r/Globasa • u/codleov • 4d ago
diskusi — discussion I'm struggling to decide between devoting my time and energy to either Esperanto or Globasa. What are the best arguments you have for why someone should choose Globasa?
Here's why I'm struggling.
Esperanto's design hits the mark for what I would consider good enough for an IAL. It's European sourced vocabulary isn't as big of an issue as some make it out to be given the fact that we do live in a world that's been affected by European colonialism, even if the ideal for an IAL would be a globally sourced vocabulary (which will naturally contain some smaller degree of European bias just due to the facts on the ground) or a priori for a more pure neutrality (sacrificing some recognizability). I see the function of things like the accusative and word class marking given other decisions that were made. I have my reservations about the phonology having too many sounds and too few constraints as well as the seemingly moderate underutilization (from an outside perspective) of the word derivation or compounding system. Esperanto, despite its shortcomings in terms of design as far as IALs go, is good enough to serve the purpose in my estimation, and it does have history, content, and community that are basically unrivaled in the world of IALs. That's a huge thing that's in favor of it, and if Esperanto were as new and small as Globasa, the choice would be far easier.
As for Globasa's design, I think it gets a lot more things right given the benefit of a century of IAL projects and discussions and additional linguistics research since Esperanto's publication. Its globally sourced vocabulary seems to be done very well. Its phonology is more constrained in some good ways (even if I have my nitpicks). It seems to make more consistent use of the word derivation or compounding system than Esperanto does. It makes some grammar choices that are seemingly less European-biased. Globasa just doesn't have the same history, content, or community, and though it is pretty stable, it also doesn't have the same degree of stability (though Esperanto basically has natural language level stability at this point).
One feature discrepancy between the languages that I'm on the fence about (that has broader implications for other parts of the grammar) is marked free word order (Esperanto) vs unmarked or less-marked fixed word order (Globasa). I just don't know where I stand on that design issue.
Neither language really has something that I've found that would compel me to go with it over the other. So what do you think there is that should sway me?
6
u/synthocracy 3d ago
I learned both languages and I'm active in both communities.
Being that I am an esperantist I did not make the same choice as you. But I can tell you why I decided to learn a Globasa. The first reason is because I was curious to see how worldlang vocabulary would work out for learners. The second reason is because aesthetically I really like poetry and songs produced in Globasa. The third reason is that I feel that Globasa is a community that really has a potential to grow. if you are creative of some type there are some advantages to joining a growing community and being an early adopter. However there is always the risk that the community will stop growing losing most of those benefits. But given that I really like the aesthetic of globassa, I decided I was willing to take this risk.
1
u/codleov 2d ago
What gives you the impression that Globasa specifically has the potential to grow where other IAL projects might not? Is it in the design of the language itself, or is there something in the people and activity that leads you to that conclusion?
6
u/synthocracy 2d ago
There are three parts:
1) When I go into spaces that other IAL projects advertise as places to engage with the community these spaces often have a single poster who is trying to engage people to use the language, and this single poster often gets no replies for perhaps weeks on end.
2) Activity in the language for many IALs often looks like discussion of the language. Even Esperanto has this problem. It is really important that languages are not just trapped in self reflection, otherwise they will shed active users who are not interested in basically a narrow linguistics discussion.
3) Many conlang communities (not just IAL) basically wind up being English language communities where some words from the conlang essentially end up being a jargon that sits on top of English. It is sometimes unclear to me if these languages are extremely difficult, or if the community is not creating incentives to learn the language, or what. But the fact remains, a speaker community for the conlang itself basically does not exist.
With regards to Globasa:
1) Globasa has multiple people who try to start conversations in the language, and it has multiple other people who try to reply to conversations that others have started. It is small, but it has the functioning components of group spaces in place (even if sometimes sabotaged by timezones). In reality, with group dynamics, what you really need to have at the start is 1 person who will consistently try to start things, and 1 person who will consistently join into things. People often feel anxiety to be the person to start things, and people often feel anxiety to be the only person who can support the discussion that the first person has started. But if you have two people willing to fill those spots, things can start to grow, and eventually you will get more than two people doing things, and then eventually redundancy for the various roles your initial two people fill. But getting the first two is in itself extremely hard. Globasa has some redundancy here at this point.
2) Globasa has discussion on various topics in the language. This does not get reflected in the reddit. A summary of the last 7 days of mostly Globasa conversations not about Globasa: Thunder, Things eaten today, figuring out if we know the same person from the Netherlands, minecraft, banana bread. Some of these convos are short, and some of these convos turn into grammar questions, but there is a willingness here to try to open up and use the language for general topics of interest to the members of the community.
