Linguistic Goals and Political Means of European and International Communication

ABSTRACT: Document on Esperanto prepared for the 36th Congress of the Radical Party (Rome, Hotel Ergife, 30 April - 3 may)

---------------------

-1-

Political Prerequisite

Our aim here is to demonstrate that the goals to be pursued in international communication, both European and world-wide, and concerning the problems arising therefrom - about which we shall speak in Part II - only provide for a political solution, as will be made clear in this first section.

Hence the need for a precise strategy, to which we will have to dedicate our efforts from now until the end of this century, as we shall see in Section III.

* * *

In short, linguistic domination is a consequence of political domination, which today is exercised - in favor of establishing English as the de facto and world-wide lingua franca more and more firmly - by those nations and peoples in all five continents who speak this language, and, chiefly,

by the United States.

Therefore, those who intend to oppose this trend and wish to establish a neutral artificial language as the international, and especially European, lingua franca, are dutybound - if they do not wish to pursue a merely idealistic goal - to work on building a political power comparable in dimension to that of the US: a political power with a direct interest in the adoption of an artifical language like Esperanto as its official lingua franca, because only a language like this would enable such a power both to confirm its independence, culturally and politically, and at the same time to preserve the plurality of European languages - which are now threatened by the progressive spreading of English - and hence to preserve the plurality of European cultures which would themselves disappear if the languages that sustain them and make their continued surival possible, were to disappear.

-II-

The Language Proplem in International Communication: Goals

Having clarified this preliminary and essential point, let us first briefly analyse the current state of international communication, the language aspects in particular, the risks involved and the appropriate remedies.

In a few decades, the actual existence of European languages will be threatened by an extremely serious danger: the progressive establishment of English as the de facto lingua franca throughout the entire world.

The fate of the autochthonous languages of Europe at the time of the Roman Empire, i.e. their destruction and replacement by Latin; and of those of North and South America which, after the discovery of the New World, were annihilated by Spanish, Portuguese, English and French, leave no room for doubt.The only difference is that while this process formerly took centuries, it will now be accomplished within one or two generations, since English can utilize not only the political and economic strength of the English-speaking countries, and especially of the United States, but also the more influential power of the mass media, and of television in particular (and shortly, television transmitted by satellite, which is worse still).

A living language cannot be a neutral and aseptic instrument of communication. It is the expression, the Trager of a Weltanschauung, of a way of life, and is consequently intolerant, and will tend to replace all other Weltanschauungen with its own.

* * *

The only rational way of avoiding this danger is to take radical action: to introduce as a lingua franca a language without the destructive power of English.

The fact that Latin lost its destructive power after becoming a dead language, that throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance it could still remain the lingua franca of scholars and scientists, of an élite, and, last but not least, of the Church, without threatening either French, German, Spanish, etc., indicates (historia magistra vitae) the solution we should adopt, i.e. a language which is nobody's mother tongue, and does not have the cultural and political force of a people of a State behind it, or, even worse, that of a group of powerful peoples and States present in all five continents.

As it is not just a small élite or intelligentsia which needs to communicate internationally, and we also live in an era of mass communication, only a language which is both "dead" (neutral) and very easy to learn, is suitable for our needs and our time. Only a planned language possesses these characteristics. And only Esperanto has been in use long enough, and has a sufficient infrastructure (i.e. a wide range of literature and a considerable number of people who speak the language) to be capable hic et nunc of performing this function. What's more, it is the only language which complies with the raison d'etat of a European Federation, i.e. with its aspirations of independence, and desire to play a leading role in helping the Third World reach a similar independence, both politically and culturally.

Last but not least, the adoption of Esperanto would be of fundamental help in putting the dominant languages and dominated idioms of ethnic groups on an equal level, and, therefore, making a fundamental contribution to eliminating the alienation the latter is experiencing on account of linguistic domination.

