It would, of course, be hopeless to attempt to crowd into an international language all those local overtones of meaning which are so dear to the heart of the nationalist.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
It might be inevitable that we have to confront the idea that our destiny is to be one world with one language.
It would be just as pointless to oppose the international use of English today as it would have been to oppose the worldwide use of French in the 18th century.
I feel that as the world becomes more and more multicultural, it's a good tool to be able to speak another language.
As a matter of fact, a national language which spreads beyond its own confines very quickly loses much of its original richness of content and is in no better case than a constructed language.
Without translation, I would be limited to the borders of my own country. The translator is my most important ally. He introduces me to the world.
I will meet my countrymen. I understand only one language: that they are my countrymen, they are my brothers. You may see with whatever colour you want; Modi will not go into that colour.
In any area of the U.N. we... have to agree on certain language that can represent the same spirit, but that can be accepted by everyone.
A common creation demands a common sacrifice, and perhaps not the least potent argument in favour of a constructed international language is the fact that it is equally foreign, or apparently so, to the traditions of all nationalities.
Every language is a world. Without translation, we would inhabit parishes bordering on silence.
Music is not supposed to be nationalist. It is supposed to surpass language barriers. It is about generations communicating with each other.