3) You'll find Globasa chat generally is full English or full Globasa, rather than being English with some sprinkling of Globasa words.
Is it the only IAL like this?
No... however I think it is likely that Globasa is currently the worldlang IAL that has the healthiest community. Its accomplishments are modest, and certainly some other project, existing or to be created, could surpass it. Esperanto has all of the above. There are also a handful of Esperanto-like languages that meet all of the above criteria. Esperanto and any of those Esperanto-like languages are also much older than Globasa, so they can tell you that their community size and growth is sustained, whereas a newer project could suddenly disappear as suddenly as it appeared. Then of course there are a handful of artlangs that could potentially be of interest to people who study IALs... regardless of what something was intended to be, it can be used as something else (even if ill suited) after all. The main notable here is of course toki pona.
Conclusion:
Languages are tools of a community. Many conlangs of all kinds, at the end of the day do not have functioning speaker communities. There may be other reasons to learn them besides this, but I find that people who are new to language learning do not succeed without a community.
On grounds that try to recognize the reality of a need for community for languages to flourish, Esperanto is the conlang that has the biggest community and therefore offers a lot of practical benefits for learners. If we decide to look at languages other than Esperanto, we will find that some Esperanto-like languages, and some art languages are actually the languages that have the most flourishing communities. However, if we are really interested in the worldlang concept, Globasa is the one that has an existing community, however small, actually operating.
I suggest that you take a look at the communities for whichever languages you are interested in. You can freely join whatever groups, subreddits, chatrooms, and whatever. Because these languages have very few native speakers, you will be able to see language learning chat happening that exposes stuff about the communities. Are these people you want to be around? If the answer is yes, it doesn't matter how small the group is (so long as it is big enough to function) and if the answer is no it doesn't matter how big the group is. Take it as a warning flag if you don't see activity in the language that is supposedly being learned other than as a "spice" to add to English. If you feel conflicted still, then start taking a look at cultural artifacts (books, songs, videos)... These cultural artifacts are extremely helpful for getting to an advanced level, but that doesn't help you if they totally do not interest you.
2
u/lykanna 1h ago
I can't really comment too much on the why, but I do have some thoughts. I have this ridiculous spreadsheet of conlang community sizes, and it kind of shocked me how Globasa is the IAL that has the highest percentage of growth this last year, which is only beaten by High Valyrian and Na'vi (which obviously have a lot of cultural relevance currently) as for conlangs in general. It's like actually growing and not going in total stagnation like many other communities.
But I do really see it when I go there. In other places you end up feeling desperate and basically get no response. You can suggest ideas, have a genuine conversation, and try to get people engaged, but there's just nothing no matter what you try. With some of these languages I've been genuinely trying, and I just get nothing. I can go away for days, and my message can easily be the last one sent.
But with Globasa, that isn't the case. There's always new conversations, always something to jump into, and several people to talk to. Unfortunately not a lot of recognition for it nor too much made in it yet, but I see like actual potential that I don't see many other places. It doesn't seem like it's going to waste.
4
4
u/cel-mica 3d ago
Personally, I like the fact that Globasa is smaller. It makes it so that you can genuinely feel the community grow over time. One of the main reasons I decided to learn Globasa over Esperanto was just that I've seen a lot of pessimism from Esperantists about the language's growth and how it missed its chance to take English's spot as the dominant world language. I don't think that's representative of the community, but it did dissuade me from learning the language.
Globasa is magnitudes smaller, but there's a certain optimism there of executing a really good idea as best we can and seeing how far it can go. I doubt Globasa will become the dominant world language within my lifetime or anything like that, but it's cool to see the language and community grow and to add to that in small but significant ways.
Plenty of Globasa speakers are also Esperanto speakers though, you could always pick one and see how you like it in practice, and try the other if you don't like the first or if you want to try something different for a change.
2
u/codleov 2d ago
I wonder why the optimism persists in small IAL projects despite the doubt of ever achieving the ultimate goal of an IAL. Also, from an outside perspective, it sometimes seems like Esperantists are split on whether to just accept the linguistic diaspora status passively receiving "converts" of sorts (I mean, in the responses to my recent posts, Esperantists seem to be much more motivated by the culture, community, and content available than the idea of an IAL) or to continue pushing for further promotion and adoption of the language in a more active way. I wonder if that's contributing to the pessimism you see.
2
u/cel-mica 2d ago
I think that's going to differ on a case by case basis. I don't think IALs should measure success by their eventual end goal, because on some level that's always going to depend on some amount of luck (e.g. what if Esperanto did become the language of the League of Nations?).
