On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:28:02 +0100, Magda
wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:00:39 -0700, in rec.travel.europe, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ...
> ...
> ... Magda wrote:
> ... > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:01:48 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, john_kulp@hotmail.com (John Kulp)
> ... > arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ... >
> ... > ... On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:04:51 +0100, Mxsmanic
> ... > ... wrote:
> ... > ...
> ... > ... >EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
> ... > ... >
> ... > ... >> Especially not "Esperanto", which was designed to be a "universal"
> ... > ... >> language, but never really caught on!
> ... > ... >
> ... > ... >It has no culture to support it.
> ... > ...
> ... > ... But was used by the US military to test language learning ability
> ... >
> ... > Real languages would have been jealous had one of them been chosen instead?
> ...
> ... Why teach something practical, when you can use a language with no
> ... native-speakers at all?
>
>Good question. Maybe they have tested the speed at which the soldiers forgot the esperanto
>they learned, too.
It's amazing how many people can't read plain English and comprehend
it. I said they used Esperanto to TEST language learning ability, not
teach it as a language. The whole point was that virtually no one
would know or have even seen Esperanto and have a leg up on an ability
test. |