* * *

As things stand, it is unrealistic to hope that Europe might make such a choice hic et nunc. Quite possibly, the main obstacle is not the socialogical strength of English which is already a de facto lingua franca to a great extent. The main obstacle is in fact psychological: there is a disturbing, and subconscious, feeling that the use of an invented language, completely lacking in historical traditions, would signify, both individually and collectively, a radical "loss of identity", which people are by no means prepared to accept.

The problem would seem to be unresolvable, but a way out of the deadlock is provided by modern Sprachkybernetik as it is studied at the University of Paderborn, and most especially by Professor Helmar Frank of that university. Research has enabled them to confirm and demonstrate unequivocably, with rigorously scientific methods and quantitative measuring systems, that the study of Esperanto, thanks to both its rationality and its being easy to learn, is the best and most practical preparation for the study of a living language in general, an Indo-European language in particular, and English most of all.

In other words: people who have studied Esperanto for two years and then begin, in the third year, to study English, French, etc., will, after the fourth year, have a greater knowledge of that language, and a greater ability to speak it, than their contemporaries who started studying the relevant modern language from the beginning, four years previously.

I, therefore, maintain that this method should be adopted throughout the European Community: starting with those countries which, like Italy, are proposing to introduce the teaching of a foreign language in primary school. It can, and indeed must, be used together with the most up-to-date, and the most sophisticated, methods available to linguistic didactics (which concentrate on ways and methods of teaching and not the choosing of the actual language); and perhaps more importantly, it can and must be accepted even by those people who are against Esperanto as the choice for an international lingua franca. Its being used as a means does not, in fact, signify that it must be accepted as an end.

For this reason, it will be possible to eliminate the radical aversion to Esperanto felt by those people who oppose it because of the above-mentioned "loss of identity" which has been identified by the psychologist and linguist Claude Piron of the University of Geneva: it is as if the use of an invented language without historical roots, even if only as an auxiliary language, could destroy in radice both their individual and national cultural personality. A purely propaedeutical and didactic, and thus only temporary, use of Esperanto would not give rise to such irrational fears, or at least only to a minimum extent.

Furthermore, the "endemic" spreading of a very easy language, so to speak, which is consequently much harder to forget than a modern language, will, on the one hand, serve to further reduce these fears, when facts and experience are allowed to speak for themselves; and, on the other hand, will prepare the ground for an "epidemic" dissemination of Esperanto, i.e. for the realization of the more ambitious long-term project explained above.

A second, and no less important, objective is the creation of interdisciplinary institutes in our universities (if possible with the collaboration of universities in various European countries), to study the problems of international communication, as seen from the vantage points of political science, sociology, pedagogy, linguistics and cybernetics.

This constitutes the short-term programme which we can, and must, begin to realize immediately.

* * *

A second phase has been suggested by the French linguist Jean-Pierre VAN DETH, of the Association Internationale pour la Recherche e la Diffusion des Méthodes Audiovisuelles et Structuro-globales (Ghent, Belgium). It would be put into operation at a later date, and developed along the following lines:

Contemporary language teaching "for specific purposes" - which is by far the most widespread method as it is the only one suitable for mass education - is so elementary that it is impossible that the knowledge of foreign languages thus acquired can have a formative value, improve the Bildungof the student, and open his mind to the culture of other nations. The degree of knowledge of a foreign language is useful for the basic needs of daily life, for example, when one has to buy a ticket at the railway station, or order a meal in a restaurant. If this is its only purpose, it is absurd to waste so much time in learning languages that are as difficult as the living languages; Esperanto is more than sufficient for such elementary types of communication, and would permit a faster and more effective learning process, with an enormous saving in time and energy.

