In part 3, we’ve seen that there are many alternatives to English. However, none of them has become the de facto international language – at least so far.
Why didn’t they flourish?
With English being so difficult and while many easier alternatives exist, why and how did English eventually become the international language? Objectively, Esperanto is a lot easier than English. I mean, a great lot. Even for non-European people. In fact, some Asians learn it as a starter to get a grasp of European languages, which I believe is a smart move. Yes, Esperanto is far easier than English. Yet, it struggles to become something more than the fad of a few enthusiasts.
Fellow Esperantists, yes I know there are hundreds of thousands of people who understand Esperanto, if not millions, depending on the claims. However, we are far from the billions we aim for, aren’t we? All this despite the fact Esperanto has been around for a staggering 140 years. We do have to take a step back, look at the big picture and ask ourselves “why?”.
Of course, there isn’t one single answer to that question. And we can make a lot of excuses.
Typewriters
Let me make a little parallel. Coincidentally enough, Esperanto has been around for exactly the same time as typing technology. Typewriters became increasingly widespread around the 1880s, exactly when Esperanto was invented.
At the time, typewriters consisted of pieces of metal striking a paper and imprinting the ink from a ribbon. That mechanical setting came with a few problems: the keys had to be put in staggered rows because of the mechanical pieces that connected them to the typing shafts inside the machine.
People also mention that the shafts would get jammed when people were typing too fast, and there is a story telling that the qwerty layout was invented to prevent that:
However, there is little to no evidence to back that claim. Instead, the keyboard was roughly designed from the alphabet to which a few rules were added, supposedly to make typing easier. The thing is, touch typing or even dactylography did not exist at the time, so they did that in a very clumsy way with the knowledge they had at the time – without realizing that a century later the whole planet, billions of people, would be typing on this thing. The result is a keyboard layout that has many imperfections, which in turn can lead to hand injuries for those who spend their lives typing. Those people generally switch to another layout later in life, and see clear improvements to their conditions after switching.
Yet, despite Qwerty being extremely clumsy and inefficient, 140 years later, we still use it. All this while many quality alternatives have been invented. Back in 1932, Dvorak invented a keyboard layout optimized for speed while typing in English: his layout is definitely worth trying, and I have used Dvorak for 20 years. I have only switched to another layout because I type daily in other languages than English and Dvorak is really a pain in French, for instance.
So, people in the 21ˢᵗ century still use the Qwerty layout and other similar layouts (Azerty for French) in other countries. We even use it on smartphones! And yes, we even kept the staggered rows, even if there are absolutely no mechanical constrains of the sort anymore. In fact, staggered rows are less than practical as they force the fingers and arms to move and stretch a lot more to reach the farthest keys:
Besides, there are many alternatives from people who have invented new keyboards from scratch, getting rid of the mechanical constraints of the original typewriters:
Sadly, only a minority of geeks and keyboard afficionados (not to say fetishists!) use that kind of keyboards.
And again, the Dvorak layout is only used by a few daring enthusiasts. In the meantime, on finger touching devices such as smartphones or tablets, where a “normal keyboard layout” makes very little sense, almost nobody uses alternatives such as Messagease, which I find absolutely brilliant:
The one-million-dollar question
Why in the world would people just not use what is actually best for them but an old, crippling, inadequate thing instead?
The first answer lies deep in human psychology. Resistance to change. Social pressure and blending in: “Millions are using this, why should I use something else? I would certainly stand out. People would whisper behind my back that I’m a weirdo.”
But there is also another reason. And it lies exactly within the title of this section. Money. Had Dvorak been a multi-millionaire, I can bet safely that we would all be using his keyboard layout today. But instead, the powerful manufacturers did everything they could to stop his layout from spreading. “Why?”, you wonder. Well, you have to put yourself in the shoes of a typewriter manufacturer. In their minds, typing faster meant one typist could be more productive – which would translate into fewer typists, and fewer typewriters sold.
The same goes for languages. If you have the dollars required to pay for ads, and sponsor lobbyists in Governments to introduce your language in schools, you can get that language learned by the majority of people within a very short time. But if you have no influence at all, why would anyone bother? Everyone speaks English, why try something else?
Finally, those who have money and power generally rule by using the old and safe “divide and conquer” strategy. If everyone across the world was able to communicate in a common language, that would make the “divide” strategy a little less effective. Thus those who have the power to push it forward don’t really want to – because they have a conflicting interest: keeping their power.
Other reasons
I strongly believe there are also other reasons why those languages didn’t become widespread. Let’s take a look at Volapük. Yes, the breakup of the community caused a huge blow. But I don’t have much doubt that the fatal blow was Esperanto. Indeed, Esperanto was much easier to learn for Europeans, especially among academics who knew Latin.
However, there are some aspects of Esperanto that I believe cause a pushback for many people, which is the main reason why it didn’t take on further. The same can be said of other conlangs. Those languages have enough serious flaws for them not to become international languages. We will study them in the next part.