[shrimp_emoji]

Why fetishize diversity for its own sake, especially when it's a barrier to communication?

I think we should all speak one language (preferably, the one we're speaking now). The information suddenly marketable to or directly consumable by anyone at any given place will significantly increase.

[svat]

Diversity is not necessarily a barrier to communication. (In fact, the idea that diversity is a problem and a barrier to communication is itself a bigger problem IMO.) In India most people are multilingual, and there's usually a link-language. For instance, in the region mentioned in the comment you're replying to, probably a majority would speak Gujarati too as a second language, and a significant number of them Hindi, and many English as well. There's going to be a fair bit of interchange and translation going on too. (For example, even in the Anglosphere one is not completely blind to French or Italian or German language or culture, say, and is aware of at least a few of their peaks: enough to recognize they have something of value too.)

The existence of diversity is generally a sign of freedom and self-sufficiency: that the people in question were/are free to retain and develop/enrich their own culture, and yet function successfully (enough) in interaction with the broader society, without too much pressure to give up their ways. (See: “melting pot” and “salad bowl”.) Monocultures, monolingualism, monotheism, etc., do have certain advantages too of course, but I hope some can see why diversity is valuable too.

[gumby]

Why fetishize uniformity in the name of some absurd "efficiency"?

People are all different and why should they not choose to communicate/eat/enjoy themselves as they wish, with all the advantages and disadvantages of their choices?

(Plus in the case of languages there are things which can be said in some and really can't be said in others. My wife, child and I would typically speak multiple languages, sometimes even in the same sentence, in order to convey the nuance of what we wanted to say. Hell, even in English there are things said in discipline-specific jargons that aren't really communicable any other way).

[vvillena]

The moment that happens, that language would start diverging again. You have to unify culture in order to unify language, and that doesn't sound as good anymore.

Settling on a "common" or "business" language, though, is entirely possible, and has been done many times in history. No language ever encompassed the whole world, and if one language has it's English, right now. Latin, Arabic, Mandarin, French, English, Spanish... The world has seen its share of common languages used within certain spheres of influence.

[mantas]

Point in case - proto Indo European language. It's clear most of European languages (except pre-Indo-European, like Finnish, Estonian, Basque..) have common parent language. For example, look at numbers. All those languages have awfully familiar numbers. If you speak one language, you can recognise most numbers in other languages rather easily. Yet they evolved into very different languages in different regions.

[murukesh_s]

I think numbering system is a recent introduction to European languages - adopted from India in 10th century or so.. but some other words have similarity like maatha- mother, pithaa- father etc!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu–Arabic_numeral_system

[mantas]

Exactly, essential words that we needed thousands of years ago as well as today sound similar. Because they are leftovers from when it was a single language. Modern words that were just invented tend to sound similar as well. E.g. "computer" in different languages. The vast difference is in words that came up in between split of Indo-European tribes and modern times.

[yorwba]

The written numerals are relatively recent, but the words for numbers are much older and still very similar across languages.

[murukesh_s]

Wasn't Roman numerals in use, before the Indo-Arabic came to Europe? How come they are similar? They look worlds apart to me..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals

[kgwgk]

These are the words the Romans used:

unus duo tres quattor quinque six septem octo novem decem ...

[nl]

The numerals are different but the words are the same. 5 and V are both pronounced “five”, just represented differently.

[nkoren]

> Why fetishize diversity for its own sake, especially when it's a barrier to communication?

Ĉar diverseco estas la bazo de ĉia belo kaj ĉia kreemo. Sin diverseco, vivo estus sensignifa.

> I think we should all speak one language (preferably, the one we're speaking now).

Certe, mi konsentas -- sed nur aldone al vian unikan lokan lingvon. Kaj ne la Anglan, mi petas!

[skosch]

When I looked into Esperanto a few years ago, I lost interest relatively quickly as I figured that this Euro-mashup of a language probably won't ever make it very far into areas where it would be most useful to me (i.e. outside of the Western world). Is this true, in your experience? Do you know of any Indian/African/Chinese Esperantists? Has Esperanto been a worthwhile investment of your time, and would you recommend studying it over "real" languages, on the merit of its community alone?

[nkoren]

I'd say it's been a worthwhile investment -- but not really on the merit of the community. That's probably my own fault: the community seems cool and I probably ought to be less of a hermit. There are certainly plenty of Chinese Esperantists; the China Radio International (the PRC's equivalent of Radio America, roughly) even has an Esperanto service that's pretty interesting to listen to[1].

