The famous saying that states that "the pen is mightier than the sword" denotes the power of language in the lives of people.1 Indeed, the power of language stems from the fact that in addition to being the primary means of communication and dissemination of information within a community, it is also a cultural construct that is highly representative of group and self- identification. Identification with a language, however, is often an uncontrolled, involuntary process, involving a considerable amount of encroachment into an individual's or a group's private sphere. Indeed, history has witnessed the injustices involved in the formation, evolution, spread and loss of languages around the world, mainly through commerce, religion, education, conquest and colonisation. A painful example is the process of nation-state formation, which had resulted in the institutionalisation of practices of cultural and political domination, in addition to the imposition of an illegitimate set of territorial boundaries. With the arrival of the 21st century, however, a questioning of past and present actions and practices has become necessary, and this entails a rethinking of the legitimacy of the existing arrangements. Should the status quo be maintained?
Esperanto is classified as a 'planned', 'artificial' or 'consciously constructed' language, and according to Klaus Schubert, it is the 'most developed' of all such languages that were primarily designed for 'international or interethnic communication'.2 Developed in Warsaw from 1877 to 1885 by L.L. Zamenhof, Esperanto is both a spoken and written language whose main properties include a lexicon that is derived from Western European languages, and a morphology that reflects strong Slavic influences.3 Historical and biographical accounts relating to the architect of Esperanto suggest that it was Zamenhof's awareness of the role of language in social conflicts, and his rejection of major languages for the reason that they put the minority languages and speakers at a considerable disadvantage, which convinced him of the necessity of a common language. Indeed, there is not much difference between the linguistic environment Zamenhof grew up in and today's environment.
Critics of Esperanto have pointed to the lack of realism and relevance of planned languages in today's society, given the multiplicity of languages already in existence, in addition to the homogenising tendencies of globalisation. However, it would be erroneous to assume that today's world does not have the capacity to have a social conscience. The global environment since the end of the Cold War has been characterised by both domestic and international concerns about minority rights, linguistic and cultural diversity, and by extension, linguistic democracy. For example, since the 1990s, dedicated individuals, international and non-governmental organisations such as UNESCO and the European Parliament have placed the language question at the top of their agenda. Indeed, there is no reason to assume that this humanitarian concern will not continue to flourish in the new millennium.
The existing linguistic arrangements, as a result of past actions, will not easily be reversed. The status quo, which is characterised by the majority-minority, colonial-indigenous and High-Low dichotomies, is a product of the interaction of different political, economic, cultural and social forces from time immemorial, and its existence is accepted as norm. The vital role of Esperanto in the equation is that it provides a context of choice for different speakers, allowing them to empower themselves through their conscious and voluntary adoption of a language that is not associated with any one group or culture, and a language that is neither superior nor inferior to any other language. This is especially important since the link between language and identity is a very strong one, and in most cases, the status of one's language also determines one's place in society. It has to be noted that planned languages such as Esperanto are intended 'not to replace ethnic languages, but to serve as an additional second language for all people'. 4
Esperanto as both an ideal and a vision therefore provides a tabula rasa for languages to start on an equal footing. By being a neutral language, it seeks to remove the social barriers and allows speakers to redefine their environment for themselves, that is, in accordance to how they perceive themselves, and not how society perceives them. The voluntary adoption of an international auxiliary language such as Esperanto enables speakers to assume an identity that is far from parochial, allowing them to experience the full benefits of living in a diversified yet integrated world, contributing to better world understanding. In an increasingly globalised and interdependent society of the 21st century, whose operation and survival depends largely on the principles of diversity, parity and efficiency, Esperanto demonstrates the capacity to act as an effective intermediary in the enduring enmity between the forces of integration and diversification.
Why is there a need to create an artificial language when there already is a plethora of languages in existence? The linguistic environment of the new millennium is that of both multilingualism and unilingualism, with the homogenising process of globalisation creating an environment of linguistic unity in face of diversity, and bringing peoples of different backgrounds together. The means of communication in the 21st century must be able to function as an effective intermediary between different languages in order to foster worldwide understanding, and for this reason, ease of second-language acquisition becomes important.
Learning a foreign language is a daunting task for most people. The architects of Esperanto have indeed taken the problem into serious consideration, making the internal language construction of Esperanto an ideal for language learning and usage. With a regular and phonetic spelling system, reading and pronunciation become an easy task. In terms of syntax, Esperanto is governed by only 16 grammatical rules, all regular and exception-free, making sentence construction easier. Indeed, the Guinness Book of World Records notes that Esperanto is 'the only language in which there are no irregular verbs to learn. 5 The morphological construction is indeed quite simple as well - Esperanto morphemes are invariant and can be recombined to form different words. Esperanto as an international auxiliary language has therefore removed the stigma attached to foreign language learning, making its learning and usage an appealing proposition in the fast-paced and highly mobile environment of the new millennium.
Esperanto as an auxiliary language for speakers of different languages is important in its role in the exchange of information across linguistic frontiers. With the increase in economic, political, cultural and social contact across the populations of the diversified and highly interactive world, Esperanto demonstrates an impressive capacity to adapt to the changing environment in global communications, and accommodate its needs. In its practical application, the elasticity of Esperanto allows it to have multiple functions.
