Steve Why don't you compare the influence (whatever you mean by that) of Trinidad and Tobago with that of Brazil insted?
Portuguese, the most successfull language in the world!
Alright. Fair go. Next up - South Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Australia, New Zealand, Canada take on Sao Tome & Principe, Macao, East Timor, Goa, Bahrain. A tough battle really.
Influence. It's in the dictionary. Under I. And in terms of trade, culture, learning, politics.
Influence. It's in the dictionary. Under I. And in terms of trade, culture, learning, politics.
Steve
««You cannot compare the influence of Angola and Mozambique to that of the US.»»
No you can not compare! So, why are you comparing? The USA is independent since 1776 while Angola and Mozambique are independent since 1975. Two hundred years of difference.
How influent was the USA after the war with the British or after the Civil War? How long it took to recover from it?
I don't remember USA being influent in 1790 or 1810.
««South Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Australia, New Zealand, Canada take on Sao Tome & Principe, Macao, East Timor, Goa, Bahrain. A tough battle really. »»
When were they independent? Macao is not independent it is Chinese.
East Timor is independent since 2002 and only after having been invaded for several decades, São Tome & Principe is independent since 1975.
A tough battle or a silly comparison? How do you want to compare countries that have been independent from 4 years to 30 years with those that have been independent for two hundred or were federated with self rulling for more than one hundred years?
Or you think that a country with thirty years of independence, and civil war for more than a decade, is able to have the same influence that took two hundred years for the USA to have?
What I understand is that you are saying Portuguese speaking countries should be able to do in very few years what took two hundred years for the USA to do? I always find those comparisons flattering.
««You cannot compare the influence of Angola and Mozambique to that of the US.»»
No you can not compare! So, why are you comparing? The USA is independent since 1776 while Angola and Mozambique are independent since 1975. Two hundred years of difference.
How influent was the USA after the war with the British or after the Civil War? How long it took to recover from it?
I don't remember USA being influent in 1790 or 1810.
««South Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Australia, New Zealand, Canada take on Sao Tome & Principe, Macao, East Timor, Goa, Bahrain. A tough battle really. »»
When were they independent? Macao is not independent it is Chinese.
East Timor is independent since 2002 and only after having been invaded for several decades, São Tome & Principe is independent since 1975.
A tough battle or a silly comparison? How do you want to compare countries that have been independent from 4 years to 30 years with those that have been independent for two hundred or were federated with self rulling for more than one hundred years?
Or you think that a country with thirty years of independence, and civil war for more than a decade, is able to have the same influence that took two hundred years for the USA to have?
What I understand is that you are saying Portuguese speaking countries should be able to do in very few years what took two hundred years for the USA to do? I always find those comparisons flattering.
Look, what you've basically just shown is that the entire argument for Portuguese being the most successful language in the world is flawed, by pointing out that most Portuguese speaking countries are tiny nations in comparison to English speaking ones. I am not here trying to compare nations but rather to compare numbers and influence of a langauge.
"What I understand is that you are saying Portuguese speaking countries should be able to do in very few years what took two hundred years for the USA to do? I always find those comparisons flattering."
I did not infer that. I am pointing out exactly the opposite. These countries are still in their infancies and at the moment have bigger things to worry about than whether their language is spreading or not. I do believe that when these nations solve their problems that Portuguese may become much more important than it is at present, especially in Southern Africa and perhaps South America. However, I don't expect that Sao Tome e Principe could become as important in terms of global discourse as the US even given a thousand years of independence.
When I said "tough battle", I was being a wee bit sarcastic. I was basically trying to say, as you did (rightly so), that it is a silly comparison. So is the comparison of Portuguese to other languages based on the ratio of total speakers to the number of speakers in the country in which the language originated.
I am well aware of the fact that Macao is not independent and that Goa is part of India, etc. I was merely pointing out places which were Portuguese colonies - I apologise there for any confusion caused.
"What I understand is that you are saying Portuguese speaking countries should be able to do in very few years what took two hundred years for the USA to do? I always find those comparisons flattering."