What's really made it a worthwhile investment is that it's given me a better understanding of language itself. All languages have idiosyncrasies, including Esperanto -- but Esperanto's idiosyncrasies are unusually consistent, making it really easy to map things onto. So I often find it easier to comprehend some weird construct in (say) Hindi or Japanese by mapping it onto straightforward Esperanto, rather than trying to map it onto an English construct that's probably even weirder.

Plus it's just such an easy win. I can order off a menu and find my way around town in a fair handful of languages, but haven't really gotten much further than that. But I can easily read just about anything in Esperanto, with 1/10th the effort that I've put into any other language. Which is just kinda gratifying to be able to do.

1: http://esperanto.cri.cn/

[skosch]

Thank you, that's interesting, glad I asked! I'll have to take another look then.

[squiggleblaz]

Esperanto has speakers in China, Japan, Korea, Indonesia and Thailand. No doubt others besides but these are the ones I've met either in my own country or in theirs.

You can see some chinese uptake here: http://esperanto.china.org.cn/

Esperanto is very european in its appearance (both grammar and vocab). This seems to have helped it to gain a userbase, which allows others to adopt it who don't share its background. The regularity of the language helps people even if they have to learn a lot of weird roots and struggle to get the very latinate relative clause system (a lot of English speakers struggle with that too though, because agreement is moribund).

Esperanto havas parolantojn en Cxini, Japanio, Koreio, Indonezio kaj Tajlando. Nedube ankauw aliaj sed cxi tiuj estas tiuj de kiuj mi renkontis esperantistojn, aw en mia lando aw en ilia.

Jene vi povas vidi ion de la cxina uzigxo: http://esperanto.china.org.cn/

Esperanto estas tre ewropa law sia formo (kaj gramatike kaj vorte). Sxajne tio helpis gxin obteni fruajn uzantojn, kiuj instigas ekuzi gxin aliajn kiu ne kunhavas gxian historion. La reguleco de la lingvo helpas homojn ecx se ili devas lerni multajn strangajn radikojn kaj penas kompreni la tre latinan relativan fraz-sistemon (multaj angla-parolantoj devas peni per tiu ankaw, cxar konsento estas mortonta).

[z3phyr]

"We should also have one programming language, one processor architecture (preferably the x86-64) and one browser"

If the above statement sounds wrong, it's because __it is__

We should let other cultures and languages to thrive by themselves; as this is the primary reason of evolution of our business language too. If multiple languages would not suddenly exist, our business language will stop borrowing from other languages and would cease to advance by itself.

[jogjayr]

> I think we should all speak one language (preferably, the one we're speaking now).

Gods no. You'll have to pry my other two languages from my cold, dead tongue. Just the ability to have private conversations in public feels like a superpower. The amazing puns you can make up is also a huge benefit - I can amuse myself all the time.

Plus, you know, cultural diversity, accessing millennia of literature and history etc. But that's the boring stuff /s

[tensor_rank_0]

sprechen se habla?

[msaharia]

So, people should give up their culture to become easier preys to global consumerism? Diversity is not a problem - it's fundamental to the survival of a species.

[ivm]

No way, English is too dry and limiting due to the lack of emotional tones that are present at least in Spanish and Russian (because of the flexibility of words and their order in a sentence). I'm ok with using it for technical purposes but I would prefer something else to actually talk.

[shrimp_emoji]

I know what you mean. I speak another language (natively), and it's surprising how more emotionally expressive it is than English. Personally, though, I like English's relative dryness; it makes English seem much more civil and rational. That other language sounds vulgar and primal. D:

[janc_]

I think you are comparing with "business English" instead of actual locally spoken/written English here...

[ivm]

No, the one spoken with family and friends – it's still limiting. Profanities in English aren't diverse either.

[sangnoir]

> Profanities in English aren't diverse either

English profanity feels unsatisfying/watered-down. I suspect overuse in pop-culture has worn away most of the taboo factor, making it less cathartic.

[wbl]

And of the seven words you can't say we mostly use three.

[_emacsomancer_]

Because diversity emerges, like it or not. Go back far enough and Swedish and Nepali were dialects of the same language.

[draw_down]

> I think we should all speak one language (preferably, the one we're speaking now).

Good grief.