The Chairman. What progress has Esperanto made in the United States?
Prof. Christen. In this matter the United States is behind all other progressive countries. There have been many sporadic efforts made and there are Esperanto groups in different places from New York and Boston to Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Tacoma, etc., but as a national movement it is not what it should be, and the difficulty is, to far as I can make it out, the enormous size of the country. It is difficult for a society, without very large funds, to carry on an effective propaganda all over the country.
Then another difficulty is that Americans are not generally very much given to what I should call ethical ideas of this kind, that offer no immediate and sudden cash returns, until they really become a craze or until a certain class, perhaps, takes them up. ([4]) Let us not forget also that the American people are not so much in touch with the language difficulty as are other countries, and they do not yet appreciate the enormous use that Esperanto will be to them, for, in my opinion, no white people will benefit more from Esperanto than will the American people, chiefly because like all English-speaking nations they are very poor linguists. Then it is becoming more and more acknowledged among educational people that the English language is the only language that can not be taught. It is well known that if you put educated people from different countries together the Anglo-Saxon will invariably be the one who understands his own language least. That is due to the peculiar construction of the English language.
However, Esperanto would not be difficult for the American people because it is so scientific, so logical, and entirely free of all irregularities. Prof. Mayer, of the University of Oxford, learned Esperanto in his seventy-ninth year. I heard him make a speech in the language about six or seven days after he took it up, and he declared that Esperanto ought to be introduced into the educational system of the country. He was professor of the Latin language at the Oxford University. He declared Esperanto ought to be introduced into the schools, into the kindergartens, where children of 5 years of age should begin with Esperanto, and I hold with him, because if children were to learn Esperanto it would be of help to them in their English. It is extremely easy to learn and can be learned in a very pleasant fashion, because it is so scientific and so simple. ([5])
If children understood Esperanto, they would understand English better, and much of the time we waste in trying to teach them English would be profitably spent, for they would have something to go upon, something to compare English with, and that something so scientific and so logical as Esperanto. Take, for instance, analysis. I will not say it is difficult but I will say it is impossible to analyze an English word, because every word can be so many things. It can generally be an adjective, a noun, a verb, a preposition, a conjunction, and an interjection, that is, the same word, without any structural change, so that it is difficult for a child to discriminate and label the word. Take the word "benefited." That might be used in the past tense (I benefited), or as a past participle: (We may have benefited), and it is impossible for a child to sense the difference, and such confusion occurs to a great extent with most words in the English language.
I am a teacher of languages and have done nothing all my life but study and impart languages. If I had to teach you gentlemen, say, French upon the theory that you were going on an important mission this day 12 months, and that it was absolutely necessary that you should speak French (or any other language that I could impart you) by that time, I would say it was impossible for a number of busy men to acquire a new language inside one year; that I could not guarantee useful results, but that if you would take two months to start with for the learning of Esperanto, then I might be able to teach you the other language in the rest of the time, because Esperanto is the best foundation for learning any language. And, as I say, an English-speaking student, be he young or old, knowing Esperanto would more easily distinguish the parts of speech in English and possess a real and valuable "linguistic feeling" (which he now entirely lacks) because of his Esperanto.
The Chairman. Is Esperanto made up of the derivatives of the various languages?
Prof. Christen. I will explain that, if you like, in a very few words. Esperanto is the work of a Polish scholar, Dr. Ludovico L. Zamenhof, who started with an inspired mind. I should say he was a great genius. He had studied a large number of languages, for, as a boy, nay, as a child in the cradle, he spoke four languages, because so many different languages were actually spoken in his home town. Then at school he learned several more and it is due to this polyglotic experience and the evils caused daily by Babel in his own circle that as a child, almost, he conceived the idea of constructing a language
that should at once and for all time put an end to a foolish and intolerable situation. He must have been inspired in what he did, because he at once hit upon the only possible solution of the thing, and he hit upon it without knowing that scores of others, older and more learned, had tried the same thing and failed. His first stroke of genius was in the composing of his entire vocabulary by borrowing all his words from well-known sources. With the true insight of the genius he decided that the words of an artificial international language must be taken from international sources, and so he first of all hit upon the good idea to use first of all those words which are already common to most languages, and there are a great many more such words than we have dreamed of. He decided that that should be the starting point of his world tongue, because everybody would know those words to start with. Take the names of animals and produce that come from certain parts of the world and carry their names with them, such as elephant, tiger, lion, camel, and a great many more. Take the rose: the rose is a rose in every language; so an orange, a lemon, a nut, and tea, coffee, and tobacco, etc., are the same in most languages. They may not be spelled the same or pronounced the same, but they are international, and therefore they are Esperanto. That was the foundation of the vocabulary in Zamenhof's new language—take words that everybody would know and use them in Esperanto ([6]).
Mr. Towner. How do you determine those common names?