One language spoken worldwide would lead to better international relations.
language is one of the important sources of self-identification and a symbol of national identity. However, only one spoken worldwide language is able to change everything.
First of all, if there was only one spoken worldwide language , people from all over the world would overcome the language barrier.People from different countries would understand each other and have a conversation without any difficulties whenever they would go.
In addition, if there was only one spoken language, all political leaders and diplomats would be able to immediately discuss all the important problems related to economics and politics.They would not need interpreters who could misinterpret or misinform them."Why did not Esperanto become an international language in practice?", George kokoliya,2014, https://thequestion.ru/questions/798/pochemu-esperanto-ne-stal-mezhdunarodnym-yazykom-na-praktike
In our real life there are well-known examples of associations which discuss a lot of important international questions, such as :Commonwealth (former British Commonwealth), the International Organization of Francophone, the Commonwealth of Portuguese Language Countries, the Russian World, the Türkic and Finno-Ugric communities, etc.
On the other hand, language is a phenomenon that is very closely related to the concept nationality. It contains an idea of the world from the point of view of culture: Russian is Russian, and Chinese is Chinese. Every language is unique and has a cultural identity ,that is why one language spoken worldwide wouldn’t lead to better international relations, as it wouldn’t contain cultural features of a definite nation,it would have just a neutral base. And in order to fully switch to it, we will have to abandon the cultural identity - to cease to recognize ourselves as a representative of the nation.
Another disadvantage of using only one spoken worldwide language is that it is not profitable for big countries, and no one will listen to small ones.
There was even an example of trying to use one spoken language in real life: in the USSR in the early 1920s, Esperanto was even considered as a possible “language of the world revolution” and used it in correspondence and on postcards. In general, then there was a peak of interest in the language all over the world: newspapers were published and so on.And on the eve of World War II, Esperanto had a real chance to become the official language of the League of Nations, but then the French blocked this proposal, fearing a weakening of their language.
To sum it up , one language spoken worldwide can lead to better international relations, but it is practically impossible to create and use it across-the-board.
First of all, if there was only one spoken worldwide language , people from all over the world would overcome the language barrier.People from different countries would understand each other and have a conversation without any difficulties whenever they would go.
In addition, if there was only one spoken language, all political leaders and diplomats would be able to immediately discuss all the important problems related to economics and politics.They would not need interpreters who could misinterpret or misinform them."Why did not Esperanto become an international language in practice?", George kokoliya,2014, https://thequestion.ru/questions/798/pochemu-esperanto-ne-stal-mezhdunarodnym-yazykom-na-praktike
In our real life there are well-known examples of associations which discuss a lot of important international questions, such as :Commonwealth (former British Commonwealth), the International Organization of Francophone, the Commonwealth of Portuguese Language Countries, the Russian World, the Türkic and Finno-Ugric communities, etc.
On the other hand, language is a phenomenon that is very closely related to the concept nationality. It contains an idea of the world from the point of view of culture: Russian is Russian, and Chinese is Chinese. Every language is unique and has a cultural identity ,that is why one language spoken worldwide wouldn’t lead to better international relations, as it wouldn’t contain cultural features of a definite nation,it would have just a neutral base. And in order to fully switch to it, we will have to abandon the cultural identity - to cease to recognize ourselves as a representative of the nation.
Another disadvantage of using only one spoken worldwide language is that it is not profitable for big countries, and no one will listen to small ones.
There was even an example of trying to use one spoken language in real life: in the USSR in the early 1920s, Esperanto was even considered as a possible “language of the world revolution” and used it in correspondence and on postcards. In general, then there was a peak of interest in the language all over the world: newspapers were published and so on.And on the eve of World War II, Esperanto had a real chance to become the official language of the League of Nations, but then the French blocked this proposal, fearing a weakening of their language.
To sum it up , one language spoken worldwide can lead to better international relations, but it is practically impossible to create and use it across-the-board.
Yana,
ОтветитьУдалитьYou have managed to come up with some arguments that fit the discussion of essay topic. The logica of your essay is clear. What you need to work on at the revision stage is fully develop the introductory and concluding paragraphs. Also you need to add concluding sentences to the body paragraphs. From the point of view of your essay's structure you need to revise its paragrahing and extend your concluding paragraph.
Sorry, just noticed a typo in my comment above: it should be "the logic", not "logica". I think I was going to write that your essay structure is logical but then formulated it the way you see it written.
Удалить