Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, European and Regional Studies

2 Issues per year

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2068-7583
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Linguistic Justice, van Parijs, and Esperanto

Federico Gobbo
Published Online: 2016-10-26 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/auseur-2016-0008

Abstract

In the European and world-wide scenario of linguistic justice offered by van Parijs (2011), it is argued that we need one lingua franca only and that the only suitable candidate is English. In order to sustain his argument, the author has to reject three known alternatives against the English-only scenario. The second alternative is Esperanto. Van Parijs argues that there are some inner defects in the Esperanto language, and therefore Esperanto is not suitable for the role of world-wide lingua franca. This paper offers counterarguments based on the evidence of facts, showing that if nowadays Esperanto is only a lesser-used language the reason is not in the inner traits of the language, rather in geopolitical decisions. I argue that in the most probable global scenario English still plays the actual major role, but along with other cultural languages being regional lingua francas.

Keywords: linguistic justice; Esperanto; political neutrality; cultural languages; regional lingua francas

References

  • ECKERT, Penelope. 2006. Communities of Practice. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Elsevier.Google Scholar

  • GLEDHILL, Christopher. 2000. The Grammar of Esperanto. A Corpus-Based Description. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar

  • GOBBO, Federico. 2005. The European Union’s Need for an International Auxiliary Language. Journal of Universal Language 6: 1–28.Google Scholar

  • GOBBO, Federico. 2015. Interlinguïstiek, een vak voor meertaligheid. Interlingvistiko, fako por multlingveco. Interlinguistics, a Discipline for Multilingualism. Oratie 532, verschenen in de oratiereeks van de Universiteit van Amsterdam op vrijdag 13 maart 2015. Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar

  • LINDSTEDT, Jouko. 2009. Esperanto: an Eastern European Contact Language? In: VOSS, Christian–NAGÓRKO, Alicja (eds), Die Europäizität der Slawia oder dies Slawizität Europas. Ein Beitrag der kultur- und sprachrelativistischen Linguistik (Studies on Language and Culture in Central and Eastern Europe, 2). Munich–Berlin: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar

  • LINDSTEDT, Jouko. 2010. Esperanto as a Family Language. In: DERVIN, F. (ed.), Lingua francas. La véhicularité linguistique pour vivre, travailler et étudier. L’Harmattan, 69–80.Google Scholar

  • LINS, Ulrich. 2000. The Work of the Universal Esperanto Association for a More Peaceful World. Esperanto Documents 45 A. Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar

  • OKRENT, Arika. 2010. In the Land of Invented Languages. Spiegel & Grau.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • SIKOSEK, Marcus. 2006. Die neutrale Sprache: Eine politische Geschichte des Esperanto-Weltbundes. Bydgoszcz: Skonpres.Google Scholar

  • VAN PARIJS, Philippe. 2011. Linguistic Justice for Europe and for the World. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

  • WELLS, John. 1989. Lingvistikaj aspektoj de Esperanto. Rotterdam: Universala Esperanto-Asocio.Google Scholar

  • ZAMENHOF, Ludwik Lejzer. 1915. Alvoko al la diplomatoj. Appeal to the diplomats. The British Esperantist 123: 51–55.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-10-26

Published in Print: 2016-10-01


Citation Information: Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, European and Regional Studies, ISSN (Online) 2068-7583, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/auseur-2016-0008.

Export Citation

© 2016 Federico Gobbo, published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in