[em-bee]

any second language is a stepping stone to later languages. by the time you learn latin and then french, you might as well have learned french directly and then german or chinese.

esperanto is different because it is easier to learn, so instead of taking years to mastery, you are done in a few months, and teachers can focus on proper learning techniques without fearing that students get demotivated because it takes so long. then you can apply those techniques to the next languages and hopefully come out ahead

[ghaff]

To echo others, I would need to be convinced that learning a synthetic language that, for most of us, will never have any direct practical use has some unique pedagogical value. For me, learning an actual language, however imperfectly, that has a history, literature, and in many cases current speakers and culture seems far more interesting. But, then, I never had any interest in learning Klingon or elvish either.

[em-bee]

right, we need more research to verify that theory.