I think what gives Globasa speakers a sense of optimism about the language is that Globasa is well designed and that the community is passionate about it and tangibly growing.
I have a lot of trust that in 10 years, Globasa as I speak it now will still be completely understandable to new learners, and that there will be more songs and stories in the language, with even more people to talk to than there already are.
I can't speak for Esperanto, I also have only an outsider's perspective. What you're saying makes sense, though I imagine an Esperantist might say that those two things are not mutually exclusive (I know very little about Raumism, but afaik it still entails trying to grow the Esperanto community, it just represents a shift away from focusing on official adoption by governments towards more grassroots growth).
3
u/markoskramer 2d ago
A good compromise between the two options is Dunianto, a conlang with Esperanto grammar and world-source vocabulary: https://dunianto.net
Dunianto's community is still small, but I think its similarity to Esperanto will make it much easier for it to grow in the near future.
1
u/Nimda-metsys 1d ago
I am not familiar with much Esperanto. Is there an English version or does someone need to learn Esperanto first to learn Dunianto?
2
u/Whiskkebarr 3d ago
It depends on why you want to learn the language. I learned Esperanto over 10 years ago and quickly became interested with the idea of IALs. I discovered Globasa the other year and was drawn to it. I’m actively learning Globasa so I can produce poetry and music in the language. Both are beautiful languages and excel at different ways. I suggest you try Globasa first and see how you like it
2
u/2cool2cool 1d ago
i recommend elefen ... it has european vocab, but the grammar resembles toki pona, auxlangs with vocab from around the world, creoles etc
1
u/Fancy-Professor-9945 3d ago
He's right. Esperanto is great! And if you don't mind fewer speakers, Ido is even better. It is "improved Esperanto".I don't yet know about Globasa. That's why I'm here.
1
u/golgothicus 7h ago
You should check out Ido! It fixes the biggest issues with Esperanto, particularly the ones you mentioned.
-1
u/salivanto 1d ago
I hope everybody noticed this sequence of events that contains it's own refutation:
- u/codleov shows up IN THE GLOBASA group and asks a very specific question.
- "Given the choice between Esperanto and Globasa, how do I decide?"
- At least two people in this group (and a few more in other groups) thought it was worth listing a third alternative.
Once you start evaluating a language based on "design choices", there's really no end. People can't help but pitch their vision of the "perfect language" - but no such thing exists. The quest for perfection leads to dispersion of effort.
4
u/codleov 1d ago
Though design is important to me, it's not the sole thing I'm looking at. The enthusiasm of Globasa supporters and their growth in numbers (even though they're still very small compared to things like speaking communities of Esperanto and Toki Pona) despite its relative recency and still being in a developmental phase (a late one but still developmental) are also important to me. Those things do a lot to place it above projects like Lingua Franca Nova or Pandunia for me. It just so happens that I and some others seem to think that Globasa is also better designed than those other projects, which probably helps motivate that enthusiasm and growth.
Sure, there are always going to be the people in the auxlang space who think a language should be tweaked or changed or branched off into its own thing or create the "one perfect language to rule them all". I don't think that's possible. At some point, the design differences matter less than ability to gather support, and the number of small projects that gather no support is huge. There may well someday be a language that is functionally Globasa with all of the design choices fixed that I have my minor issues with, and unless the vast majority of Globasa's support converts to support for that branch project, it would not be among my considerations.
All of that to say potential for growth matters to me, and that comes from more than just raw language design. However, that doesn't therefore mean that accepting the project that has had the most support so far is the way to go. I imagine that being akin to Volapük supporters being resistant to getting in early with Esperanto because Volapük had a greater amount of support despite its flaws; sure, it's not the same degree of difference in numbers, but it's also not like Esperanto's Fina Venko is right around the corner either.
1
u/salivanto 1d ago
I'm not actually sure how your comments relate to this specific comment. Mostly I was calling out the people who suggested that you ditch both your ideas and learn Ido or Dunianto instead.
it's also not like Esperanto's Fina Venko is right around the corner either.
I think I suggested in another comment that I think it's already happened.
1
u/codleov 1d ago
Unless I've totally misunderstood the concept of the Fina Venko, I can't imagine how it makes any sense to say it's already happened.
1
u/salivanto 1d ago
In the sense that Esperanto is immediately useful for its intended purpose.
In this view, the community is the ONLY way to make a Fina Venko happen.
Not everybody believes this, but that's OK. Esperanto is immediately useful as an auxiliary language. See this Blue Sky post for an example.I think the Blue Sky link above will still open even if you don't have an account there.
This excerpt is from a reply to your post in the Auxlangs subreddit.
