With one caveat I applaud the fine essay on "science diplomacy." A life member of AAAS since 1962, I am always glad to see an article that is practical, idealistic, and relevant to most readers of Science.
English is the default solution to the problem of language diversity among scientists, but is it diplomatic to assume that we should leave it that way? An alternative possibility is to have an accessible, practical, second language agreed upon by an international group of scientists. On the basis of over 50 years' experience, I nominate Esperanto.
The Internet has made Esperanto a better tool than ever: There are learning sites, many Wikipedia articles, discussion groups, etc. Native speakers of English are notoriously poor at gaining second language fluency in U.S. schools. Research has shown that Esperanto as an introduction in foreign language teaching accelerates learning of a subsequent ethnic tongue. Studies showing the effectiveness of Esperanto as a translation tool go back to the days of the League of Nations. Translation issues in the expanding European Union have revived interest in Esperanto there.
Native speakers of English have an advantage, but a hollow one, in being able to get through life in the wider world with monolingual fluency. Let the AAAS, in the spirit of ethical, far-sighted diplomacy, take leadership on the question of functional bilingualism for all.
For further information see: Esperantic Studies Foundation, www.esperantic.org.
E. James Lieberman
Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, George Washington University School of Medicine, USA, and Delegate in Medicine, Universala Esperanto Asocio
E-Letters: ![[Read E-Letter]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif){kind=icon}
