TED Conversations

Hugo Wagner
Paris
France

Prospective graduate student in Mechanical Engineering,

TED Translator Associate Language Coordinator TED Attendee

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Is our destiny to be one world with one language?

Are we heading towards a world with one common language?
If you think so, do you believe that it will happen naturally (because globalization requires it) or because of one country's leading "soft power"?
Would it enhance international cooperation and promote better understanding between countries?

On the other hand, what would it mean for human cultures and civilizations?

+17

Sort By:

Jean Davi
- 0
Sep 3 2011: i don't think so.
- Thomas Jones 100+
  - +1
  Sep 3 2011: Succinct.
Vernon Nolan
- +1
Sep 3 2011: The operative word here is 'common'. 0f course people will always speak in the language they learnt at home. But I do not think any other language can compete with English (how about calling it Earthish?) as a common language. Sure there are millions more who speak Mandarin? but what do they speak when abroad? There is no doubt that the home language will eventually be English for most people
Estela Estela 10+
- 0
Sep 2 2011: I sure hope so and I hope that language is English! lol

Seriously though, I know another language and I recognize the interesting qualities that differnent lagnuages possess-it's like the language is shaped by the land, by the way the people are in that particular 'culture', maybe even by the colors of that environment, the food etc. I think that is part of the reason sometimes words are not translatable--because the people who speak them lived different lives and therefore the words just don't fit everywhere.

It would be nice if all humans spoke ONE common language but retained the language of their homelands, whatever that may be.

That being said, it is important to note that language changes; it is a growing, changing thing--in written history and, no doubt, in pre-history as well.
Thomas Petzold
- 0
Sep 2 2011: A wonderful talk by Mark Pagel, but a concluding question too simple-minded for his caliber. (Sorry, Mark!) It is true that language competition is an ongoing process with the most notable effect of driving out existing languages (and in very rare cases the revival of others). However, if we talk about cooperation and languages in a world where so called social media has become an important aspect of how we communicate then we need to acknowledge an option that is ultimately driven by both humans and technology. This option is the creation of language pairs. Language pairs is a means of bundling, or connecting, languages. In Wikipedia, for example, this is the language section that you see on the left-hand side of most Wikipedia articles. It shows in what other languages the same entry, or rather concept, is available. All that is required is one click on the language link. Now, there is still a problem, that is, if I only speak language A, how do I read entries in language B? Enters another example of language pairs used in Google Translate. Google Translate's main asset is not only that it translates from one language to another instantly but, in fact, that it provides a system in which any of the adopted languages can be translated to any other: think of Norwegian to Hindi, for example. While many discuss the flaws of machine translation, only few have noticed that the powerful asset is the language pairs that can be randomly chosen from all of the supported languages on Google Translate. Now, this is an early inspiration for the future of human cooperation and we should all try hard to develop this perspective further, instead of retreating to questions too simple for our capabilities.
Carlos Eduardo Rodrigues
- 0
Sep 1 2011: Perhaps, someday, we will have one language. Here in Brazil we speak portuguese, to be a succesful professional career you need to speak english, and spanish, and now some companies are considering mandarim (chinese). So, we're going to have professionals that can speak four languages! This is not a endemic phenomena so far, but it is gradually happening.

Thus, the use of foreign words in brazilian portuguese is getting stronger, we are inventing new words ou simply adding foreign words to everyday use, probably, I think, in few years we'll have a whole differente language. A new brazilian portuguese full of foreign words. Expanding that phenomena to the entire world, is possible that we might create somo sort of hibrid language.

In the company that I work, sometimes, I chat with chinese employees. I dont write or speak english very well (as you probably noticed) and also they are not orthographically correct when writing, but it was perfect for communicate an idea. My point is maybe we'll have one language even if this means use a language in a very deficient way.
Julian Emanuel
- 0
Sep 1 2011: The world does share one language: body language.
Kevin Landry
- 0
Sep 1 2011: At least TED events should be in English.
Dusko Vorkapic
- 0
Aug 31 2011: I think universal translators will be perfected sooner :)
Walter Radtke
- +1
Aug 31 2011: I wouldn't want that. It implies a uniformity of thought and deed that could easily become tyrannical. I like the fact that diverse nation states with their cultural diversity constitute a testing laboratory for ideas, that, when they fail, don't bring down the entire civilization as it has almost done in the economic sphere where a set of monopolistic financial institutions become too big to fail yet are run by short term thinking idiots. Monopoly is to be feared. People who use mathematics are already using a single language. That's about as far as I'd want to go. If anything, we'll become bilingual, speaking our native language and the lingua franca that emerges via international commerce.
- Judy Li
  - 0
  Sep 1 2011: Yes, one world with one language, the idea gives me shivers. It is as Mr Radtke said above: "a uniformity of thought and deed", which people shoud be feared to. Yes, with one language maybe we can communicate our ideas better, but it may also have a serious downside: no change. Diversity, arguments and different ways of thinking give us sparkles, and these sparkles are exactly the things that advance our society. I would think the better way is like as Mr Radtke said above: "become bilingual, speaking our native language and the lingua franca that emerges via international commerce".
  - Mr. Anony mouse
    
