Language-Change, Slang, Evolution

Language, what binds us together and keeps us apart.
Language has evolved from the earliest roots in Indo-European for Europeans and Indians, and from other sources for everyone else. Indo-European formed Celtic, which formed Greek, which formed Latin, which combined with German to form French, then combined again with another Germanic language to form English.
Language has been a great culture identifier. If your African and speak French and something else, you can draw your roots to Morocco for example. Language has defined culture throughout the ages, and has joined us but also kept us apart.

I'm sure many of you know that in America, we have put up laws, or are discussing the use of English as an official language, for use in all government documents, legal procedings, etc.

I'm conflicted about this, seeing it as a threat and a benefit to society.
I'm against intigrating Spanish in our American culture. We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish.
Then there is the whole 'melting pot' and how is this different than any other mixing of cultures and languages? It's not really.
Middle English is a mix of French and Anglo-Saxon.

Which do you support and why. Keep languages apart, or join them together, creating new languages through life?

Languages change. That can't be legislated away. No matter much it might irk me, "lol" and "noob" and "pwned" are eventually going to end up in some dictionary.

In the past, laws which attempted to restrict or do away with one or more languages have been solely used as a mean of oppression. A good example is the British outlawing the local Gaelic language in Ireland. I don't view such attempts at oppression to be a good thing.

In the case of these laws making English the official language, I'd say the real intent isn't so much to make one language official as to outlaw the official use of some other language. The difference is subtle; but it's very important. The real intent is the supression of some language other than English. If it's OK for the majority to pass a law making English the official language and thus prohibiting the official use of Spanish, then what happens when Spanish speakers are the majority in some city or county or state and they manage to pass a law making Spanish the official language and thus outlawing English for official use? Would it be OK then, if it's OK now? Follow through on the logic.

And can a culture is so vital and thriving that it must be protected? I'd argue that the need for protection speaks to the viability of the culture, or lack thereof. :wink:

we have to let languages run their own course...but not forcing on others. Integrating spanish into america is okay, but not imposing it upon the world. Then we would lose our heritage and what makes us us.

Languages constantly evolve. Over the course of time, I'm sure that Americans will hardly be able to speak with our English counter parts, We will integrate Spanish and Japanese slowly into our Language, while the English will slowly integrate Hindi and Arabic. French won't be French, German won't be German, Turkish won't be Turkish... well not in any original state. That is the way it is, we can't control it, it just kind of happens wether we're aware of it or not. Its even apparent now that English is yet again evolving, when I speak with Americans I can use every slang word I know, and most of the time other Americans can understand perfectly, but if I try to speak like I always speak to an English or Irish person they scratch their heads, and then they speak to me using all of their slang and I scratch my head, so both sides have to try really hard to speaking "properly", even though there are many proper American Words and Many Proper English words that are phoenetically different, yet retain the same meaning.

There's nothing wrong with the minor, natural evolution of a language that is inevitable. One of the great virtues of English is that the regulators of the languague such as the people who run the OED see nothing wrong with including new words which have come into popular speech, unlike say French, where the guardians of the language, the Académie Française, zealously guard against foreign intrusions which corrupt their language. However, such measures will probably lead to a stagnating language, and stagnation is the first step before decline.
However, I am opposed to a rapid and unnatural alteration of English, which will not just add a bit flavour, but change the face of it.
A little spice is a good thing, but too much will spoil the food.

There's a whole book dedicated to this, called Empires of the Word.

By the way, I'm not sure about Celtic being Indo-European. Didn't they have their own language group? Now it is obviously influenced by Indo-European languages, but what about before the Romans went to Britain? Did they have an Indo-EUropean language then?

Wakizashi: I don't think so. Not with globalization and all, and constant contact on the internet now. The words might be pronounced differently with different dialects as in Chinese, but you will be able to communicate. Unless, of course, either England or America do a North Korea and control all information that can be accessed.

indo-european seperated and branched out into europe and other areas. Every European language was once Indo-European, but it had evolved sigmnificantly before the time of the romans. Nations had seperated and isolated them =selves, and given the nATURAL variation of languages, its no wonder why....and if you still dont understand I cant help you.

English will became Vulgar like Latin in the past...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius

Wakizashi: I don't think so. Not with globalization and all, and constant contact on the internet now. The words might be pronounced differently with different dialects as in Chinese, but you will be able to communicate. Unless, of course, either England or America do a North Korea and control all information that can be accessed.

---

Tried understanding Ebonics lately? It is essentially a bastard child of English, so I should be able to understand it, but I have absolutely no idea what people are saying when they speak it.

