LANGUAGE POLICY PRINCIPLES OF EU
for promoting language learning and linguistic diversity
in a non-discriminative and most economical way

Introductory remarks about the Commission Staff Working Paper
[Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity. Brussels, 13.11.2002]

The Barcelona objectives about learning at least two foreign languages mean a very heavy economical charge on the peoples of Europe and in practice create not only political but also very heavy economical discriminations among the nations with different mother tongues (see Supplement I).

The whole language problem must be thoroughly thought over again. Hereunder, the basic principles of a non-discriminative and most economical language policy for the multilingual European Union are summarized.

I. Basic goals

For promoting language learning and linguistic diversity in the European Union three main goals - in rather close accord with the widely spread ideas of the the European Council - have to be followed:

1. promoting language learning to attain mutual understanding and increasing solidarity between the peoples and inhabitants of the present and future European Union,
2. conserving the present linguistic diversity and supporting the further development of the mother tongues and the ethnic and national cultures of Europe,
3. conserving, further developing and widening the common European culture.

Recognizing and wishing to promote the development process in the political, cultural, scientific, educational, industrial, commercial etc. fields in global scale, the following generalization is needed, too:

1. widely promoting ideas similar to those listed above for Europe, considering the much desired evolution of peaceful and friendly contacts among the peoples of the whole world.

In the following, on the basis of the above basic goals, some basic ideas, tasks and data about, and related to, learning and conserving languages and cultures, which may significantly facilitate the concrete development, are considered.

II. A common official EU-language and its advantages

The European Union needs one common official language for all EU citizens and institutions, for the sake of easy co-operation of, and forming a high degree solidarity among, all citizens of the new common fatherland, the European Union, but not hurting the further living of the historic solidarity among the people (nations and national minorities), so in the Member States, as in the linguistic regions or communities; inclusively, at any time when needed, also direct individual and - in gatherings or through radio, TV etc. - the public verbal communication between any leader and any citizen - or even the whole population - of EU, without the need of any interpretation.

Therefore, the European Union

1. ensure the initial and continuous teaching of the common official language of EU in its whole territory, to each generation one after the other, not damaging the use of the mother tongues, either official or not, in the Member States and the linguistic regions,
2. financially support and politically protect the conservation, development and freedom of the private use of the other tongues of all of its citizens, and also the official use of the mother tongues in all matters within the countries and lower level administrative territories (regions, departments, cities, districts, villages etc.), where their native speakers attain a certain number, or percentage of the total population,
3. ensure the right to the citizens to learn and use, besides the official languages, any language(s) according to their free election.

III. Election criteria for the common official language of EU

The common official language of EU

1. be applicable for any internationally necessary private, political, economical, scientific, technical etc. communication on both colloquial and professional level,
2. could be learnt most economically for both the individual and the whole EU society,
3. should be the most acceptable alternative for the future common official language of the whole world, too.

IV. The two realistic alternatives for the common official language of EU

There are two, not official but realistic, candidates (see Supplement II) for the common official language of EU:

1. English, because of the worldwide economic, industrial, scientific, technological, informatical, political, military etc. power of the nations whose dominant mother tongue it is. Its learning requires very big natural efforts, which however can be expressed in money, just as the direct financial costs of teaching. Its use results in heavy political and economic discrimination between persons and nations with English mother tongue, on one hand, and those with other mother tongue, on the other.
2. Esperanto, because of its linguistic qualities (applicability not only in political and business matters, but also in humane and cultural contacts), political neutrality (not belonging to any nation or ethnos) and easy learning (requiring, as an average, one tenth of the time, needed by any national language). Its use results in not any economic or other discrimination among people or nations of different mother tongues.

V. Conclusions

All the facts, statements and arguments (particularly the very high natural and financial efforts needed for language learning!), presented in Supplement I and shortly referred here above, require a serious reconsideration of the whole language problem. Therefore all the ideas, inclusively also the list of concrete questions (a) to (g), published in the Commission Staff Working Paper [Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity - Consultation, Brussels, 13. 11. 2002], must be essentially revised. It makes not any sense to answer them now.

It is clear, however, that EU highly needs one common official language, modern, expressive, but very easy and cheap to learn, and non-discriminative to any nation or citizen, either politically or economically. Such and only such a language is fully suitable for the direct communication among any citizens of different mother tongues, for creating a European solidarity among the peoples of EU, besides conserving their mother tongues, i.e. the linguistic diversity. The only realistic alternative for such a language is Esperanto, which is not only a medium for international communication, but its knowledge means a very useful basis for significantly easier learning of other languages, too, and which, besides its communicative values, has developed also its own literature and scientific and cultural applications.
......................................................................................................................