    +1
    Sep 2 2011: @both:
    
    How exactly does it imply uniformity of thought and based on what evidence should we (be afraid)/(get emotional) of/over it? Nobody is mentioning any stationary state here - you are predisposing it, language could evolve and constantly stream towards perfection and correctness (logic) and always increase in complexity, but as a whole not locally. Also, there are arts for people who want to be creative in non logical manner. Maybe you are forgetting our experimental time is running out, and there are other factors besides the suicidal behaviour and stupidity of our species in play.
olina yang
- 0
Aug 30 2011: It sounds interesting .When i learned english ,i would swith it into mandarin ,although i know it's bad for me ,i would do that uncontrolly .i think the reason is that it becomes my tool to talk , i can handle it smoothly .as for english or japanese ,i have to spend more time .
Burton Lo
- 0
Aug 29 2011: I don't think a _complete_ common language is necessary, but I do think we need to find a way to discuss common values. While having a singular language would make that easier, if we come up with vibrant ways to discuss values, then we'll inevitably find a way to extend that shared understanding.

In order to do that, we need commitment towards mutual respect and objectivity. Without that, corroboration is very difficult.
- Marcel Wiedenbrugge
  - +1
  Sep 2 2011: Well said. Speaking a language doesn't mean we interpret the same words, phrases or sentences equally. Common values would make communication so much easier.
Ben Kelman
- 0
Aug 29 2011: MY OPINION: In the biological sense of the topic, what is anything's destiny? Evolution happens very slowly, but very fast in relation to these kinds of topics. If one considers when the sun will burn out, most scientists guess between 5-7 billion years. Who knows what kind of adaptations humans will make, as well as technological advancements we will make even one billion years from now. Maybe prehistoric apes were wondering what their destiny was, and they probably never would've guessed being human beings was the answer. I guess all I am trying to say is that there is such a wide realm of possibilities for our human race that any guess made like a unified culture is simply not able to be confirmed.
- Mr. Anony mouse
  - 0
  Sep 2 2011: Purely biologically/evolutionary. Humans would probably die before sun would burn out due to other natural disasters. Either by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory, space collision, solar flare, gamma ray burst... Technology and science are culture in broadest meaning of word.
Chris Pavlis
- 0
Aug 29 2011: not so much destiny maybe, but ideal state (well actually trans-galactic on one language IMO ;) ) And I would be willing to learn Chinese to that end since 1/3 of the world already speaks it, Esperanto since anyone can pronounce it, or English which happens to be my primary, and the "business" (also computer) language. we also don't mind if you make up the odd word :D

Just not French ;) I wasted 15 years learning the bloody thing only to find out 5 years later you need university training to write it without heavy grammatical errors - bah I say :D
E G 10+
- 0
Aug 28 2011: Won't be French that language ............... don't you think so ?
- Mr. Anony mouse
  - 0
  Aug 28 2011: I don't think it's up to you do decide, but considering facts - most probably not French. Maybe Chinese or something "xyz", that has yet to come to existence [Maybe some global equivalent to "Esperanto"] ? It's still chronologically far way off, so it is impossible to predict what will it be with any certainty, but it might not be English, as you are suggesting...
  - Ben Kelman
    
    0
    Aug 29 2011: Something binary. Flawless. If anything. If any time.
    - Mr. Anony mouse
      
      0
      
      Aug 29 2011: There are many interesting different types of logic not only binary :) Binary is the most primitive one that's why it is used in computers nowdays :) Try quantum logic or Many-valued logic :P
Lucius Chan
- 0
Aug 28 2011: It is only possible if that particular language is Cantonese .Chinese can never give up on chinese because all the chinese's foundamental concept are hidden in the chinese language. Even if the meaning is able to be translated into english , the relationship between the ideas will be gone.In chinese , the word itself tell us how the word are related to similar things.
- Ben Jarvis 50+
  - +1
  Aug 28 2011: you've argued that chinese is irreplaceable, but that doesn't mean that chinese cannot remain people's native language while they learn a second language to use for global communication.
  