As a second language and lingua franca, Esperanto has achieved notable success in Central and Eastern Europe, mainland China, South America and Southwest Asia. 6 Indeed, the number of users of the language continues to increase, and this guarantees Esperanto an increasing amount of usage in more and wider areas of application. In over 400 international conferences held each year, speranto is used, reflecting its growing acceptance as a viable rival of English.
In terms of published works, the use of Esperanto is increasing and accelerating. There are now libraries around the world that have a collection of over 20,000 items in Esperanto, and these include the International Esperanto Museum in Vienna, and the Esperanto Collection in the Aalen Public Library in Germany. An impressive number of books and periodicals are now being published in Esperanto, El Popla Cxinio in China being the most elaborate of all. The versatility of Esperanto is not restricted to publishing, however. The language is also starting to conquer the music industry, ranging from 'popular and folk songs through to rock music, cabaret, solo and choir pieces and opera', and have been recorded by famous artists such as Elvis Costelo and Michael Jackson.7 Esperanto is also used in the electronic networks of the computer age, indeed popular in a large number of internet websites. As further proof of the accommodating nature of the language, there are now numerous Esperanto organisations for special-interest groups such as the blind, chess players, Scouts and Guides, as well as groups of a wide variety of denominations including the Protestants, Mormons, Baha'is, Shintoists, Quakers and Catholics.
In form and in substance, Esperanto is ideally the international language for the new millennium. In reality, however, there are a number of obstacles to be faced before Esperanto is permitted to reach its full potential. Among these obstacles is the fact that Esperanto is in competition with other languages in the world. According to Mario Pei, 'a solution to the language problem must be found in the adoption of a language by international agreement'. 8 As a clear manifestation of the growing sense of international interdependence, international organisations such as the UN have already given their support to Esperanto, giving way to suggestions that an international identity through the auxiliary language is emerging. Breidenbach and Zukrigl are correct in pointing out the emergence of 'cultural expressions which do not have historical roots, but are the result of global interconnections'.9
While the push of internationalisation is underway, however, the pull of parochialism is also proving to be a tenacious force. Adolf Hitler referred to Esperanto as an instrument of Jewish world domination in his explosive book, Men Kampf, and in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, imprisonment is the usual punishment for attempting to teach the language. Nationalist pride is the primary obstacle to foreign-language learning, and it is not surprising that in today's world, no government has officially supported the use of Esperanto.
Esperanto 'begins with the initial disadvantage that it is artificial'.10 Unlike most official languages which have disseminated through activities that were of economic, military, political and religious nature, there are not any such incentives or pressure to learn Esperanto. Critics are also quick to point out the missing link between language and identification in the use of planned languages, which is vital in any language's maintenance. However, Forster argues that: 'The fact which is crucial to the understanding of Esperanto is that the speech community of the language is a social movement'.11
The strength of Esperanto lies in the fact that it is not imposed, but chosen, voluntarily and consciously. The absence of the link between language use and in-group identification does not negate the fact that Esperanto enjoys a universal appeal and continues to bring together people who may have nothing in common, apart from the shared willingness to provide an alternative to the status quo. The adoption of Esperanto is a private matter, and purely of personal choice. It is a matter of choice for individuals and communities to utilise Esperanto as an effective lingua franca in global communications. It is optional for people to allow Esperanto to coexist with the languages they identify with. Esperanto is all about choice, and it allows its speakers to consciously redefine their surroundings and themselves through language use.
The direction of the linguistic arrangements in the new millennium is both forward and backward. Esperanto will prove to be a successful intermediary between the two, on the condition that the humanitarian and progressive vision of its architects is upheld. It will continue to assert itself as the most widely accepted and most developed of all planned languages, but this is dependent on the willingness of the linguistic arrangements in today's society to allow the maintenance of linguistic diversity.
1 Quote cited by Bobaljik, Pensalfini. Papers on Language Endangerment and the Maintenance of Linguistic Diversity. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 28, 1996, p.22
2 Schubert, Klaus (ed). Interlinguistics. Aspects of the Science of Planned Languages. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 42. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin and New York, 1989, p.10.
3 Fettes, Mark. 'About Esperanto'. http://www.esperantic.org/ced/espe.htm.
4 Pool, Jonathan and Fettes, Mark. The Challenge of Interlingualism. A Research Invitation. http://esperantic.org/esf/ism.htm.
5 Jones and Zervic. 'A Key to the International Language Esperanto'. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1197.
6 Fettes, Mark. 'An Update on Esperanto'. http://www.esperantic.org/ced/espe.htm
7 Fettes, Mark. 'An Update on Esperanto'. http://www.esperantic.org/ced/espe.htm
8 Large, Andrew. The Artificial Language Movement. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1985.
9 Breidenbach, Joana and Zukrigl, Ina. 'The Dynamics of Cultural Globalisation. The Myths of Cultural Globalisation'. http://www.adis.at/arlt/institut/studies/collab/breitenb.htm
10 Large, Andrew. The Artificial Language Movement. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1985, p.198.
11 Ibid., p.198.