Spanish is the most beautiful of all languages

Hi Jr,

I don't think that the vowel 'a' should sound the same in both 'fan' and 'fall'. In standard English, the first one is rather a frontal vowel, and in the second one you have to form it in the back of the mouth. So, they are not interchangeable. English phonetics has got plenty of such cases, where orthography doesn't follow the way a word is actually pronounced.

Spanish is not my favourite language. It is just my mother thongue and I happen to prefere it because I can express myself better than in any other language.

I personally prefere the Brittish pronounciation of English, which to my ears is more clear. Ironically, I am more used to American pronountiation, because USA are our neighbours.

I prefere any variant of Latinamerican Spanish pronountiation over any variant of Spain's Spanish pronountiation, because it is more clear, it is spoken slower, and softer.

I prefer the Brazillian melody than the Portuguese one, but I prefer the much more proper usage of the language in Portugal ten times over the Brazillian way of letting their language deteriorate this way.

I prefer the French pronountiation of French than the Canadian one, at least as far as I have listened and had contact with both of them. But I think that Canadian French is slower and more clear than France's French (this alone doesn't make it more beautiful, though).

Being English, French and Portuguese foreign languages for me, I think it is understandable that I prefer the clearer, slower variants of each language.

<<I prefer the much more proper usage of the language in Portugal ten times over the Brazillian way of letting their language deteriorate this way. >>

Sergio they didn't let their language deteriorate, they let it 'evolve'.

Hi Aldvs,

I was considering this point of view... but for me, making a language a collection of grammar inconsistencies, shortening words following the phonetic of them with no rules, absorbing pronouns here and there and conjugating verbs one day this way, tomorrow this other way, is not an evolution at all... again, for me.

Perhaps it is evolving right now, but for the time being, as far as there is not a Brazillian grammar which englobes all this phenomena and make all words of the same class follow it consistently, it will keep appearing as a beautiful language going through a deterioration stadium.

Es una lástima porque considero que el portugués es una lengua bellísima, muy colorida y con una enorme capacidad de expresión. Y ver que la gente escribe tan mal por pereza o por rebeldía contra las reglas gramaticales es como tener un jardín mal cuidado.

Aldo and Aldvs are the same person. I realize they are related names, but why the switch?

Anyway, I'd like to know what you define as evolution. For me, evolution, especially in language, is a change to something different. Certainly I think of it as forward moving, but I do not see most changes within languages as "backwards".

This is why I do not see loan words as detrimental and why I also see Brazilian Portuguese as having evolved from it's ancestor. At the sme time, I think Eu. Portuguese has also evolved - neither of them as the same as their ancestor.

My previous post should have a question mark behind the sentence "Aldo and Aldvs are the same person"

<<Aldo and Aldvs are the same person. I realize they are related names, but why the switch? >>

Yes Tiffany both are the same. I started on Antimoon with Aldo, you may remeber our fight about the 'United Statian vrs American' thing (which I still keep strong by the way), but I realized that there were more Aldos popping up everywhere so I switched to the 'Latin version', LOL! BUT again new Aldvses appeared around so I switched back to Aldo one more time. I will switch to Aldvm then now on. I would switch to 'monkeybangeran' but it's waaaay long.

Sergio, I was being sarcastic about the 'evolving' thing since Tiffany says that using plain foreign words even if there are synonymous available is evolution of a language, and the example was 'UFO', the English acronym that Italians use too but identical, instead of using an Italian equivalent.

<<For me, evolution, especially in language, is a change to something different.>>

But 'UFO' in English is identical to 'UFO' in Italian. Where's the change then ?

I don't like to use foreign words if there are equivalents or at least I try to be conscious about it. I admit that I use some, specially technic words, but I care and try to use our equivalents otherwise our language will become a freak like this one:

"In un placete de La Mancha of which nombre no quiero remembrearme, vivía, not so long ago, uno de esos gentlemen who always tienen una lanza in the rack, una buckler antigua, a skinny caballo y un grayhound para el chase."

"A cazuela with más beef than mutón, carne choppeada para la dinner, un omelet pa' los Sábados, lentil pa' los viernes, y algún pigeon como delicacy especial pa' los Domingos, consumían tres cuarers de su income."

...and I don't want that. Do you ?

We are talking about the evolution of one language, not a comparison. The evolution in this case is the additon of a new word - UFO.

Those monstrous texts that I copied above are full of additions but for sure they don't look like an improvement the same way 'UFO' doesn't.

But let's let it go (one more time) since you are more stubborn than what I am otherwise we would move in circles for years. LOL!

In a book called "Language Myths" there's a chapter titled "Italian is beautiful, German is ugly" which dispels the myth of one language being the most beautiful.

And apparently, I hate spam.

salut benjamin!
Excuse moi je me suis mal prononcé l'autre fois je ne voulais pas inférioriser l'anglais, j'ai été maladroit et je te pris de m'en excuser...il est vrai que je me suis trompé, et que j’ai été très irrespectueux envers vous, on peut nommer ça « l’arrogance à la française »…
Je dois souligner quand même que dans l'anglais, il est difficile quelquefois de discerner ce que souhaite un anglophone à cause déjà des pronoms personnels sujets, le "tu" et le "vous" en français ou en d’autres langues latines est seulement "you" ce qui différencie mal la politesse et la personne a qui l'on s'adresse...
Et je tiens a souligner que je ne suis pas le seul a m'être mal exprimé il y a un certain LAA, c’est marrant car il a dit exactement l’inverse que moi(peut être pire que moi): « And English is much more efficient at showing possession or ownership. »
« And Latin languages are also limited in the amount of words they have with which to express any given thought or idea. »
je compléterai en disant que l’anglais a quelque autres déficiences de ce type que la précision et moins évidente qu’en français, je pense, après pensez ce que vous voulez ça c’est mon avis.

In English:
hello Benjamin! Excuse me I badly decided the other time I did
not want to offend English, I was awkward and I taken to you of me to
excuse some... it is true that I was mistaken, and that I was very
disrespectful towards you, one can name that " l'arrogance à la française "... I must underline nevertheless that in English, it is
difficult sometimes to distinguish has which is addressed and under
which context addresses an english-speaking because already of the
prone pronouns personal, "you" and "you" of French or in other Latin
languages is only "you" what differentiates the courtesy badly and the
person has who one addresses herself... And I hold has to stress that
I am not only A to be badly expressed to me there are also LAA which
will be able "to close it": "And English is much more efficient At
showing possession gold ownership." "Latin And languages are also
limited in the amount of words they cuts with which to express train
any given thought gold idea." I will supplement by saying that English
has some other deficiencies of this type that the precision and less
obvious than in French, I think, after think what you want that it is
my opinion.

Hi Tiffany,

English
UFO- Unidentified Flying Object

Spanish
OVNI- Objeto Volador No Identificado

If Spanish created a new spanish "word" or abbreviation, why can't one do the same thing in Italian? I am not against evolution of a language. I am just against adopting foreign words innecessarily. Call it pedantery, or aestethic obsession if you want, but importing foreign words when not necessary makes such a beautiful language like Italian to break its rythm and sacrifice own words in favor of foreign ones. (even words that are more beautiful and/or more suitable than the new ones!!!)

As for the language situation in Brazil, imagine that all of us in this forum, whose mother thongue is not English, would insist in not improve our errors, and would start to claim, that "this is a new language, our new language, even if we don't have consistent rules, and are not interested in having them, because we will start to break them anyway as soon as they are formally declared"..... would you call that evolution?

Why do I think in this apparently intolerant way? because I see languages as the most important comunication vehicle among human beings, and the quality and accuracy of information exchange is always better in any language if the language is unified and follows consistently the rules.

