The Instigator
PatriotPerson
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
Grandbudda
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

English would be the most logical choice for a one-world language

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
PatriotPerson
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,109 times Debate No: 44220
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

PatriotPerson

Pro

I think that if everyone in the world were to know one specific language (one-world language), it should be English. You, my opponent, will obviously argue that English is not the best option.

Round 1 is acceptance only.
Grandbudda

Con

It's highly presumptuous to make English an official world language. One could make the argument that Mandaton Chineese should be the one language for the world. Since more people speak Chineese than any other in the world that would make sense. I don't think that there should be one official language for the world. We should have to learn one another's languages to foster better relations between countries.
Debate Round No. 1
PatriotPerson

Pro

I would like to point out a few grammatical mistakes in my opponent's first argument (Yes, I am a Grammar Nazi).
-He spells "Mandarin" like "Mandaton".
-He spells "Chinese" like "Chineese".

I will point out the benefits of a one-world language speaking English.

1. Many countries already speak English, or have a large population of English-speakers. Some of these countries include the USA, Canada, Jamaica, UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and India. Many other countries have languages with a higher amount of native speakers, but sill have a significant amount of English-speaking citizens.

Pakistan - 88,690,000 total English speakers
Nigeria - 79,000,000 total English speakers
Philippines - 52,292,884 total English speakers
Germany - 51,584,000 total English speakers
Bangladesh - 29,398,158 total English speakers

As you can see, most countries already have a large English-speaking population. (http://en.wikipedia.org...) I would go into demographics of more major countries, but that will be saved for later.

Present your argument(s).
Grandbudda

Con

I thank my opponent for his help with my grammar and spelling. However I think he needs a civic lesson on the respect for other cultures and customs. It's true that English is spoken in many places around the world. This I won't deny, what I'm saying is that it's fundamentally wrong for us to force our language as a one world language. That borders on fascism to think that we can dictate to the world what language they will speak. I'm a proud American but I also recognize that other people and customs must be respected as well. If countries wish to as is the case with airports around the globe that use English as a common language that's fine. But we can't dictate to anyone what they can or can't enforce in their own sovereign nation. The whole idea of globalization kind of gives me the creeps anyway. No to one world language!
Debate Round No. 2
PatriotPerson

Pro

Bro, you've got me all wrong. I don't THINK there should be a one-world language, I just think English would be the most logical option if there were to be one...so that cancels all of your arguments in Round 2.

To the readers and voters: Con has wasted his round 2 by spewing false impressions about me and not even defending his side of the resolution.

I will now present my second argument.

2. English is similar to many other languages, so it won't be too hard too learn for most people.
Most English words are based on Latin and Greek roots, as are other languages. Spanish, for example, is highly based on these roots, and is already somewhat similar to English.
Grandbudda

Con

Excuse me friends but apparently my opponent is now trying to say that he is not for a one world language. I'm confused as it is stated that "English would be the most logical choice for a one world language" is his stance. I'm simply saying that is blatantly ridiculous that somehow you're going to wave your magic wand and people around the world will agree to this idea. I'm sure that everyone in their own country would love the world to speak their language. It's not surprising that someone from the US thinks everyone should speak English. However reality tells me that it won't happen and therefore is a ridiculous folly to propose it in the first place. Perhaps my opponent would like everyone to drive a certain speed in their country, or attend a specific church or marry whomever he decides is ok to marry. I think however that people will speak whatever language they need to in order to grow and prosper and can do so without us dictating to them what, how or in what language thy should speak. As for my opponent's attempts to dismiss my arguments I think quite the contrary that he has dismissed his entire case. His premise is foolhardy and his argument is weak and unrealistic, therefore it's a losing one.
Say no to a one world language!
Debate Round No. 3
PatriotPerson

Pro

I would like to begin my argument with a picture depicting my current feelings.


My resolution says that English WOULD be the most LOGICAL one-world language, not English SHOULD BE the one-world language! Can you not get that in your head?

And hello? Convincing people is what you're supposed to do in DEBATES! Welcome to DEBATE.org, genius!

And you think making up random crap about me with no validitity is all ship-shape? I don't wanna be a dictator, decide speed limits, or force-marry people!

