The freedom of American language
-
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am
The freedom of American language
I think it's overdone myself, but I believe American language has a certain freedom of expression that many others don't have. The only thing that's uppermost in my mind is clarity (I wonder what input VT has about this?):
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015 ... poken-1916
PhilX
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015 ... poken-1916
PhilX
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: The freedom of American language
There is no American language? Just English, or at least until America decides to change the name of its current dialect.
With respect to freedom of expression, what do you mean by this?
With respect to freedom of expression, what do you mean by this?
- SpheresOfBalance
- Posts: 5688
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: The freedom of American language
What's on paper matters not, what's used is all that matters!Arising_uk wrote:There is no American language? Just English, or at least until America decides to change the name of its current dialect.
With respect to freedom of expression, what do you mean by this?
-
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am
Re: The freedom of American language
I disagree with you when you say there is no American language. It has developed from a number of languages into its own language with its rules, syntax and a number of Americanisms with their own ways of saying things you won't find in any other language.Arising_uk wrote:There is no American language? Just English, or at least until America decides to change the name of its current dialect.
With respect to freedom of expression, what do you mean by this?
With freedom of expression, French, e.g., is governed rigorously by its ways of grammar way more than the American language is.
I can list several scholarly-type websites that do recognize the American language, e.g.:
http://www.bartleby.com/185/
PhilX
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: The freedom of American language
Not disagreeing and what is used is American English, a dialect of English, at least until America decides to call what they speak American and not English. In the near future it'll be Chinese English.SpheresOfBalance wrote:What's on paper matters not, what's used is all that matters!
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: The freedom of American language
No it hasn't, it's pretty much English(and an old form at that), which is French and German, that English, because it is a mixture of two languages, allows ease of appropriation of words from other languages is a given, nothing distinct about it being 'American' other than it being a dialect of English.Philosophy Explorer wrote:I disagree with you when you say there is no American language. It has developed from a number of languages into its own language with its rules, syntax and a number of Americanisms with their own ways of saying things you won't find in any other language.
You mean English or American English.With freedom of expression, French, e.g., is governed rigorously by its ways of grammar way more than the American language is.
Wishful thinking I think, as all it says is that English can absorb words from other languages but we know that due to the fact of English already being an amalgam of two languages and American English being an English dialect with an enriched and enlarged vocabulary from its immigrant population. But its still English until America decides to call it American and even then you'll still be speaking English.I can list several scholarly-type websites that do recognize the American language, e.g.:
http://www.bartleby.com/185/
PhilX
-
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am
Re: The freedom of American language
It's still American to me.Arising_uk wrote:No it hasn't, it's pretty much English(and an old form at that), which is French and German, that English, because it is a mixture of two languages, allows ease of appropriation of words from other languages is a given, nothing distinct about it being 'American' other than it being a dialect of English.Philosophy Explorer wrote:I disagree with you when you say there is no American language. It has developed from a number of languages into its own language with its rules, syntax and a number of Americanisms with their own ways of saying things you won't find in any other language.You mean English or American English.With freedom of expression, French, e.g., is governed rigorously by its ways of grammar way more than the American language is.Wishful thinking I think, as all it says is that English can absorb words from other languages but we know that due to the fact of English already being an amalgam of two languages and American English being an English dialect with an enriched and enlarged vocabulary from its immigrant population. But its still English until America decides to call it American and even then you'll still be speaking English.I can list several scholarly-type websites that do recognize the American language, e.g.:
http://www.bartleby.com/185/
PhilX
PhilX
Re: The freedom of American language
How would you compare the freedom of languages? And is it a good or bad thing?
They all change over time. Nations with many ethnic minorities have more linguistic diversity; those that have geographically isolated regions tend to keep distinct dialects in used longer than those that have easy commerce, but the dialects are used by ever-fewer people, become irrelevant and eventually die out. Nations that have been more recently formed brought their language from an older dominant culture and incorporated elements from each smaller ethnic group as it mixed into the mainstream; the later influx of discrete immigrant groups will contribute the odd word or expression, but generally not affect the dominant language. The larger the dominant linguistic group, the less its vocabulary and grammar is affected by sub-groups. It is affected by wars, political and economic vicissitudes or triumphs (changes in international status and lifestyle) technological advances, culture and fashion. Look what's happened to British English in just one century.
In America, regional - look at the distances! - racial, ethnic, political and economic ghettoes function just like dialects in the old country: refusal or inability to learn the dominant language is a handicap, so the more ambitious young people forsake their mother tongue and speak only English. (The most ambitious ones become bi- and tri-lingual, making use of all available resources.) The original languages are thus used in a shrinking area, by a shrinking, ageing population - and in an increasingly hybridized form, as English words are mixed in. (This is unavoidable, as the sub-group is introduced to new technologies or forms of commerce for which no name exists in their old language.) A few words and expressions also creep out of the sub-groups into general usage, but without a noticeable impact on standard usage.
The two forces that most affect American English are political hyperbole - election rhetoric, partisan double-speak, news media and propaganda organs - and mass advertising. These change the meaning of words and the structure of sentences, such as to make public discourse incomprehensible even while it sounds persuasive. To a far lesser extent, each cohort of free-spending youth inspires its spokesmen, entertainers and panderers (individuals drawn from the previous cohort, if not generation) to adopt a slang to which that cohort most desirably responds (by applauding, enthusing, consuming and emulating). This tends to make miscommunication between generations more prevalent and emotionally taxing than it needs to be. Each social movement, such as labour and feminism, has a similar linguistic forefront. This tends to make miscommunication between interest-blocs and ideological factions more prevalent and fraught than it needs to be. Some words, concepts and expressions from every such wave make their way into mainstream usage, though usually in an altered form or with a meaning somewhat different from their original intent.
I imagine the same thing happens to Dutch and Japanese, but we wouldn't know or care.
Note - Poor spelling, low rate of literacy, forgetting how to pronounce the letter 't' or what commas are for, random apostrophizing and capitalizing and the use of words that sound vaguely similar as synonyms is not change; it's merely decline.
They all change over time. Nations with many ethnic minorities have more linguistic diversity; those that have geographically isolated regions tend to keep distinct dialects in used longer than those that have easy commerce, but the dialects are used by ever-fewer people, become irrelevant and eventually die out. Nations that have been more recently formed brought their language from an older dominant culture and incorporated elements from each smaller ethnic group as it mixed into the mainstream; the later influx of discrete immigrant groups will contribute the odd word or expression, but generally not affect the dominant language. The larger the dominant linguistic group, the less its vocabulary and grammar is affected by sub-groups. It is affected by wars, political and economic vicissitudes or triumphs (changes in international status and lifestyle) technological advances, culture and fashion. Look what's happened to British English in just one century.
In America, regional - look at the distances! - racial, ethnic, political and economic ghettoes function just like dialects in the old country: refusal or inability to learn the dominant language is a handicap, so the more ambitious young people forsake their mother tongue and speak only English. (The most ambitious ones become bi- and tri-lingual, making use of all available resources.) The original languages are thus used in a shrinking area, by a shrinking, ageing population - and in an increasingly hybridized form, as English words are mixed in. (This is unavoidable, as the sub-group is introduced to new technologies or forms of commerce for which no name exists in their old language.) A few words and expressions also creep out of the sub-groups into general usage, but without a noticeable impact on standard usage.
The two forces that most affect American English are political hyperbole - election rhetoric, partisan double-speak, news media and propaganda organs - and mass advertising. These change the meaning of words and the structure of sentences, such as to make public discourse incomprehensible even while it sounds persuasive. To a far lesser extent, each cohort of free-spending youth inspires its spokesmen, entertainers and panderers (individuals drawn from the previous cohort, if not generation) to adopt a slang to which that cohort most desirably responds (by applauding, enthusing, consuming and emulating). This tends to make miscommunication between generations more prevalent and emotionally taxing than it needs to be. Each social movement, such as labour and feminism, has a similar linguistic forefront. This tends to make miscommunication between interest-blocs and ideological factions more prevalent and fraught than it needs to be. Some words, concepts and expressions from every such wave make their way into mainstream usage, though usually in an altered form or with a meaning somewhat different from their original intent.
I imagine the same thing happens to Dutch and Japanese, but we wouldn't know or care.
Note - Poor spelling, low rate of literacy, forgetting how to pronounce the letter 't' or what commas are for, random apostrophizing and capitalizing and the use of words that sound vaguely similar as synonyms is not change; it's merely decline.
- SpheresOfBalance
- Posts: 5688
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: The freedom of American language
Sweetheart, I know all too well why your so invested in such a discussion, ARISING UK.Arising_uk wrote:Not disagreeing and what is used is American English, a dialect of English, at least until America decides to call what they speak American and not English. In the near future it'll be Chinese English.SpheresOfBalance wrote:What's on paper matters not, what's used is all that matters!
As usual you feel that the fact that America supposedly speaks English, at least on paper, bears reflection on your abilities as a Brit. Even though us speaking English happened hundreds of years before you were born. You never change (grow up), ARISING UK, still living on the false pride that you believe being a Brit affords. Whatever delusion floats your boat, though it's delusion none the less. Why else be so invested in something about a country not your own. And no, I've not forgotten how easily you're drawn into a "My countries better than your country", argument. Even Bob can suck you in, now that's pathetic!
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: The freedom of American language
Really? So when asked what language America speaks you say American?Philosophy Explorer wrote:It's still American to me.
PhilX
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: The freedom of American language
Save your psycho-babble for you and your shrink.SpheresOfBalance wrote:Sweetheart, I know all too well why your so invested in such a discussion, ARISING UK.
As usual you feel that the fact that America supposedly speaks English, at least on paper, bears reflection on your abilities as a Brit. Save your psycho-babble for your shrink Even though us speaking English happened hundreds of years before you were born. You never change (grow up), ARISING UK, still living on the false pride that you believe being a Brit affords. Whatever delusion floats your boat, though it's delusion none the less. ...
It's a PHILOSOPHY forum numbnuts.Why else be so invested in something about a country not your own. ...
Like bob you have a memory problem that suits you. So you have forgotten the umpteen times I've explained how my nik arose, which unlike yours was not chosen to reflect some belief about one's self(erroneously by the way) and I'll thank you to show me where I've argued with bob about whose country is better or not as until then I'll treat this as the guff it is. Best you return to your meds.And no, I've not forgotten how easily you're drawn into a "My countries better than your country", argument. Even Bob can suck you in, now that's pathetic!
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: The freedom of American language
American is English. Just because you have a few quirks and can't spell hardly gives you the status of a distinct language. Is there no limit to the stupidity and arrogance of you people?
- SpheresOfBalance
- Posts: 5688
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: The freedom of American language
Americans speak American, period! Deal with it Asinking_UK!Arising_uk wrote:Save your psycho-babble for you and your shrink.SpheresOfBalance wrote:Sweetheart, I know all too well why your so invested in such a discussion, ARISING UK.
As usual you feel that the fact that America supposedly speaks English, at least on paper, bears reflection on your abilities as a Brit. Save your psycho-babble for your shrink Even though us speaking English happened hundreds of years before you were born. You never change (grow up), ARISING UK, still living on the false pride that you believe being a Brit affords. Whatever delusion floats your boat, though it's delusion none the less. ...
No, you should save your ignorance for your NLP pseudoscience.
It's a PHILOSOPHY forum numbnuts.Why else be so invested in something about a country not your own. ...
God you're ignorant, shit for brains! Call me when you actually understand your motivations. Here's a clue, it's written all over your, so called, random choices.
Like bob you have a memory problem that suits you. So you have forgotten the umpteen times I've explained how my nik arose, which unlike yours was not chosen to reflect some belief about one's self(erroneously by the way) and I'll thank you to show me where I've argued with bob about whose country is better or not as until then I'll treat this as the guff it is. Best you return to your meds.And no, I've not forgotten how easily you're drawn into a "My countries better than your country", argument. Even Bob can suck you in, now that's pathetic!
