@Brian Barker – So either Google should have to develop for all the world’s languages, to be fair, or all of the world’s population should have to learn a new language with no native speaking population, again, to be fair? Seriously? And Google “discriminates” against people with no mobile phone? Really? Should Google not provide any services because it “discriminates” against those without computers, internet access, electricity, shelter, or perhaps the mental capacity to use them? Should we not build roads because not all people have cars, too?

Who would that be fair to, other than perhaps your personal ideals? Google has nothing that forces them to support any languages at all, they are free to choose as they please, and choosing the languages spoken most by their users would seem quite logical. And it helps people. Helping one person is better than helping no people, so I’d still argue that helping the millions that speak one of the most common languages is even better yet. Personally, I’d be a bit disappointed if Google supported Samoan and chose to ignore French or German, but maybe that’s just me.

As to a universal language, it’s good in theory, but impractical for countless reasons. Makes more sense to support Mandarin, Spanish, English, or Hindi in my opinion. A global language would do worlds for international relations and commerce, but people don’t want to give up their own languages and, to be honest, many don’t have the ability to learn a new one. I love languages, but I certainly wouldn’t want the rest of them to be forced out in favor for some recently designed language, even if it did avoid most of the pitfalls of the worlds languages (irregular verbs, anybody?).

And shame on Esperanto.net for only providing information on itself in 62 languages on its site, right? Such discrimination….

/RANT