I'm all for including more Spanish in our English. I'm think everyone should learn Spanish. Why the heck not? Our European friends all speak at least two langauges. It doesn't make us any less American. In fact, it makes us more American-- while politically distinct, we have much more in common with our southern neighbors than the average culturally and historically ignorant US citizen would care to realize.

I believe in immigration control over the short term, but overall I'm definitely a Pan-Americanist.

Well, English seemed to be a part of America's culture, from the very beginning. So, the use of Spanish seems wrong. While I'm for the use of Spanish as a second language, it's just wierd.
Don't use all. I'm sure there are hundreds of Britons who only speak English, Irish who only speak English, French who only speak French, and Germans who only speak Germans.
I have a problem with a wide use of Spanish in America because it threatens our culture. The Mexican/Nicaraguan/Panamanian/Costa Rican/Cuban/Guatamalan/South American illegal immigrants use Spanish as a first language, and claim it as culture. While that is true, it doesn't mean you should speak it all the time. I can claim a Irish heritage, but does that mean I will be allowed to use Irish Gaelic often? No, and that is because they won't understand me.
If English becomes the official language, you HAVE to speak English often, and if you have a problem with this law, either go home and use your democratic rights or become a legal citizen and vote against it.

I'm drawing this off topic, so I'll take it back.

Why is the strict enforcement of language (Academie Francaise) bad? You claim stagnation and inability to adapt, but why not use a national board to create a word that cover the new world, and have it fit perfectly into the grammar and vocabulary structure of society?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

Why is the strict enforcement of language (Academie Francaise) bad? You claim stagnation and inability to adapt, but why not use a national board to create a word that cover the new world, and have it fit perfectly into the grammar and vocabulary structure of society?

---

Do we really need to imitate the French on this issue?

English is and always has been a mongrel language, and that's the way we like it. Let the French make rulings on whether or not "multimedia" and "CD-ROM" can be allowed in print. English is a dirty girl, a naughty girl, a girl who will take anything from anyone and walk away whistling. God bless our mother tongue!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

Why is the strict enforcement of language (Academie Francaise) bad? You claim stagnation and inability to adapt, but why not use a national board to create a word that cover the new world, and have it fit perfectly into the grammar and vocabulary structure of society?

---

Because I am a proponent of evolution not intelligent design.:2thumbsup: Therefore I support a language that is living, breathing and adapting the real world around them. :laugh4:

Seriously to have a board decide what is and isn't in a language is like having an art commission decide which books will and won't be printed, which fonts shall be used, which authours are allowed. What art shall be painted, which colours, oils, brushes shall be used in the making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius

By the way, I'm not sure about Celtic being Indo-European. Didn't they have their own language group? Now it is obviously influenced by Indo-European languages, but what about before the Romans went to Britain? Did they have an Indo-EUropean language then?

---

The Celtic language family is a branch of Indo-European and it displaced older non-Indo-European languages as it spread into north and western Europe, including Britain (from c. 500 BC). One or two languages have held out, such as Basque which is not I-E.

Quote:

---

So, the use of Spanish seems wrong.

---

So, Marshal: Florida, California, Las Vegas, Los Angeles... these are all English names, yeah?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

So, Marshal: Florida, California, Las Vegas, Los Angeles... these are all English names, yeah?

---

And most of the place names which aren't Spanish are all from the various native tribes: state names like Minnesota, North and South Dakota, river names like Susquehanna, and what's the name of that river flowing through our nation's capital? Oh yeah, the Potomac.

I don’t mind a rich blend of cultures but I do believe there should be an official language for legal stuff, so that there is no confusing the law, instructions, directions, etc. For the US it should be English since nearly the entire country speaks it. I think it would be a landslide in a vote.

I find it to be a silly waste of space to have to make everything bilingual, I hate designing things that are going to be sold in Canada because there are all the bilingual requirements (not every company pays attention to the requirements).

It's only a matter of time before the EU decides every bit of packaging needs every recognised language on it. Prepare for huges boxes, tiny fonts, and every single fluent Welsh speaker being hunted down and forced to translate things.

There are some good, intelligent posts here. Some of you understand language much better that they average person.

Language is my profession, so I have a lot of thoughts on it. A few points:

A language evolves constantly. Even from one day to the next a particular language has gained some words and lost others. Nouns are turned into verbs; new contractions are created; specialized jargon and foreign words are incorpotated into the mainstream.

There is no one "English". There are hundreds or thousands of variations, many of which are mutually unintelligable. They are all equally valid forms of English.

There is no English today that has not changed significantly over the past few hundred years. There is no "original" or "true" Engish, and, actually, never was. Linguists have pointed out that the English today that is closest to Shakespeare's English is spoken by the people of the Appalechian Mountains of West Virginia.

