Esperato lovers speak out
Although the title does not do justice to the actual situation in today's world, I wish to congratulate you for David Newnham's article ("World reluctant to embrace Esperanto," July 18, page 9). As a speaker (and lover) of Esperanto since my teens, I've appreciated its rare accuracy.
However, he's mistaken when he says that "Esperanto is probably the only language to have no irregular verbs." How could you, in Taipei, print such a sentence? Chinese has no irregular verbs either. It consists, just as Esperanto, of completely invariable blocks that combine without restriction.
Esperanto's Eurocentricity is less marked than Newnham suggests. While the roots on which the vocabulary is based are European, they combine according to patterns you find in Asian languages. In both Chinese and Esperanto, you derive "first" from "one" and "my" from "I," something alien to European tongues.
Or consider words like "foreigner" or "autonomous." The Chinese who learns English has to memorize them as new, separate entities. In Esperanto, eksterlandano, "foreigner," consists of the same three elements as its Chinese equivalent waiguoren: ekster, "outside," land, "country" and ano, "a human being (belonging to...)."
Similarly, memstara, "autonomous", is an exact transposition of the Chinese zili (stara "who stands" = li
I've noticed also that my experience -- I was more fluent in Esperanto after 10 months than in English after 10 years -- is shared by many people all over the world. For many decades, Esperanto used to be derided in the press. The trend appears to be changing. More and more honest articles are being published. But Newnham's stands out for its wealth of accurate information.
Claude Piron
Switzerland
The reason why Esperanto is not widely known in England and Wales (and probably the rest of the world) is that professional language teachers regard it as a menace to their jobs, or beneath their dignity because it is not complicated, or think that Esperanto teachers are heretics. It has long been suppressed in UK schools, and hardly anyone emerges from the system with knowledge of it.
The British Esperanto Association struggled for many years to have it examinable for the Certificate of Secondary Education, and finally for the General Certificate in Secondary Education (GCSE). The Northern Examining Association successfully marketed the GCSE in Esperanto, but in 1989 the Modern Languages Working Group, consisting of the leaders of professional language teachers, omitted to mention Esperanto when it recommended a list of languages (19 of them, from Arabic to Urdu) to the then minister of education, for inclusion in the emergent National Curriculum.
Since 1990, when the National Curriculum came into force, it has therefore been illegal to teach Esperanto as a first foreign language in schools in England and Wales, and this caused it to be ignored by schools in the rest of the UK.
As a second foreign language it may be taught, but timetabling for that purpose is so difficult that it would be true to say that millions of UK adults by now are unaware of the only successful means of speaking or writing to non-English-speakers on a basis of equality. The GCSE in Esperanto was withdrawn in 1995 because of a lack of candidates.
David Curtis
England
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS