Why the french prefer spanish instead of english

Kirk   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 10:50 GMT
<<English belongs to Adam, not you Kirk. It is the language of the United kingdom, of England, of the queen. It was born in England. There are hundreds of millions of speakers of English in the rest of the world, but it is all english incorrectly spoken...Queen's English is correct English, and I am afraid that even my English does not reach that level...and any other form is invalid....This is a tired argument...Standard English as spoken in England, is the only correct form of the English language. All others, including English as spoken in the US, is a demented anomaly that is incorrect, no matter the hundreds of millions of speakers that seem to validate an aberration.>>



Wow.

It certainly IS a tired argument indeed when you try and propagate wholly linguistically invalid ideas. Just as in Spanish's case, English is constantly evolving, and there is no one inherent "pure" form that anyone can point to (which actually doesn't apply to *any* living language). I don't know on what grounds you hold that a certain dialect of any language can be *better* than another, but your arguments are highly logically flawed--you obviously know little about basic linguistic facts and are broadcasting that loud and clear for everyone to see here. Shall I start a crash Ling 101 course for you?

Also, even if the "Queen's English" were the "only proper" English, I'd like to point out that very very few UKers even speak anything remotely close to the Queen's English. The idea that only a minuscule percentage of a country, much less the entire English-speaking world, speaks "correctly" is absolute nonsense.

If you're arguing that British English is "correct" because you believe it's the "original" form of the language, you've thought wrong--all dialects are constantly changing and diverging from the past, and in the case of North American and British dialects, both have equally (tho in some different ways) diverged from their common ancestor, Early-Modern English of several centuries ago. Hopefully this nifty little makeshift chart I designed shows up ok:


Early-Modern English
| |
| |
| |
/ \
/ \
Modern North American English Modern British English


Anyway, regardless of all this, *all* native speakers of *any* language, by definition, speak perfectly correctly and in no way are "lazy" or "sloppy" just because their dialect differs from another. Any other view is linguistically unreasonable and is not to be taken seriously.

--Please do a little logical thinking before you post, Riko.
Yann   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 10:52 GMT
There is indeed many French who don't like the way English sounds and prefer Spanish.
Greg explained in another thread that the English pitch is higher than that of French: "Francophone use a frequency range varying from 800 to 1.800 Hz. Anglophones : from 2.000 to 12.000 Hz."
Plus, although English has about 22 vowel sounds, almost none are similar to that of French.
Because of all this, English sounds very "unnatural" to French ears that haven't been exposed to English long enough (save, perhaps, when it's spoken with a Scottish accent).
In top of all that, although English has 70% of Romance words, the most used words are essentially Germanic, and so the grammar.

Obviously, all of this contrasts very much with Castillan: the pitch is similar (perhaps a bit lower), most words are similar, the grammar and the conjugation are similar and, to cap it all, the spelling is more logical than ours (let alone that of English).
Kirk   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 10:52 GMT
Well antimoon apparently left-justifies everything so the chart didn't come out as I'd hoped (gotta love the absence of a "preview" feature). Oh well...hopefully everyone gets the point.
Yann   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 11:10 GMT
There is indeed >> There are indeed
...   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 13:03 GMT
to Damian...

Leviticus 18:22

"Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable".

1 Corinthians 6:9

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
greg   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 13:14 GMT
Yann : "Plus, although English has about 22 vowel sounds, almost none are similar to that of French".

I'm not too sure about the number '22' for English. Dialectal variation aside (for both English and French), I'd say there are 16 monophthongs in French and 12 in English. Then diphthongs and triphthongs should be added to that.

Anyway, if we go back in time before 1066, then Old French was highly diphthongised (with triphthongs and nasal diphthongs) -a bit like Modern English- while Middle English was not much diphthonguised (if at all) -like Modern French.

English is said to have experienced one Great Vowel Shift (maybe more actually as old-time and current dialects should be taken into account) while French underwent 3 or 4 major vocalic mayhems before achieving its current stable, cardinal vocalic system.
Emri   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 13:47 GMT
Its important to understnad the french don't want to speak english, they prefer spanish, that's the point. I have been in France andi have seen many young french who were able to understand and speak spanish better than english. Some french told me, this is an alternative to the english monopoly. Many latin cultures prefer being between latin and encounter many difficulties when they are with nordic civilizations.
Sander   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 13:49 GMT
Since when is English Nordic?
Rosario   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 13:50 GMT
Kirk


No because between Pyrennees they are the same people : basques and catalans. They are french or spanish but the same culture.
Riko   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 14:23 GMT
Kirk, its all about logic with me

I stated before that English was not an American language, it is a European one. You need to think how the world was pre-1492, before the shit hit the fan. Correct, proper, and standard English is the standard English as spoken by those in England. When the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock they were speaking English, a language that was totally alien to the land where they settled. Why? Because they were from England, and their national language was English.