I DO NOT WANT A ONE-WORLD LANGUAGE, GENIUS. I'm just saying that IF and pay attention to the IF there were to be one, it SHOULD be English.


Now that I've gotten my anger out I hope my opponent will get some sense into his head of what I'm arguing. And I also hope that he can make some valid arguments to help his side of the resolution.
Grandbudda

Con

So you're saying that your opinion is that English would be the best one world language. Big deal, that's your opinion! Opinions are fine but it doesn't amount to a constructive argument. I have put my side our there and have repeatedly stated that you're wrong. The evidence that you're wrong is that no accepted international organization has thought it a good idea. I mean a one world language, the very idea is ridiculous. I can't imagine a more idiotic mundane problem posed as whether or not you think English is the best language for the whole world to use. I'm new to this site and have just started posting arguments and don't need your condescending words. Let's just leave it here: your stance is ludicrous and I completely reject that it could or would ever occur.
Debate Round No. 4
PatriotPerson

Pro

I reject the idea of a one-world language, too. I'm simply saying English WOULD be the best choice if there were to be one. If I could bold, underline, highlight, circle, and draw arrows pointing to thye "WOULD", I would.


Why you should vote Pro: Con has wasted his debate ranting on false accusations about me and not backing up his side of the resolution with any facts or reasoning. No matter how many times I tell Con about the WOULD, he doesn't seem to get it into his head. Now, it is understandable that he would bomb a debate since he is new to this site. I have included facts and data to support my end of the resolution whil Con has used no such thing, all he does is rant.
Grandbudda

Con

As I have said repeatedly the whole idea of a one world language is ridiculous and I reject it on its face. Therefore whether my opponent would or could the one world language just doesn't fly. He has yet to prove why it would work or how it would work or if it would work or why it would work. All he does is continue to insist that a one world language WOULD logically be English and I see it differently. I think it's highly presumptuous of my opponent to think that we can impose our will to make it easier for us to communicate with the world. The whole idea again is ridiculous and just won't work. There are too many cultures, languages and customs in many countries they speak multiple languages in order to get along. If anything we need to reach more people by speaking more languages not fewer ones. I encourage you to vote contrary as my opponent has failed to demonstrate his position and my position is quite clear.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
PatriotPerson
How about you ain't gonna get me banned, like you want, so keep dreaming and shut your trap.
Posted by Grandbudda 3 years ago
Grandbudda
I wonder if the people of the world could vote on whether they should speak English how they would vote. I think that they would vote it down and that's why it doesn't make sense.
Posted by PatriotPerson 3 years ago
PatriotPerson
Let's play a game of shut the f*ck up. You go first.
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
Sorry for the repeat it was a mistake but yeah, shut up
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
@Patriotjuevos
Shut up
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
@Patriotjuevos
Shut up
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
@Patriotjuevos
Shut up
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
Yes your right... It makes me wonder what else was wrong in that book I read.
Posted by PatriotPerson 3 years ago
PatriotPerson
Thank you for your comments in my favor, Jifpop, but I'm afraid your China vs. USA on English speakers is incorrect.
Posted by Jifpop09 3 years ago
Jifpop09
I have to agree with Patriot on this. English is spoken everywhere. More people speak English in China then in the US. You can use this one Patriot, I'll be your reliable source.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
PatriotPersonGrandbuddaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: lol cons conduct was awful, i feel for pro. his s&g were just as bad. he also broke the rules of round1 acceptance only. fail con. his best arguments were fallacies lmao
Vote Placed by Lordgrae 3 years ago
Lordgrae
PatriotPersonGrandbuddaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ignored the resolution, so he fails in arguments and conduct. However, conduct is a tie, because it was sortof obnoxious for Pro to point out specific spelling mistakes. Pro was the only one who sited anyone.
Vote Placed by Ryuuikari 3 years ago
Ryuuikari
PatriotPersonGrandbuddaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: The conduct for both participants went down the drain a little bit as the debate neared its end; it just turned into a shouting match. Unfortunately Con did not make any arguments for his stance and greatly misinterpreted the debate title. The debate was "English would be the most logical choice for a one-world language" not "English should be the world's only language". At no point did Pro say he wanted a one-world language to exist. Therefore Pro wins for delivering points relevant to the actual debate title.