Why Esperanto won’t diverge into dialects
A question I see every now and again, especially from beginners, is what's to stop Esperanto from diverging into dialects? Can one language really be spoken everywhere or would it just split apart like Latin did?
So I wrote an article to answer this query and highlight the key differences between Latin and Esperanto to show the various factors to prevent the language diverging.
I know that speakers of different languages will naturally bring some sort of accent with them. However, the majority of Esperantists will want to participate in the Esperanto community. This will lead to an inevitable standardization of pronunciation. The people who don't participate in the community probably won't teach enough people Esperanto to create another accent/dialect.
What about different accents in different countries? La diferencoj estas tre malgrandaj kaj ne ĝenas la komprenadon.
Even still, Esperantists come together annually for international Esperanto conferences. Esperantists from different countries will also come together outside of these conferences to communicate with one another.
Esperanto estas jam 133-jara kaj ne estiĝis dialektoj. Kial? Ĉar esperanto-parolantoj daŭre transiras la lingvajn limojn.
Hmm, the same way radio standardized the French language in France during the first half of the 20th century, starting from a point when it was pretty much a foreign language to my great grand parents (in their respective French rural communities) back in 1900? Romans from Spain and Syria didn't have a radio telling them how people talked in Rome, esperantists now have a radio on steroids.
Came here to say this. As long as we have mass communication and written texts we will not get meaningful/harmful dialects. The pronunciation is defined, so deviations are acceptable for accents, but would not be seen as "how people talk".
The biggest risk would be for a large difference in the vocabulary (slang), but I think that would be somewhat helped by the ease of use of online dictionaries.
Have you no inkling of the dozens of dialects in the United States alone? And apart from that, there are even drastically divergent dialects in the United Kingdom and Australia. Just look up the lexical differences between seemingly basic terms between the UK and the US. For example, the American word "sprinkles" is translated to "jimmies" in Britain. Australia's English is a bit more difficult for Americans to understand. Your article's claim that there is no challenge against comprehension of accents is also an ENORMOUS fallacy. Although Australian is more easy to understand in terms of pronunciation, I cannot count with 20 hands how many times people in the United States, myself included, have said that they can't understand what British people say. Please revise that article. For the love of all that is holy, revise that argument.
Robert Nielson actually specifically refers to the fact that "[d]espite the fact that English has been spoken in countries thousands of miles apart, all over the world for centuries, it has not evolved into multiple dialects." As Johnathan Rentz said, English has most certainly split apart into multiple national dialects, as well as many dialects within each country.