And why do we care so much what a certain people find suitable, vs not? The Italians have no problem with it. I'm not telling the French they cannot use of SIDA, or ordinatuer, etc. It is their lanaguage, they may use whatever they please.

I, however, find it very uncomfortable when others are looked down upon as "dirtying the language" when they chose to accept words that may not sit well with others. And yes, I do find this attitude very intolerant. It's prescriptivism at its best (o worst depending how you look at it). Language is an important vehicle of communication - I fail to see how any of what you are talking about would hinder a langauge from being that.

Unless of course you wish we all spoke one language...

''I prefer the Brazillian melody than the Portuguese one, but I prefer the much more proper usage of the language in Portugal ten times over the Brazillian way of letting their language deteriorate this way. ''


The same old ''song''.
''I prefer the melody of American English, but don't respect Queen's rules, they are killing the noble language, blablablabla''


American English and Brazilian Portuguese have their own grammar rules.
I JUST SAW may be a grammar mistake in the UK but it's ok in the USA.
MATARAM ELE may be a grammar mistake in Portugal, but it's used by everyone in Brazil, even by professors

Please stop seeing language evolution as ''detoriation''.
We could be say the same thing of Continental Portuguese vs Latin. Someone might prefer the melody of ''Continental Portuguese'' but pure and clean rules of ''Latin'' which have been destroyed in development of Portuguese (like vulgar future with habeo VS normal Latin one-word future form)

'''shortening words following the phonetic of them with no rules'''


I think you need some help.
Brazilian Portuguese has its own rules and its own grammar. They are different from Continental Portuguese, Spanish, and Latin.

Try this grammar:

MODERN PORTUGUESE (A Reference Grammar)
by Mario Perini
published by YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS

http://www.powells.com/biblio?isbn=0300091559

Hi Tiffany,

I'm afraid that you mixed both parragraphs from my last posting. To your first comment: why do I care? because of the way I see languages (YES, MAYBE I AM WRONG). Your language carries a great deal of your cultural background, it allows you to identify yourself within a group of human beings, which is unique, and is one of the many different manifestations of the plurality of the human being. Adopting new words for concepts that are foreign to your culture is perfectly understandable, like computer related words. I use them myself everyday in Spanish!!! using foreign words to supplant already existent native words is like giving up a bit of your own culture. Please let's forgive the UFO example because this is not the case. Let's think about "fine di settimana vs. weekend"....
So, yes, they may use whatever they please, I am just saying that I find it a pity, for the above explained reasons.

>>I, however, find it very uncomfortable when others are looked down upon as "dirtying the language"...
Well Tiffany, this is not my case, I am not looking down upon anybody, I am just saying that this is a pity. Just in case.... :-)

So assuming that the next parragraph refers to my comment on the situation of Brazil:

>>And yes, I do find this attitude very intolerant.
You do? try to put this judgement in the context of the correct use of the English language. Would you be in favor of creolization of English anywhere rather than protecting the language as one entity? I am not talking about the whole planet using a single language, but about the specific case of English. Don't get me wrong here.

>>It's prescriptivism...
1) is it bad?
2) do grammatic rules make sense to you? would it have been easier for you to learn Italian 200 years ago, when there was not a unified grammar?

>>Language is an important vehicle of communication - I fail to see how any of what you are talking about would hinder a langauge from being that.
OK. Country A and B speak the same language. Several million people are capable of communicating. After a time, language in country B starts to fragment because of a relaxed (tolerant?) following of the grammar, BUT it fragments into different pieces within the same country. If this process goes further, one day, people within the same country will not be able to comunicate so easily with each other as it used to be, let alone with people from country A. What happened to the quality of comunication?

>>Unless of course you wish we all spoke one language...
I am fascinated by languages. The last thing on earth I would wish is everybody to speak the same language. I am making big efforts to learn several languages, and I am enjoying it. This doesn't have anything to do with our discussion. I would summarize my point in one open question: which is the healthy point to be tolerant/strict with the grammatic rules of a language?