  i understand the difficult translating chinese, it's also very difficult at times to translate japanese into english, and so i recommend not translating. use english or chinese, don't try to switch between both. also cantonese or any other form of chinese isn't really suited for the modern world. characters are difficult to display on computer screens (the more complex ones become unreadable), and while the world vocabulary is increasing, the number of chinese characters is not, and so creating new words in chinese is only possible up to a point.
  - Lucius Chan
    
    0
    Aug 29 2011: It depends on what you mean by global .
    
    The world vocabulary , you mean english or other language ?
    
    All kind of language has its limit on creating new words.
    
    It is very difficult for a person to be profound in two languages, especially when you dont need to use english in your everyday life . It is just like for a english speaker to learn chinese in England.
    
    Even if Chinese is the world language , there will still be two type of chinese language : old chinese and morden chinese . Besides , English comsumes less memory in computer programme.
    
    I believe Chinese language has a more complete system on "making" words , and the word itself gives more detail on its meaning. Also , I feel that Chinese words are more connected to daily life.
    
    In conclusion , I believe every language has its value on different aspect , and we should make use of its advantage on different "knowledge". Unless there is only one race , or there will be different languages.
    - Ben Jarvis 50+
      
      0
      
      Aug 30 2011: i disagree, languages without characters rely on combinations, and there are so many combinations that new words can be easily created, while with chinese (for example) no new characters are being created so you have to string together a bunch of characters that mean something else.
      
      In japanese for example, there is no character for 'car', so you have to call it a 'self-moving cart'. perhaps you could tell me the chinese word for 'laser'? type the characters in chinese, please.
  - James Snead
    
    0
    Aug 29 2011: I disagree with your point about not switching between Chinese and English Mr. Jarvis. I work at a company with some native English speakers, and some native Mandarin speakers. While both have adapted and learned enough of the other language to be able to create some level of communication, there is a much more productive level of communication when the languages are applied at different times. I find myself speaking with other native English speakers in broken Mandarin/English, and often it boils down to the fact that in English you can be more descriptive and communicate more through an overall sentence, whereas in Mandarin there is often more meaning behind individual words.
    - Ben Jarvis 50+
      
      0
      
      Aug 30 2011: sorry james i didn't explain clearly and understand your objection. i'm the same, some things are easier to say in english and some in japanese. what i meant was if we try to use both languages in every situation, we find it difficult or even impossible to convey the meaning when switching to another language. as in your example, mandarin has more meaning behind individual words, and that meaning doesn't exist in english, so it is lost if you switch. by 'switch' i mean 'convert'.
    - Frans Kellner 100+
      
      +1
      
      TED Translator
      
      Aug 30 2011: Here in Holland I had a neighboring woman from the Congo that is capable of speaking Congolese, French and Dutch in one sentence. Her children understood every word. As English was formed out of a mix of up to 5 or 6 different languages they kept best of all while some similar words got different meanings it would be best to speak as we are able to and try to understand each other anyway.
      In a hundred years there may be a world language.
  - olina yang
    
    0
    Aug 30 2011: i agree with u ,for chinese when they learn a second language ,they also can remain their own languares.as a chinese ,u not only know the mandarin but also know the dialect of your country .why do they need to learn english ? From my opinion ,most of them learn it for communicating with more foreigner to know their countries and cultures and finances and so on .
    why should have a world language ?if u wanner know it exactly ,u could spend time to learn it and talk with the local people .Is n't it good to have different characters of countries?
Mr. Anony mouse
- +2
Aug 28 2011: I don't think it's our destiny, as I don't believe in anything souch as "destiny" - due to heisenberg uncertainity principle, exists, but it's certainly a very good idea. I'm also a "Carl Sagan", "Kardashev scale", "Transition from 0 to type I civilisation" and "transhumanism" fan. I think it's essential for humans to "get over" a concept of: border, country, nationalism, race, national identity, organised religion - basically a "local patriotism". Identifying ourselves as humans and inhabitants of earth is perfectly sufficient, if one wants to identify himself at all. And obviously we cannot survive as a species if we don't work together.

Edit:

I'm all for bilinguinism Universial world language (sorry English people (stop being so egocentric) you won't dominate world and science for eternity) and mathemathics.

