|
I have noticed, that those who say I'm wrong, are Americans mostly. You don't like me correcting your incorrect grammar, huh? Well, now I understand why some English people say you, Americans, have spoiled English. And now speak English no longer, but you speak American.
You can condemn me, and label me as a stupid linguistic purist. But I know a lot of people, all over the world, agree with me.
|
|
You may be right, Pete. As far as Americans changing English, for better or for worse. But I do like to think of the English language as a "living language" as the experts say, (not that I always agree with the so-called experts ) and therefore it's always changing. I fear that if it stops changing it will be like Latin and die.
Then, of course, maybe Americans have turned Englsih into their own language ( bastardized, perhaps, in your eyes).
There are many variations on the language as we see on this site and so I guess my attitude is, live and let live. Speak the language as it speaks to you. In other words, live it and don't fuss too much, easier said than done and all of that. But still . . .
|
|
<<I have noticed, that those who say I'm wrong, are Americans mostly. You don't like me correcting your incorrect grammar, huh? Well, now I understand why some English people say you, Americans, have spoiled English. And now speak English no longer, but you speak American.>>
Nope, nationality has nothing to do with it. There are actually probably more American prescriptivists who've posted on this site (I won't name names) than those from other places, and we and other linguists/linguistically oriented people disagree just as much with them as people espousing the same views from other places. Prescriptivism is prescriptivism, no matter the geographical origin.
<<You can condemn me and label me as a stupid linguistic purist. >>
I don't have the time or interest to condemn you as an individual. However, it's your comments which aren't linguistically sound. I wouldn't call your views on lanaguage "purist," but perhaps something approaching "misguided, unrealistic, and uninformed." That's a start.
|
|
|
It's most of you, English speakers people who suffer from "SPOIL-MY-OWN-LANGUAGE - ITIS". A serious illness in some people, like in the guy of another post saying that he pronounces "CAR" like /kja:r/.
|
|
>>I have noticed, that those who say I'm wrong, are Americans mostly. You don't like me correcting your incorrect grammar, huh?<<
Of course, that begs the question of just who defines what "correct" means in the first place. And no, that who is not whoever your English teacher(s) may happen to be or prescriptivists of likes of Fowler and others of his sort.
>>Well, now I understand why some English people say you, Americans, have spoiled English. And now speak English no longer, but you speak American.<<
Of course, such English people oh so conveniently overlook when various forms in their own native dialects happen to be innovations and when the forms in use in NAE dialects happen to actually be conservatisms. They happen to overlook things ranging from their non-use of the subjunctive in everyday speech to the numerous phonological changes that have happened in English English since the split between NAE and English English.
>>You can condemn me, and label me as a stupid linguistic purist. But I know a lot of people, all over the world, agree with me.<<
Just because they agree with you means nothing. Just because many people believe something does not mean it is so.
|
|
<<Just because they agree with you means nothing. Just because many people believe something does not mean it is so.>>
Yes, it does. The majority of people don't believe that the sun is actually green and just looks yellow because of the blueness of the sky, because that's not true. The majority of people don't believe that the Earth is actually flat, because that's not true.
|
|
Pete,
My friend, you lost this argument the minute you pressed 'send' back on the second page with your initial post. (I never use "anyways," by the way...always "anyway"...but that doesn't change the illogical nature of your argument). One would only need a recording of you speaking colloquially in your native language to be able to pick out similar impurities in your speech. There is no such language as "American," by the way.
I would, however, like to take a minute to correct your English. Being the strict prescriptivist you are, I am sure you'll be glad I did so.
You wrote: <<ANYWAY, I may accuse you of being ignorants of the English grammar. >>
Notice your use of the term ignorant. In English "ignorant" is an adjective...this is not the case in some other languages like Spanish, for example, where it can also function as a noun. You can accuse someone of being ignorant of something, but calling them "an ignorant" is incorrect English, as such a noun doesn't exist.
Also, omit "the" before "English grammar"...you don't need a definite article there.
|
|
<<Yes, it does.>>
See how far that will get you in a logic course. (It's referred to as argumentum ad populum.)
|
|
<<Yes, it does.>>
Lazar, the majority of people don't believe that the sun is actually green and just looks yellow because of the blueness of the sky, because that's not true. The majority of people don't believe that the Earth is actually flat, because that's not true. So clearly, because many or most people believe something clearly means that it's true or at least that it's very likely to be true.
|
|
I meant to quote Lazar's:
<<See how far that will get you in a logic course. (It's referred to as argumentum ad populum.)>> and not myself.
|
|
|
This, of course, excludes what the majority of young children believe in.
|
|
Albert,
Here is where your argument goes awry:
The sun is forever changing, but we humans don't notice these changes as they occur over millions of years. Therefore, as we know it, the sun's color is unchanging. The spherical nature of the planet is also unchanging.
Language, Albert, is not static...nor does it take millions of years to change. So does that mean "anyways" is acceptable in formal English? No. However, those that express themselves that way and are understood in their particular language community are not wrong. English and languages extend well beyond the formal written word.
Good try, Albert, but a bad analogy.
|
|
>>Lazar, the majority of people don't believe that the sun is actually green and just looks yellow because of the blueness of the sky, because that's not true. The majority of people don't believe that the Earth is actually flat, because that's not true. So clearly, because many or most people believe something clearly means that it's true or at least that it's very likely to be true.<<
Correlation causality does not make. Just because may people believe the sun is yellow and the sun does happen to be yellow, for instance, does not mean that it is necessarily the many people believing that the sun is yellow which makes the sun yellow. Likewise, it is not necessarily the many people not believing that the Earth is flat which makes the Earth not flat.
|
|
<<Pete,
My friend, you lost this argument the minute you pressed 'send' back on the second page with your initial post. (I never use "anyways," by the way...always "anyway"...but that doesn't change the illogical nature of your argument). One would only need a recording of you speaking colloquially in your native language to be able to pick out similar impurities in your speech. There is no such language as "American," by the way.>>
I tell you, when I speak my beautiful language, Spanish, I try to avoid dumb expressions as much as possible. However sometimes thay pop up and I can't help it, of course. Especially when I am among Central American people, and Mexicans living in the USA who speak a terrible Spanihs, using literal translations from English like for example: saying "DAR PARA ATRAS" or "IR PARA ATRAS" for "GIVE BACK" and "GO BACK", that's the most annoying shit I've ever heard why using those bastardized English-like espressions when we have specific verbs for that "DEVOLVER" and "VOLVER", if you speak Spanish you can understand what I mean.
So I always try to let them know that Spanish, one of the most beautiful Romance languages, is that a beautiful way to express yourself, it's almost poetic. A language cannot be a method of torture.
<<I would, however, like to take a minute to correct your English. Being the strict prescriptivist you are, I am sure you'll be glad I did so.
You wrote: <<ANYWAY, I may accuse you of being ignorants of the English grammar. >>
Notice your use of the term ignorant. In English "ignorant" is an adjective...this is not the case in some other languages like Spanish, for example, where it can also function as a noun. You can accuse someone of being ignorant of something, but calling them "an ignorant" is incorrect English, as such a noun doesn't exist.>>
Yes, I'm happy with that. Thanks very much. What I really want is to speak correct English, to comunicate as I do in Spanish or Italian. I didn't know there was no noun for the adj ignorant. It's good to know that there are some actually intelligent people here.
|
|
<<There is no such language as "American," by the way.>>
I know. Then ask the English, not me...
|
