briefly expressed by the following abstract.

TetraSociology: Esperanto as the o­ne Language of Technologies and Intercourse in the XX1st century.

RC25, session 4.

The globalization of modern world increases cultural pluralism and simultaneously requires of increasing unity, including linguistic. More 100 years ago L.Zamenhof (1859-1917) created the auxiliary artificial language of Esperanto, which does not displace national languages and appears as peacemaking language of international dialogue. Today tens millions people possess it almost worldwide.

TetraSociology as the global theory of social space - time generalizes arguments of Esperanto statement as the world language. They are:

1. The global space-time of modern social world created by global communications and technologies aggravates problem of acceptance of o­ne world language. It becomes necessary condition of further diversification and the development of technologies, work, culture. The powerful pluralism created by the Internet requires powerful unity including language.
2. The English language as most wide-spread can not claim for status of world language as it inevitably limits vision of world by English vision (A.Touraine, M.Sasaki, T.Sudzuki) which prevalence is recognized "harmful" for other national languages and world culture. Besides the interests of preservation of English originality and identity, early or late, will become irresistible force o­n way of its transformation in o­ne world language.
3. From all artificial languages extreme simples in use and checked by secular practice is Esperanto. The best applicant for a role of o­ne language is not present.
4. Actual statement of the electronic hypertext world language (M.Castells) precedes to acceptance of o­ne language of intercourse.
5. Acceptance of o­ne language qualitatively will increase a potential of technologies, work, culture, international cooperation, marriages, interconfessional join.

The sociologists should help Esperanto to be ratified as o­ne language putting forward for example idea of World Summit convocation about Esperanto and to accept it as the official language for the ISA. Esperanto is acceptable response to a global language challenge. However, rather than traditional branch actors (groups, classes), it's sphere classes as actors of harmony that need Esperanto as a single global language for international communication. Until they self-identify and self-organize, emergence of a single language is unlikely. It is difficult to hope for origin of a single language without it.