Or, maybe a single unified language could be created... I'm sure if linguists were not baffling souch trivial issues, they could try working that one out...

And no, I'm not form New York (as my profile suggests) or any English speaking country for that matter.
- Ben Jarvis 50+
  - 0
  Aug 29 2011: i heartily agree on your first points. we need everybody to stop thinking of other people as 'others' and instead regard them as fellow humans, equally deserving. also agree with the point about labels. i've often found it strange when for example an audience applauds a tv guest based on where they are from - "so tell me where are you from?" "born and bred in new york!" *applause* - why? because he's from new york that means what? that he's a good person?
  
  re your point about english though, i get that we shouldn't place preference on english just because it happens to be our language, but english is already set up as a global language. english is the language of computers (my own operating system is in japanese but everything 'under the hood' is in english and so is every other piece of software that runs on it, it has to be), it's also the language of science as ovr 90% of the world's scientific journals are written in english, and english already has the largest vocabulary of any language and is flexible enough to be further expanded. the same cannot be said for any other language.
- Thomas Jones 100+
  - +1
  Aug 29 2011: Hi Mr. Anony mouse,
  
  [Are you related to Micky? ;-)
  
  QUOTE: "I'm all for bilinguinism Universial world language (sorry English people (stop being so egocentric) you won't dominate world and science for eternity) and mathemathics.
  
  You probably mean "ethnocentric" ... and I don't think ethnocentricity is really a factor in the process of language's evolution. English, if we want to get technical about it, is not even an "English" language; it evolved and developed. It is an accretion of countless Indo-European and other languages.
  
  As we interact with groups of people, people who use different words to describe our common world, we tend to merge our languages. If we live in isolation, we tend to create our own unique language. So, what happens, in the future, isn't really about what we "want" ... it will be about what we "do."
  
  If we interact globally, we will have a global language. It is inevitable. (I have guessed it would be an amalgamation of all languages with a strong core of English, Chinese, and Spanish. It's just a guess.)
  
  If, through circumstance, we interact more locally, in isolation, we will develop more languages than we have now. Again, it will be inevitable.
  
  Languages are not planned any more than species are, they evolve and adapt to the environment.
  
  QUOTE: "Or, maybe a single unified language could be created... I'm sure if linguists were not baffling souch trivial issues, they could try working that one out..."
  
  I do not think a created language is a viable option ... at least not for a "universal language." It has been tried many times (and is being tried, even now.)
  - Mr. Anony mouse
    
    0
    Aug 29 2011: No, unfortunately my name is disambiguation of word "anonymous" is was supposed to have no relation to Micky Mouse.
    
    Yes, I believe "ethnocentric" would be more appropriate word. I was referring to it in context of being an universial language - which is not yet, and will not neccessarily be a universial language.
    
    I believe it's invetable, world will get more globalised over time and some kind of language influence will certainly happen. Maybe "English, Chinese, Spanish" like you mention.
    
    Current thrend seems to be leaning in globalization favour. But I agree with you on that standpoint.
    
    Arguably mathemathics and computer languages are engineered, and they are pretty widespread and successful. When referring to "universial language" I was thinking more about something in context of unifying "more linguistic examples of language", logic and mathemathics for example or "universial language of mind" - if you like.
    
    Sure it would require huge ammount of processing power to create it, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. It's success would be another issue, but imagine implications of souch tool.
    - Thomas Jones 100+
      
      0
      
      Aug 29 2011: QUOTE: "No, unfortunately my name is disambiguation of word 'anonymous'"
      
      Yes, I saw that. That was why I added the ... ;-)
      
      I see your point about math and code.
      
      I was thinking more in terms of human speech - which is what I suspect Mr Wagner was speculating about.
      