This proposal - "Esperanto for Tourists", "for specific purposes" or "for everyday matters" - is of particular importance and should be supported, as it would make it possible to overcome another form or aspect of a "complex" which can be described as follows: an invented language like Esperanto can be compared to an automaton, capable only of simple, basic movements; but if such a language is used without restriction, we run the risk of its destroying our wealth of spirituality, and annhilating our humanity, by reducing communication to an extremely primitive and unrefined level. But it is precisely because of this that Esperanto, given the facility with which it can be learned, can be usefully employed on an international level (but first of all, and as soon as possible, within Europe) in simpler forms of communication, such as those relevant to tourism, transportation, commerce, etc., and always with the understanding that this language is completely unsuitable for higher forms of communication, inclu

ding cultural forms, for which there are and always will be living languages.

This is the belief that inspired Van Deth. It does not matter that he is mistaken, that Esperanto has in fact demonstrated that its expressive capacity is inferior to none of the living languages, and that it indeed occasionally surpasses, in its ductility and flexibility, the living languages themselves. Neverthless, this error of judgment should not be corrected. On the contrary, it should be reinforced and exploited. There will be enough time to correct it later on: the only thing that counts now is that, due to this error, we are in a better position to overcome a serious psychological block, and to make further, and very significant progress, along the road to the "endemic diffusion" of Esperanto, as I have called it.

* * *

As I have said, the above suggestions constitute only a second step, which cannot be realized immediately without the agreement of a certain number of nations (the third step being the use of Esperanto in scientific communications at an international level, to be adopted later). The first step, the immediate objective, is, and remains, the one indicated by the scholars of Paderborn: an objective which, so far, is completely unknown to, or has been totally ignored by, scholars of that science which calls itself "language teaching" or "applied linguistics".

The propaedueutic and didactic value of Esperanto in the teaching of modern languages constitutes, in my opinion, a great discovery in linguistic didactics. If, however, the experts systematically ignore this discovery and never as much as consider it, not even to reject it (indeed, they never so much as mention it, tamquam non esset), this cannot be for scientific reasons that are inspired by the principles of inquiry, objectivity, and a desire to constantly question the conclusions reached, which must always be considered provisional as they will become redundant with each new scientific development.

Instead, the adepts of linguistic pedagogy have all chosen the strategy of silence, as regards the question which interests us. It is a silence that cannot be inspired by anything other than prejudice, i.e. by the fact that their culture, their sources of information, and their interests as teachers have led them unanimously to an almost total state of subservience to Anglo-Saxon culture (and specialized literature), with the result that English is the only international language they are willing to consider, and they carefully avoid, also in this instance, any discussion of an alternative to a planned language, and, above all, stubbornly ignore the disastrous "glottophagic" consequences which the spreading of English will produce.

Worse still, when they are absolutely forced to consider the problem, they deny and minimize the above consequences without any real sense of criticism or logical argument.

It would therefore be opportune to remind the linguistic pedagogues of the following, starting with an admonition in Latin: Sutor, ne supra crepidam. Yours is a science of means, not of ends. Your task, therefore, is to study and experiment the best methods of teaching languages: but the choice of a language as an international lingua franca, and the fact of whether we should resign ourselves, after having carefully considered the consequences, to the victory of English which will come about if no move is made to oppose it, is outside your field of competence and has to remain the task of the politicians, aided and guided by historians, sociologists, linguists, experts in communication, and international organizations. Everything that has been proposed above cannot take place without a profound change in the mental and cultural attitude of the people involved. This would necessitate that European intellectuals and decision-makers, and above all those who suffer most acutely from the language and ethnic

disadvantages which might cause English to become the dominant language, become aware, assume responsibility and commit themselves, in a practical, direct and sustained manner.

This trahison des clers that has taken place so far is understandable, but cannot be excused: intellectuals and decision-makers are polarized by the conflict between the Great Powers and divided on the regulations front, and they have forgotten the problem of European unity, as well as the problem of communication and an international culture.

However, this inadequacy and lack of interest - for which they must be criticised - are absolutely unacceptable.

-III-

Indispensable Political Measures: the Creation of a European Federation between now and 2000

Nevertheless, even a commitment on the part of the intellectuals is not enough: we need, more than anything, a new political power.