Today, 1 in 3 human beings speak English. Does this mean that English belongs to no one or to them. No. It still belongs to the island off of northwest Europe. Now, if a language such as Esperanto or Interlingua ever had a status similar to English today, then it would belong to 'no one'. Why? While these languages are man-made or perhaps invented through a computer, they do not belong to an original nation state and are not part of that country's vernacular.

<<<Just as in Spanish's case, English is constantly evolving, and there is no one inherent "pure" form that anyone can point to (which actually doesn't apply to *any* living language). I don't know on what grounds you hold that a certain dialect of any language can be *better* than another, but your arguments are highly logically flawed--you obviously know little about basic linguistic facts and are broadcasting that loud and clear for everyone to see here. Shall I start a crash Ling 101 course for you?>>>>

2 billion people speak English, with hundreds of dialects between them. Some of these dialects diverge into separate languages. What holds them together is the binding glue of standard English, which is spoken in Britain. One has to ignore the behemoth on the other side of the ocean that speaks incorrect English. It may be the same language, but the pronunciation is incorrect. I suspect that I am writing some Americanisms myself, but I can't help it, I was put through the crap box that US Americans call public education.

<<<<<If you're arguing that British English is "correct" because you believe it's the "original" form of the language, you've thought wrong--all dialects are constantly changing and diverging from the past, and in the case of North American and British dialects, both have equally (tho in some different ways) diverged from their common ancestor, Early-Modern English of several centuries ago. Hopefully this nifty little makeshift chart I designed shows up ok: >>>>>

I am arguing that what we know as "English" today was first spoken, written, and read in Britain. Before that there were Danes and Franks and Celts, Angles, and Saxons, who knows what else, but they all spoke separate Germanic, Latin, and Celtic languages. They all merged to form a new language, English. Several hundred years later the English began to leave their island and one of their first destinations was America, and you know the rest from there.

In 2005 just because the worlds only superpower speaks a version of the English language, does not make their form the true and correct version of that language, for the language, after hundreds of years, is still alien in that part of the world, and will always be.

To state that someone from negril, perth, fairbanks, newcastle or abuja are correct in their 'native' usage of the English language is correct, but their English, except for newcastle, is not standard.
Sander   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 14:25 GMT
Your an idiot Riko.
Riko   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 14:46 GMT
Is that all I am?
Yann   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 16:04 GMT
Emri: <<Some french told me, this is an alternative to the english monopoly.>>

Some French think so. But the main reason for our prefering Spanish is that it's easier to learn for us.

<<Many latin cultures prefer being between latin and encounter many difficulties when they are with nordic civilizations.>>

Well, some French might prefer Latin cultures, but to say that we don't want to visit non-Latin countries nor learn English would be an over-generalization. As I said in another post, teaching English is one of the most profitable business in France.
But because English is not a Romance language, we can't learn it with the same ease as the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Danes and the Swedes.



Greg: <<I'm not too sure about the number '22' for English. Dialectal variation aside (for both English and French), I'd say there are 16 monophthongs in French and 12 in English. Then diphthongs and triphthongs should be added to that.>>

Interesting. How many vowel sounds would that make in both languages if diphtongs and triphtongs were included?
Cro Magnon   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 16:10 GMT
English is NOT alien in our part of the world! Maybe it was in 1492, and maybe it had it's roots in a tiny little island which is only important because it happened to have a kick-ass navy a few hundred years ago. But American English is clearly the most important language, and if any language is the "correct" version, it would be American.
M   Sunday, June 05, 2005, 16:42 GMT
JJM,
"You are dreaming if you conflate the importance of Spanish worldwide with the importance of English."


Well, not really. I work in France since 20 years, people in companies usuaally had english lessons. Since the last 5 years, more and more people have the choice between spanish and english. The majority choose spanish. Some softwares are used in the spanish versions today. A friend told me it's the same in Italy. There is a real tendency today with spanish. In fact, some french business men do prefer spanish because of South AMerica and Hispanic U.S,culturally closer, they usually have contracts the anglo-saxons don't have. One of my colleague who came in Mexico told me he had to sign a contract with a mexican enterprise. The boss told him that in fact, if the guy is latin or if he speaks spanis, he can be sure he will have opportunities. Only because they feel more trust than in the past. More and more european businessmen do not hesitate to develop products in spanish version. There businessmen are essentially french,italians and sometimes germans.