On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:19:03 +0200, Kjell Rehnstr?öm <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >I guess everything lies in motivation. > >In Sweden the young generation start lerning English in grade/form 3. >They are supposed to learn German and French as well, later, in what is >highschool in the US. The languages mentioned are declining. There is an >encreasing interest in Chinese. > >The system of grades (marks) seams to lead to the pupils selecting the >easy subjects so that they can score high grades / marks in order to be >admitted to the prestigious schools and universitites. Languages demand >too much work for many and therefore they chose to take easy courses >that give the best marks. They are trying to change that situation. > >I suspect that another reason why young people don't learn any more >foreign language – as the "school languages" are called – is that when >they come to Germany or France they will meet young people who speak >more or less as good English as they themselves. And given that their >German and French is a little bit shake – as they don't meet these >language as much as English – people will prefer speaking English to >them. I have had similar experiences and I suppose this can be a more >general experience. > >In any of the languages Esperanto, Ido, Interlingua, >Occidental/Interlingua a normal pupil can achieve fluency in a fraction >of the time needet to learn e.g. English. Provided the teacher or the >material is good enough. And also with the constructed language ,there will be no mistakes with the pronunciation. For example if you pronounced a national language without accuracy then that would be a mistake ,because there are native speakers who pronounce the language in the standard way. The problem is that the national language itself evolved while the older pronunciations would be considered wrong. In the constructed languages that have no native speakers you can have many variations in pronunciation as long as you are completely understood. Nobody will say that you have mistaken in pronouncing a d like a t. If somebody pronounced walked as walk-ed and not walk/t/ then that would be a mistake ,because there are millions of native speakers who pronounce it in the later way. While in a conlang that has no native speakers you are more free ,because it's your language. > >I learnt good Esperanto without the help of any teacher. As a metter of >fact the teachers were not encourageing the learning of Esperanto! > >English I learnt with a teacher the ordinary way. I managed to learn English with the help of the teachers in school and also with some help from my father who is an English language teacher. I remember my colleagues, when we were very young at the end of the elementary years of school, were very amazed by the fact that I am able to say the English letters from A to N. Really from A to N. They started to talk about my father being an English teacher. But I remember that I have learned the alphabet from a cassette in my home that contains some children songs including the alphabet song. > >There are a lot of benefits from an ethnic language like English, but >they are so obvious that I think I don't have to spell them out here and >now. How did you support a planned auxlang then? Catch him! A secret natlanger :-) The same thing would be said by Arabic language supporters, chinese language supporters...etc. You can hear an Arab talking about his language until you surrender. All the national languages have advatages seen from some points of view. And many of these advantages can be transfered into the conlang after its spread. I know of course that English now has much more clear advantages than Esperanto ,but many of these advatages can be obtained by Esperanto once it becomes spoken as a world language. Zein.