Asklemmy

50955 readers

408 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

If you had to choose a new lingua franca, what language would you pick? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 3 days ago by irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

120 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] folaht@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Lojban for now
Certainly not Esperanto

Lojban like Esperanto has been created to be a neutral lingua franca.
I've heard that it's a logical language that tries to do away with ambiguity and that sounds interesting to me.
Esperanto feels like a language made for the EU rather than the world and so do all Esperanto look-a-likes.
Lojban sounds like a cross between Romansh and a lost native American language. Not good compared to my two favorite sounding languages, Japanese and French, but at least more neutral than Esperanto. Esperanto sounds Spanish and Interlingua sounds like an Italian that thought that Esperanto should sound Italian and I don't like how either of those two languages sound.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are we sure it's actually usable as a natural language?

[–] folaht@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I have no clue, but it'll be better than a language that thinks it's acceptable for words like "read"
to not just have two different meaning, but two different pronunciations,
while also having words like "sense", "scents" and "cents" be pronounced exactly the same.

And while writing this, I just learned that pronunciation should be spelled with "u" instead of "ou".
That makes no sense.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, the spelling is terrible, even if the spoken language is not.

[–] folaht@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

The sounds English makes is pretty good,
but I don't know if it's the culture or the language itself,
but it has a giant tendency to want to use a
euphanisms and dysphemisms to emphasize superiority
over other languages and cultures
and also has a giant tendency to use weasel words,
to weasel in authoritarianisms.