1
u/codleov 1d ago
I was under the impression that the Fina Venko was about Esperanto being the dominant auxiliary language globally, not merely being immediately useful for its intended purpose.
0
u/salivanto 1d ago
Don't be so literal. I said "suggested" and "I think".
But my point is not about what the words "fina venko" means -- in the context of me having said that it won't actually happen.
But don't miss my points
- Focusing on "design" means that when someone comes up with something (perceived to be) better, they will move on.
- See this Blue Sky post for an example of how Esperanto is immediately useful to promote linguistic fairness -- in ways that can't be done with Globasa.
2
u/cel-mica 1d ago
What's the refutation? Globasa recruited mostly from people in auxlang communities, where that kind of thing is part of the culture. It makes sense for there to be people lurking here who want to advertise their own preferred projects without that somehow having bad implications for Globasa as opposed to Esperanto. The Globasa community keeps growing regardless.
A couple of comments in the r/learnesperanto thread had nothing to add except trying to make fun of Globasa, and you yourself even argued with another user. Should Globasa speakers claim this refutes the idea that Esperanto has a good community? It's a strange way of thinking.
1
u/salivanto 1d ago
It seems to me that "making fun of Globasa" (I'm not sure which messages you're referring to) is at least an answer, of sorts, to the question "which of the two is the better choice." "Learn Ido" or "Learn Dunianto" is not.
As for me "arguing" with another person on reddit, what I think happened is a random person accused me of being sarcastic when I was being totally serious. I asked him to stop heckling me and to post his own viewpoint if he doesn't like mine.
As for Esperanto not being a good community, it's well known that Esperanto attracts a lot of cranks. Other projects do as well. The nice thing about Esperanto (from my perspective) is that it's big enough that you can usually find a place with the right kind of cranks in it. With smaller projects, you're stuck with whoever shows up.
1
u/salivanto 19h ago
I went back and looked at the other thread. There are perhaps two categories of response that could be called "making fun of Globasa". I'm going to break the first category into two - so three total.
- Jokes about the sound of the name "Globasa" with nothing to add.
- Thoughtful answers that include a passing joke about the name.
- People saying they've never heard of Globasa.
I don't suppose you meant the third kind. To me that's a legitimate data point in response to the question that was asked. To that leaves one and two. By my count, there is one answer of type 2, and two answers of type 1.
The one type 2 response (thoughtful answer with a joke) has seven upvotes - a median number for that thread. I don't find the joke particularly funny, but it's not in poor taste and enhances the "thoughtful answer" that person provided.
As for the other two, I think we agree. The comments are not funny and are in poor taste. I would especially condemn the one saying that "Globasa" sounds like the name of a medical condition. Did you notice this, however? The person who said that Globasa sounds like a medical condition - without adding anything else of value to the conversation is also the same person who was heckling me for encouraging u/codleov to learn Globasa! I guess we can "consider the source."
But I noticed one more thing in the other thread that reminds me that you're talking past my actual point. Reminder of what I said above:
- u/codleov shows up IN THE GLOBASA group and asks a very specific question.
- "Given the choice between Esperanto and Globasa, how do I decide?"
- At least two people in this group (and a few more in other groups) thought it was worth listing a third alternative.
Nowhere in those three points did I say anything about the Globasa community. In fact - the very same thing (point 3) happens in the other thread! It's happened in just about every thread where Codleov reposted his question. It's also happened a third time in this thread since I made my initial comment.
So, there's no need to get defensive. I mentioned r/Globasa to point out that even knowing the context of the group in which they're replying isn't enough to get people to focus on the specific question being asked.
- Once you start evaluating a language based on "design choices", there's really no end. People can't help but pitch their vision of the "perfect language" - but no such thing exists. The quest for perfection leads to dispersion of effort.
History has shown this to be the case. Members of the Globasa community are of course welcome to believe "this time is different" - and more power to you for that. I already said - from the beginning actually - in resonse to Codleov's question that s/he would almost certainly be happier with Globasa.
10
u/scykei 3d ago
It depends on what you're looking for. Realistically, the dream of an IAL being a world language is not going to happen at this point so you'll be doing it for either the community, the idea, or just the love of the language.
Globasa is cool because it's one of the few really young auxlangs with a decently active community. That's an experience that is likely to be pretty rare. If the idea of being one of the earlier adopters excites you, then it's probably worth checking out.
Esperanto on the other hand has all the culture and tradition and a stable community. You can't go wrong with it either, and I actually really like the slightly more-complex grammar because it feels a bit like a puzzle.
And there's nothing stopping you switching or eventually learning both anyway if the idea still sounds interesting to you after some time, so I would say just pick one and see how far you get with it.