Do you realize that, your half baked, pulled out of your bag of lame tricks, predefined retorts, have become laughable right? And there's nothing more pathetic than an ignorant fool that believes she's on top of her game. You need fresh material sweetie.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: The freedom of American language
Right, and Canadians speak Canadian, and Australians speak Australian, and Scots speak Scottish, and New Zealanders speak New Zealandish..........SpheresOfBalance wrote: Americans speak American, period! Deal with it Asinking_UK!
Yanks are without a doubt the most arrogant, obnoxious, unlikable people on the planet, yet you think the whole world LOVES you! How delusional can you be???
- SpheresOfBalance
- Posts: 5688
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
- Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: The freedom of American language
Skip wrote:How would you compare the freedom of languages? And is it a good or bad thing?
They all change over time. Nations with many ethnic minorities have more linguistic diversity; those that have geographically isolated regions tend to keep distinct dialects in used longer than those that have easy commerce, but the dialects are used by ever-fewer people, become irrelevant and eventually die out. Nations that have been more recently formed brought their language from an older dominant culture and incorporated elements from each smaller ethnic group as it mixed into the mainstream; the later influx of discrete immigrant groups will contribute the odd word or expression, but generally not affect the dominant language. The larger the dominant linguistic group, the less its vocabulary and grammar is affected by sub-groups. It is affected by wars, political and economic vicissitudes or triumphs (changes in international status and lifestyle) technological advances, culture and fashion. Look what's happened to British English in just one century.
In America, regional - look at the distances! - racial, ethnic, political and economic ghettoes function just like dialects in the old country: refusal or inability to learn the dominant language is a handicap, so the more ambitious young people forsake their mother tongue and speak only English. (The most ambitious ones become bi- and tri-lingual, making use of all available resources.) The original languages are thus used in a shrinking area, by a shrinking, ageing population - and in an increasingly hybridized form, as English words are mixed in. (This is unavoidable, as the sub-group is introduced to new technologies or forms of commerce for which no name exists in their old language.) A few words and expressions also creep out of the sub-groups into general usage, but without a noticeable impact on standard usage.
The two forces that most affect American English are political hyperbole - election rhetoric, partisan double-speak, news media and propaganda organs - and mass advertising. These change the meaning of words and the structure of sentences, such as to make public discourse incomprehensible even while it sounds persuasive. To a far lesser extent, each cohort of free-spending youth inspires its spokesmen, entertainers and panderers (individuals drawn from the previous cohort, if not generation) to adopt a slang to which that cohort most desirably responds (by applauding, enthusing, consuming and emulating). This tends to make miscommunication between generations more prevalent and emotionally taxing than it needs to be. Each social movement, such as labour and feminism, has a similar linguistic forefront. This tends to make miscommunication between interest-blocs and ideological factions more prevalent and fraught than it needs to be. Some words, concepts and expressions from every such wave make their way into mainstream usage, though usually in an altered form or with a meaning somewhat different from their original intent.
I imagine the same thing happens to Dutch and Japanese, but we wouldn't know or care.
Note - Poor spelling, low rate of literacy, forgetting how to pronounce the letter 't' or what commas are for,
Sorry skip, but my professor at university, stated that as to comma usage, there are no set rules, save list delineation, that they can indeed be used creatively, when ever one wishes for there to be a pause, so as to create dramatic flare, William Statner, in his role as Capt. James T Kirk, was famous for such things, while being laughed at by many. Of course the laughter was just born of fear and the inflation of pride, as usual!
random apostrophizing and capitalizing
Yes, she also verbally smacked our class around for those two.
and the use of words that sound vaguely similar as synonyms is not change; it's merely decline.
NO!! Sometimes it's just to do with the decline of mind, due to exposure to hazardous chemicals, or other such mind fogging things, but you obviously didn't think of that!