It is a good idea, but so far in Human history, it's never happened. Numerous attempts have been made to create or establish one, but all have fallen short.
There isn't one. But English is the most widely spoken language in the world. (Poetically speaking, Music is often referred to as the universal language).
Santiago proposes that one should learn about the universal language by observing and listening to the natural world around them, as well as by taking note of the signs and omens that present themselves in everyday life. He believes that by being open and receptive to these messages, one can begin to understand and communicate in the universal language.
The disadvantages of an universal language is that it will destroy all other languages, and thus we will lose our diversity between each other, as language is one of the main things that shows our diversity. Also, an universal language will be hard to learn by those who do not have the resources to learn a second language.
It's been tried. Many a hundred "universal languages" have been proposed, but the best of them, Esperanto, has had only limited success. The nearest thing to a common language is English, with more than twice as many people knowing it as a second language as those who speak it as a first. The challenge to any national language becoming a true universal, is that it carries "baggage," associations with the politics of the mother country. People feel they need their "own" language to preserve their culture, and they're probably right.
There isn't one universal African language, so there isn't a single way to spell "mother" in an African language. It would depend on which specific African language you are referring to.
There is actually no universal language in the world, and there never has been one. However, English is the most widely spoken language, and is more universal than any other.
Universal Language is a language which is spoken world wide. At this point there is no Universal Language really, because not every person can speak English. Therefore English is not the universal Language, and nor is any other language in the world. It is possible that one day there will be a language that will be the Universal Language, but for it to get Universal status, it needs to be a language that every single person in the world speaks fluently. There is debates and discusions about English possibly becoming a universal language, but i have doubts about its future as a main language, because as the Chinese and Indian economy are growing, their countries status in the world are becoming more and more important, and alreadt more people are choosing to study Chinese and Arabic languages over English.
There isn't one. But English is the most widely spoken language in the world. (Poetically speaking, Music is often referred to as the universal language).
Santiago proposes that one should learn about the universal language by observing and listening to the natural world around them, as well as by taking note of the signs and omens that present themselves in everyday life. He believes that by being open and receptive to these messages, one can begin to understand and communicate in the universal language.
The disadvantages of an universal language is that it will destroy all other languages, and thus we will lose our diversity between each other, as language is one of the main things that shows our diversity. Also, an universal language will be hard to learn by those who do not have the resources to learn a second language.
My opinion: I'm torn on this. Government is rather inefficient, but universal access is a laudable goal. If Congress can get a decent bill (not this one) going, I would be into it.
The nature of the English language is classified as an art and also a field of study. This is one of the languages which are considered to be universal languages.
It's been tried. Many a hundred "universal languages" have been proposed, but the best of them, Esperanto, has had only limited success. The nearest thing to a common language is English, with more than twice as many people knowing it as a second language as those who speak it as a first. The challenge to any national language becoming a true universal, is that it carries "baggage," associations with the politics of the mother country. People feel they need their "own" language to preserve their culture, and they're probably right.
Grammar is specific for a language with its specific principles in syntactic structures to formulate a grammatical principle.Universal grammar does not exist unless one formulates universal artificial language with universal syntactic principles. The parameters of grammar are the agreement between the NP & VP along with the tense which again differs from one language to another. eg: certain Indo- Burma languages do not have finite verb.
There isn't one universal African language, so there isn't a single way to spell "mother" in an African language. It would depend on which specific African language you are referring to.
The only one that springs to mind is ALGOL 60. It turned out not to be very universal; it was shouldered aside by FORTRAN, COBOL and Dartmouth BASIC.
If you feel comfortable with it yes it is a good idea