INTERPRETERS FOR JAPAN

Press, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 25091, 24 January 1947, Page 5

INTERPRETERS FOR JAPAN

Sir, —Your correspondent “K.W.” reveals his ignorance of the fluency and versatility of Esperanto' by the adjectives he uses about it. Our own language would, by his standard, also justify his description “mongrel,” aS it draws from the Latin, etc., as does Esperanto. Itjs not difficult to learn, very much the contrary, as I proved on the eve of this war by conversing at the youth hostel in Paris with French, German, and Czech hikers, j after 50 one-hour a week lessons and some application to the text-book to 1

and from work each morning during that period. It is regrettable that all those who. believe in the necessity of an international language do not enrol .under the banner of Esperanto, which can be easily learned by the average person.—Yours, etc., PHYLLIS CAMPBELL. January 23, 1947. Sir,—Does not “K.W.” know . that Basic English has been tried and fotfnd wanting? An international language must not excite national jealousies; Esperanto is neutral, so cannot. Could an Englishman forget half his native language to speak Basic? If “K.W.” had ever heard Esperanto spoken he would not call it ugly; often it has been mistaken for Italian or Spanish. We do not pretend that Esperanto is perfect (no language ever will be), but it does work, and is no more mongrel than English, which is a mixture — mostly Teutonic and Romance. Esperanto is “Basic European,” constructed on scientific principles; 75 per cent, of its roots are recognisable to an Englishman. “The spectacle of New Zealanders and Japanese conversing in Esperanto’ ’ might provide some fun for such as “K.W.”; but with the basic cause of wars (misunderstanding) eliminated, they would hardly want to go to war.—Yours, etc., J. ARNOLD HODGES. Rangiora, January 23, 1947.