In Section I we stated the political premise: a language - in our case Esperanto - does not take hold simply because it is suited to, or facilitates, international communication: this is a necessary condition, but it is not sufficient in itself. A language takes hold if it is supported by a political power capable of imposing it.

Latin dominated the Old World - and destroyed native languages in ancient Europe - not because of the beauty of Virgil's or Horace's verse, or of Cicero's or Tacitus' prose, but because of the strength of the Roman legions. This is what one might call the "bronze law of socio-linguistics".

Having established that creating a European Federation here and now, is the only way of giving Esperanto an initial, and significant, opportunity to take hold, we must now indicate the strategy which could possibly achieve this political goal by the end of the century.

It is a strategy that springs from the developments of European unification. These developments can be described as follows:

1) On the one hand, the momentous events which have shaken Europe since 1989 have made it necessary to create: a) a Political Union; b) a Pan-European Union; c) a Federal Union.

This is the only way in which we can help the former Communist countries to become fully-fledged members of the European Union in short order, and only thus can this institution be capable of resolving renewed ethnic conflicts, and of assuring the autonomy of the members and the unity of the whole.

2) On the other hand, it was agreed at Maastricht to create merely an economic and monetary Union, composed of the twelve member countries.

3) Furthermore, the German government has called for, and is still calling for, a more general, and solid, political Union, the only kind within which the economic and political dynamism of a "Greater Germany" can be incorporated, in the face of expanding sectors of German society which are clamoring for a Germany that will "go it alone", and which are aiming not for a Europeanized Germany but a Germanized Europe.

Thus, all Europeanist and federalist forces should defend the bold, but increasingly unsupported, political programme of the German government by mobilizing European society on a vast scale.

* * *

This mobilization should be carried out as follows:

In 1952, the federalists succeeded - through Alcide De Gasperi, the Italian Prime Minister at that time (and also with the help of Konrad Adenauer, Paou Henri Spaak and Robert Schuman) - in persuading the governments of the "Six" (the only countries involved in the process of European unification at that time) to entrust the European Parliament as it was then (the Assembly of the European Community of Coal and Steel) with a mandate to produce a Plan for a European Political Community, which was actually devised within six months.

The plan came to nought because of French opposition, but the basic structure is still valid.

All Europeanist and federalist forces, movements and organizations should, therefore, make a similar tacit agreement with the German government, and should organize a massive campaign for the relaunching of a political Europe. It should be done in the following way:

In 1994, the third European elections will be held for a Parliament which is virtually a consultative assembly. Hence, the elections are destined to take place - if the situation remains as it is - in a climate of public apathy even more pronounced than that which dominated the preceding elections.

However, the situation would be totally different it if the Twelve Governments, or at least some of them, were to give the new Parliament, before its election, the task of drafting a preliminary European Federal Constitution, on the understanding that it must be completed within a year and that it will be submitted for ratification directly to the national Parliaments (or a referendum will be held, according to that which is set down in the Constitution of each nation), without going through the rigmarole of diplomatic conferences which, in 1984-85, led to the stultification of the "Spinelli Draft", which had been approved by the European Parliament but was susequently watered down and reduced to the "Single Act".

The Europeanist and federalist movements and European Parliament alone do not have the the political authority, or the strength, to carry out such an undertaking successfully. But thanks to the support of an ally like the German Government, and to the solidarity of those who will follow its example, it is not such an impossible undertaking.

This is the strategy to be followed from now to the end of this century, and today's command: das Gebot der Stunde. Esperantists must answer this call, in the belief that their own political goals can only be achieved through the realization of this fundamental political requirement.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

I have provided a complete bibliography in my book (in French) Communication internationale et avenir des langues et des parlers en Europe, Nice, Presses d'Europe, 1987, as well as in my books (in Italian) Una lingua per l'Europa, Padova, Cedam, 1987, and L'insegnamento delle lingue nella Communitŕ Europea: stato attuale e prospettive future, Rome, Armando, 1988.