      I suppose on some level we might consider music a universal (and very human) language. I am amazed at music's capacity to communicate emotion.
- Tambra Tice
  - 0
  Sep 1 2011: I whole-heartedly agree with you, Mr. Anony mouse, in regards to your comment: " Identifying ourselves as humans and inhabitants of earth is perfectly sufficient, if one wants to identify himself at all." BRAVO! Just think of how much prejudice could be erased if only EVERYONE in the world were to drop those other 'identifiers'...if there were no distinction made between Gentile/Jew, Gay/Straight, Male/Female, etc...If we all were to be able to just view ourselves AND one another as a fellow human being, period, and then if we all worked in concert with one another to improve the lives of ALL humans, what wonderful changes might that bring?
DEzső Módos
- 0
Aug 28 2011: I think we have to be bilingual, as many others said before me. The language of science is English. It is not a question. I think anyone on the globe especially in the developed countries have to learn English.
Why do we need our native language? The different languages define the brain differently. Our different language structures develop different thinking shames in us. And this means different ideas to share in our common language.
The other reason to keep our native language to identify ourself. I think we have to keep our different cultures.
Little Joker
- 0
Aug 27 2011: Maybe so! Language is a tool of communication. If we share one kind of language, the misunderstanding caused by different languages will be reduced. But it doesn't mean we will abandon our own language. I think its more likely that every people master two kinds of language.One is the mother tongue, the other is THE WORLD LANGUAGE. So we can both protect our cultural diversity and communicate better.
Moreover, if you are a Christian, you know that, in the Bible, human beings used to speak the same language. Why shouldn't we go back to the origin?
Icoonfal z
- 0
Aug 27 2011: One purpose to having language is to transfer one idea to another. Unfortunately no language have the ability to do that perfectly, which is why I believe a universal language isn't necessary.
Harold Ormsby
- +1
Aug 27 2011: In more and more places and situations (could be countries, regions, job-types, corporations and so forth) "transcending monolingualism" isn't simply economically (job, profession, business etc) expedient (or necessary) but it's also socially (personal, family, cultural etc) and politically (among social groups of all kinds) either expedient or necessary.

My prediction is that the "Three Language Solution" (already a language policy in some countries) will become essentially universal: (1) a family language, (2) a day-to-day life-in-community language and (3) a work-place language. Of course, it's possible that one language might serve all three contexts, but with globalization, having two languages is becoming inevitable, so adding on a third (and fourth) isn't a big deal now and will become even easier in the near future. And in the process, many (minority or disappearing) languages will be strengthened, not weakened or abandoned.
Charlie Shread
- +1
Aug 27 2011: If the the current trend continues, almost all people on the globe will be able to speak a common language (possibly English?) over the next generation or two.
But this does not mean other languages will (or should) die out.
One world, one language is not the solution to our problems, nor will it be the rule. However, one common language that all can use will be a very useful tool in our ever increasing toolbox.

Photography didn't kill paintings - it's better at some things and has proven to be an extremely useful tool, but photography can't give you the subjective perspective a painting can.
This is what I feel about the importance of diversity of languages - we need all these different ways of thinking and feeling and seeing the world if we really want to mature as an intelligent civilization.
The solution is to have expressive practical languages (art, technology) that can share these different perspectives to generate new ideas and experience the world as a shared community.

One language would stunt diversity and growth, and is therefore an evolutionary disadvantage; we cannot, and will never, have only one language.

(Unless, some how, all the different unique ideas in all the languages of the world [including computer coding languages, mathematics, etc] could be consolidated into one massively diverse, expressive, yet efficiently logical language... I think we would have to genetically modify our brains to hold that much abstract cognition in one mind).
- Icoonfal z
  - 0
  Aug 27 2011: I agree with you. Languages doesn't just serve one purpose, just like painting isn't just for merely depicting what is there.
  - Charlie Shread
    
    0
    Aug 27 2011: Yes precisely :)
Michael Elsmore
- 0
Aug 27 2011: Of course...one color too. Language will ultimately be a forced change. It will completly destroy cultures. Civilization will continue. International cooperation and countries will be a thing of the past, because we're one world.
Omar Trejo
- 0
Aug 27 2011: I think that having one language it's like having only one specie of plants or animals, without diversity there is no life.
Rosa Cantarero
- +1
Aug 26 2011: It seems to me that we are heading towards a common language, and I'd really love to live to see it. Languages are part of our self and our culture, but needless to say, they also separate us from other cultures.
I've read a lot of your feedbacks and I've noticed that some people worry about loosing their roots if we had a common language. Contrarily, a common language would allow us to embrace other cultures, other values and other people because we would be able to understand them. A common language doesn't mean abolishing our native and familiar language. Being bilingual; means being able to express ourselves and being understood by everyone. It means sharing our ideas, our values, even our culture in our own words, without needing translators, and making ambiguities impossible.

Load more comments…

Sign In

To join or start a conversation, you'll need to sign in. Not a member? Register Now (it's free and fast).

Live Conversations

Live Conversations are hosted by TED speakers and TED Fellows. Ask your questions and participate in the discussions on the following dates and times: