Re: Various comments on Baha'i auxlang policy (long)

This is an archived post from the old bulletin board. For new posts, see the forum.

Posted by Brett Zamir ( on February 14, 2002 at 16:09:22:

In Reply to: Various comments on Baha'i auxlang policy (long) posted by Dawud (wants to be on the future world government's language committee!) on February 07, 2002 at 22:34:45:

I should add to my last posting that the Universal House of Justice may also change its decisions based on new information (it, unlike the Prophets, is not omniscient at will).

Also, to respond to a few points in your letter, Dawud, just to point out, the ability of language to reform human thought is, as you may know, controversial (I don't want to get into it, just to point it out).

As to the script necessarily being Roman, Baháâuâlláh also called for script to be agreed upon democratically. There could be some arguments made for syllabic scripts (easier for children and adults?) or even graphic scripts (use of the script may conserve space once learnt, it may engage the right side of brain, etc.). I'm not saying these are necessarily sufficient arguments, but I would say that we shouldn't (not being the representative decision-makers) rule other script possibilities out-of-hand, as many who possess those scripts will proudly argue.

As I mentioned in the first posting, translation machines would be inherently inefficient, inconvenient (bulky, time-consuming), and still cost money, especially to the masses who would be left behind - the great advantage of a world language is that knowledge could be available to the most poor. For practical reasons (as well as my faith in the Baha'i Writings), only a political solution seems to be a realistic solution.

this topic is closed - post at