The Instigator
Logan94
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Spacejoe35
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Should English be the 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 2 votes the winner is...
Logan94
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/17/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 6,969 times Debate No: 33813
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Logan94

Pro

R1 accept
Spacejoe35

Con

I accept. Thank you!
Debate Round No. 1
Logan94

Pro

English is already the primary language used in business, trade, and on the internet. A universal language it would make it easier for businesses and communication around the world. it make sense that the language should be english because a majority of the internet is in english, and is the third most commonly spoken language in the world. English is the language of business. Business is often completed in English, also the American economy is the largest economy in the world and is an english speaking country. The universal language of the world should be english.
Spacejoe35

Con

All though english has certainly become one of the biggest languages around, (Mandarin Chinese is the only language with more speakers as a first language) but it is also a very weird, contorted language that is very hard to master, and words are hard to learn, especially when some have hundreds of different meanings- such as "set" and "run". Even languages that have been made for simplicity such as Esperanto failed to become the "universal language" that L.L. Zamenhof wanted it to be. And also, convincing every nation and most people to quit their ancestral language and learn english. We would also have to have well-trained instructors and simple and easy material to teach from. History has proven multiple times that even if a universal language is successful in spreading throughout the known world, it fades fairly quickly. Some include Greek (Alexander the Great and Rome) and Latin (Later in Rome and after Rome). Modern attempts, most notably Esperanto, have also failed. Ergo, I think that making english a truly world-wide language is almost impossible, and even harder if you were to keep it around. If it was possible, I think that latin would be a good choice. Although it is often considered "dead", many languages worldwide closely related. Even though few know it well, it is fairly easy to learn, especially if your native language is a Romance language. I do agree that it would be helpful to have a universal language, and it would be extra nice if it was english, but english is not a good choice of a language for the whole world, and it is very unlikely something like this could be achieved.
Debate Round No. 2
Logan94

Pro

Making English a world language would not mean that people or other countries would have to give up their natural languages. It would just mean that it would be the language of business, and trade around the world. It would become the most known second language of people around the world, but they would no have to give up their native tongues. A primary world language would make business much easier around the world. English is becoming more and more popular throughout the years. It will become the first world language soon!
Spacejoe35

Con

You said previously that English is already the standard language for business, etc. If this is all you want it, which you have seems to have said, why are you debating that it should if it already is?
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TheDarkMuffin 3 years ago
TheDarkMuffin
Logan94Spacejoe35Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither put up too much of an argument, but Con was rather fallacious, and had a significantly higher grammar/spelling mistake density than Pro, even only intuitively rather than discernibly.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Logan94Spacejoe35Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: While con used Straw Man fallacies by saying pro wants everyone to give up their languages (ask the Native Americans about that ones), pro however ended up making no more than an argument by assertion thanks to con bringing up past attempts at an international language. Basically pro ended up falling just shy of his BoP, had there been more rounds or sources used, I suspect he would have won.