Supplement I Heavy economical problems about the languages of EU and their solution

1. Economic judgement of the realization of the Barcelona objectives about learning at least two foreign languages

What are the economical consequences of ensuring that "all citizens of the Member States" (= all citizens of EU) "are able to communicate in at least two languages in addition to their mother tongue(s)"? For the sake of easier following, all the data, just hereunder and in this whole supplementary study, are given in round numbers and the calculations are much simplified and not detailed, though the orders of magnitude are correct.

Learning an ethnic or national foreign language requires, as an average, about 2000 working hours/learner (spent in courses, with private teachers, individually etc.) for attaining a good level communication in speaking, reading, understanding and writing, so about everyday matters as about topics of their own profession. Nevertheless, learning a second, third etc. language means a shorter time requirement.

If only two such languages, as minimum requirement of the Barcelona Council, are learnt, the total number of hours, required by an average person, to learn them is 2000 + 1600 = 3600 working hours/learner. The financial value of one hour can be taken as 5 EUR/hour, so the financial equivalent of the whole time will be 16.800 EUR/learner. (It must be noted, however, that, if the young one spends one or two working years with language learning, it means that they lose the last one or two years from their active period before pension or an earlier death, when customarily the income is highest.)

It follows from the Barcelona objectives that, after a transitional period, each year roughly 7 million (preferably young) people must appear with the required level of knowledge of at least two foreign languages, because it is the number of people of a one-year generation in EU with 500 million inhabitants. So the total financial equivalent of their learning is equal to 118 milliard EUR/year. Since most people need courses or private teachers, this sum increases to about 130 milliard EUR/year. (For learning three languages with 2000 + 1600 + 1400 = 5000 hours/learner, the financial equivalent of the whole learning would be 188 milliard EUR/year.)

For comparison: The defence budget of NATO Europe in 2000 was about 165 milliard USD [A survey of the defence industry p. 4, Diagram 1. The Economist, July 20, 2002].

Tax to support the learners. The number of people effectively paid for work is about 200 million in EU. Since learning two languages takes roughly two working years (even if distributed to several years), this number decreases to 186 million. They must be charged by an income tax enough to support the learners. This means an average tax as high as 699 EUR/year/earner (where earner means a person with income for his or her own work).

In case of three languages, whose learning time is 2000 + 1600 + 1400 = 5000 hours/learner (nearly three working years), the number of earners is 180 million, and the tax is 1044 EUR/year/earner.

It is now rather clear that learning languages by the whole population of EU will postulate enormous individual and social, natural and financial efforts, to be repeated each year ad infinitum. It is obvious now that the whole language problem must be thoroughly thought over again. Therefore, a concise general survey with the realistic optimum solution is presented hereunder.

2. Numerical economic comparison of the two alternatives of learning one common official EU-language

1. English. Systematically learning it requires, as an average, 2000 hours/learner, whose financial equivalent is 10.000 EUR/learner. From among the 440 million citizens of EU whose mother tongue is not English, the number of persons in a new generation of one year is about 6 million. Their learning English requires 12 milliard hours/year, whose financial equivalent is 60 milliard EUR/ year. (European milliard = US billion.) But because most of people need also teachers, about 6 milliard must be added, so the final sum is at least 66 milliard EUR/year. (It is 40% of the cost of defence by NATO Europe!) This sum is to be paid by only the countries of non-English mother tongue, because for English, as foreign language, the UK and Ireland pay nothing.

Tax needed to financially support the learners of English is obviously heavy. The number of effectively paid working people (earners) in EU is about 200 million, without the United Kingdom and Ireland about 176 million, and without the language-learning generation only 170 million. Therefore, in the non-English countries of EU an additional average income-tax must be paid, as high as 390 EUR/year/earner. Obviously, UK and Ireland earners pay nothing.

This tax can be avoided only, if the same number of hours as those dedicated to language learning, will be taken from other studies, as mathematics, physics, informatics, economics, other professional and cultural subjects and the mother tongue, resulting in a considerably lower level of knowledge of the young people in the non-English countries of EU, resulting in a considerable relative loss of GDP.

2. Esperanto. Sistematically learning it requires, as an average, 200 working hours/learner, equivalent to 1000 EUR/learner. A yearly young generation of the whole EU is about 7 million persons. Their learning Esperanto needs 1,4 milliard hours/year, whose financial equivalent is 7 milliard EUR/year. Plus 0,7 milliard for teachers results in 7,7 milliard EUR/year. It is only 4,7% of the defence cost by NATO Europe.

Tax to support learners of Esperanto is distributed among 200 million people, so it is only 38 EUR/year/earner, to be paid without any national discrimination in the whole EU.