English has grammatical features of the Germanic languages and Latin languages, plus grammar developed on its own right up to now. If people had put artificial restrictions on it—saying it could only have "pure German" structure, for instance—it never would have evolved into the language we have today. The grammar of American English only 100 years ago had different grammar than today. The English of 2106 will be quite different from today's English.

There should be no restrictions of the mixing of languages as long as the language is useful. 20% of Japanese vocabulary is made up of words from foreign languages. Japanese who speak not a word of English use the same word for elevator, door, table, romance, computer, taxi, helicopter, melon, and even chance that I use when I speak English. This hasn't hurt the Japanese any.

I believe there needs to be an administrative language, one in which all official business is conducted and which is the default one in which laws are expressed (to avoid dual definitions), just as there is for communication at sea and in the air. As so much international business is now conducted in English, it seems the likeliest lingua franca for at least the next generation or two, so it makes even more sense in the US where all established official usage is in English (don't fix what ain't bust).

I've lived in a couple of bi-lingual jurisdictions, and visited more, and am very aware of the issues that Aenlic raises:

Quote:

---

A good example is the British outlawing the local Gaelic language in Ireland. I don't view such attempts at oppression to be a good thing.

---

The question is how to establish a norm to allow people to interact efficiently with officialdom without crushing their cultural identity (remember the minority language may be native, as in Wales or Ireland) or drowning in a sea of translators and interpreters in an officially multi-lingual society, where nothing ever happens 'til the translator shows up. It IS possible for people to be bilingual, at least to a survival level, so I don't see a second language as a problem per se.... y yo creo espaniol es una idioma muy hermosa, y no es dificil. Es la mejor segunda lingua en las americas.

Of course, "Spanish" is an interesting one in a multi-lingual context. Spain itself is multi-lingual: Castellano, Catalan, Andaluz, Gallego, Euzkadi.... you think Canada's tough? In Spain, ATMs give you about 8 language choices before you start (ok, some for tourists :beam: )... still the country seems to keep working, and long-suppressed languages are rebounding.

The whole French idea of fixing the language in aspic is a little revealing, a little disturbing. Yes, things change (and Lemur - are you calling my mother-tongue a ho'?? :laugh4: ), even the French language -- evolution tells us one thing - adapt or die or get stuck in a niche. Globally French is becoming marginalised, there isn't the same internationalism amongst Francophone nations that there is amongst the anglophones. I think English, Aussies, Yanks, Kiwis etc feel more part of a commonality than French, Quebequois, Malians, Walloons, Haitians and Senegalese do. I think this last effort to keep French pure is like putting on a good face for the death mask, the last twitch of Gallic arrogance, perhaps.

But there is a role for dead languages: Latin, especially. Not only is it forebear to the romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish etc), but it is dead, unchanging. It's definitions are constant - this is what makes it so useful for fields such as law and medicine.

So, to stop wibbling, yes there should be an "official" language, for official matters, but it is not something that should be imposed in the street, or in the home, or in the bar. But in the Courts, in school, on voting slips, in government records, yes. Does it have to be English? Maybe Latin would be better....

Just out of curiosity, what jobs are open to people who study language?

teacher.

Q: Why do surgeons use latin terminology?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

A: So that the patient can start getting used to a dead language.

:laugh4: :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

Just out of curiosity, what jobs are open to people who study language?

---

Well, someone specialized in the science of language is probably mostly looking to be a professor, but skilled linguists with the right background could find themselves jobs as interpreters or translators. Though these fields are more art than science.

Also, language education is a growing field worldwide and though schools often fill slots with any (unqualified) native speaker there are certain niches where a highly qualified professor could land themselves a pretty well-compensated job.

That was a very fine post, Macsen Rufus. Food for thought!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

Just out of curiosity, what jobs are open to people who study language?

---

Jobs with low pay.

I did try to get a position at Systran writing Babel Fish programs, but they prefered someone fluent in a second language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

I believe there needs to be an administrative language, one in which all official business is conducted and which is the default one in which laws are expressed (to avoid dual definitions), just as there is for communication at sea and in the air.

---

Is it too late for me to nominate Manx?

Manx is gonna come back. I can feel it.

Somewhat related and kind of funny: New Zealand students may 'text-speak' in exams

Language alway evolves, so as long it is not forced, then that is fine. How do you think english got the word Algebra? Arabic, from the crusades. So languages have always been constantly in motion, why stop it. I think it was a crime when the English outlawed Gaelic. If I lived in Eire, I would support some sort of effort to educate more people in Gaelic, maybe that is just nationalist, and yes, I admit it. I am a nationalist and would be if I was from anywhere else,