3. Esperanto with one or two national languages

If the Barcelona objective is accepted about learning at least two languages, but one of them, to be learned first, is Esperanto, the costs of language learning can be calculated in the following way.

Esperanto as the common official language plus one (or two) national language(s), foreign in each respective Member State, without discrimination, would require 200 + 1600 (+ 1400) = 1800 (or 3200) working hours/learner. Its financial equivalent is 9000 (16000) EUR/learner. For 7 million learners, it is 63 (112) milliard EUR/year. With the cost of teaching, the final result is 70 (120) milliard EUR/year, distributed in the whole EU without any national discrimination.

For supporting the learners of the two (three) languages, the roughly 193 (186) million earners (tax payers) will pay 363 (645) EUR/year/earner.

4. The language costs of the EU institutions

The language cost of the present EU institutions is insignificant, a few hundred million EUR/year, i.e. easily maintained from a tax of a few EUR/year/earner. For the language staff members, with their not average level, but highly qualified language talents, learning Esperanto for internal communication means no problem. Nevertheless, the knowledge of the national languages of EU here will always be necessary, since the different central decisions and laws of EU must be translated to the languages of the Member States and vice versa. Also, contact with outside persons, not sufficiently knowing Esperanto, requires, that matters could be discussed in their mother tongues.

5. Supply of Esperanto teachers

With the introducton of Esperanto a great number of teachers is required. Nevertheless, they can be produced very quickly from the present language teachers. Language teachers have not an average language talent, but they have special talent for learning languages and at the same time they have already learned the methodology of teaching languages. For them a 200 hour course to learn Esperanto and begin to teach it is obviously more than enough. After some introductory hours they even can continue learning without any course. As the experiences in Eastern Europe proved, after the change of the political system, masses of the teachers of Russian learned another language and after a relatively short time they were capable to teach English or German or French etc. on the required level. A teacher can teach Esperanto to about ten times more children than another language, because the necessary learning time is ten times shorter. The same is the situation with the present other intellectuals, engineers, scientists, bureaucrates etc. who already know some foreign language.

Supplement II Some characteristic data of English and Esperanto

English started from Old English, a West-Germanic branch of the Indo-European languages, has been developed in a spontaneous ("natural") way by its own society and highly influenced by other Indo-European languages, mostly by French, Latin, Greek, Scandinavian.

It is the native language of approximately 400 million people, (about 6% of the 6,4 billion inhabitants of the world), mostly concentrated in the English speaking countries: Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, United Kingdom, United States etc. From which 60 million in Europe. About the total number of its speakers there are no reliable statistics concerning their effective level of knowledge. It is widely used in international economy, science and politics through an increasing linguistic elite.

Its grammar is relatively simple, but with a high number of exceptions. The spelling is most complicated and irregular. The many idioms are very special, the number of phonemes is high (44), many of them hardly pronounceable and distinguishable by foreigners. Therefore it is hardly understandable even by listeners speaking languages of the same origin.

Its literature, original and translated, belletristic and professional, printed and electronic, as is widely known, at present is the richest in the world and rapidly developing.

Learning English by anybody, having average language talent, needs roughly 2000 working hours (with course or private teacher(s) and/or in autodidactic way), resulting in a satisfactory level of speaking, writing and understanding about everyday topics and one's professional field, but not comparable to that of native speakers, with the exception of a few language talents.

Esperanto is a consciously ("artificially") simplified modern offspring of the Indo-European languages, mainly based on Latin, Greek, French, English, German and Russian. Since its initiation, it has been developed by the Esperanto society itself, in both a spontaneous and a regulated way, as all modern languages, but conserving its logical, simple and highly expressive character.

It is mostly a learnt language, though it has native speakers as well. Esperanto speakers can be found on each continent and in most of the countries, with highest concentration in Europe. Each year thousands of local and about 300 international meetings, conferences, cultural arrangements and a few continental and world congresses are arranged. Private and literary communication is intensive through the Internet, too.

Its grammar is very simple, but powerful, with no exceptions. The spelling is unambiguous for the clearly distinguishable 28 phonemes. It has well defined affixes for word-creation. Esperanto can be more or less understood by the speakers of its source languages and many others.

Its literature contains translations of thousands of poetic and prosaic pieces from the Sumer-Akkadian Gilgamesh epos, through the ancient Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Greek and Latin works, to the medieval and the modern world literature. The original Esperanto literature is comparable to those of minor nations, but its authors represent cultures of five continents. The applicability of Esperanto for sciences and technology has been proved, too.

Learning Esperanto on the same level, as mentioned about English, requires about one tenth of the time needed by English, i.e. 200 working hours.

back to main page of Symposium
back to documents' list