I did not infer that. I am pointing out exactly the opposite. These countries are still in their infancies and at the moment have bigger things to worry about than whether their language is spreading or not. I do believe that when these nations solve their problems that Portuguese may become much more important than it is at present, especially in Southern Africa and perhaps South America. However, I don't expect that Sao Tome e Principe could become as important in terms of global discourse as the US even given a thousand years of independence.
When I said "tough battle", I was being a wee bit sarcastic. I was basically trying to say, as you did (rightly so), that it is a silly comparison. So is the comparison of Portuguese to other languages based on the ratio of total speakers to the number of speakers in the country in which the language originated.
I am well aware of the fact that Macao is not independent and that Goa is part of India, etc. I was merely pointing out places which were Portuguese colonies - I apologise there for any confusion caused.
««Look, what you've basically just shown is that the entire argument for Portuguese being the most successful language in the world is flawed, by pointing out that most Portuguese speaking countries are tiny nations in comparison to English speaking ones.»»
Where did I say Portuguese speaking countries are tiny nations? I said the ones you refered were young nations not tiny. Brazil is a big country, Angola and Mozambique are not that small.
What you still do not understand is that being the most successful depends of the factors being analysed, as I already said in a previous post.
The most successful language can be Sanskrit or Tamil if the factors analysed are the oldest living languages still spoken (more if we take into consideration the number of languages that became extinct and the ones endangered).
««I am not here trying to compare nations but rather to compare numbers and influence of a langauge.»»
I do not know what you are trying to do, you did not give the elements necessary to make another evaluation. I am basing my opinion on the elements analysed by Viri.
If you tell what factors you are analysing we get a different picture than the one given by Viri, that is logic.
««So is the comparison of Portuguese to other languages based on the ratio of total speakers to the number of speakers in the country in which the language originated.»»
Any comparison can be silly if you start fighting over what is a successful language: Being successful is surviving as a living language for thousands of years while most died out; or having the biggest number of first language speakers but hardly being spoken as a second language; or being the most spoken second language; or being the language of technology etc etc?
What is success depends of what you analyse and more than one language can be the most successfull depending of what is analysed. In the case of the elements that were given in this thread no other language succeeded more than Portuguese no one proved otherwise.
I do not know why you do not agree with this, it is a valid definition of success just like any other.
If you want to use other elements go ahead, I am sure it gives a different picture, but do say what element you are analysing otherwise we get in a silly debate.
Where did I say Portuguese speaking countries are tiny nations? I said the ones you refered were young nations not tiny. Brazil is a big country, Angola and Mozambique are not that small.
What you still do not understand is that being the most successful depends of the factors being analysed, as I already said in a previous post.
The most successful language can be Sanskrit or Tamil if the factors analysed are the oldest living languages still spoken (more if we take into consideration the number of languages that became extinct and the ones endangered).
««I am not here trying to compare nations but rather to compare numbers and influence of a langauge.»»
I do not know what you are trying to do, you did not give the elements necessary to make another evaluation. I am basing my opinion on the elements analysed by Viri.
If you tell what factors you are analysing we get a different picture than the one given by Viri, that is logic.
««So is the comparison of Portuguese to other languages based on the ratio of total speakers to the number of speakers in the country in which the language originated.»»
Any comparison can be silly if you start fighting over what is a successful language: Being successful is surviving as a living language for thousands of years while most died out; or having the biggest number of first language speakers but hardly being spoken as a second language; or being the most spoken second language; or being the language of technology etc etc?
What is success depends of what you analyse and more than one language can be the most successfull depending of what is analysed. In the case of the elements that were given in this thread no other language succeeded more than Portuguese no one proved otherwise.
I do not know why you do not agree with this, it is a valid definition of success just like any other.
If you want to use other elements go ahead, I am sure it gives a different picture, but do say what element you are analysing otherwise we get in a silly debate.
Look, I'd prefer not to continue with this pointless arguing. First of all, tiny need not refer to physical size and second, I think it's reasonably clear to everybody here what the most successful language in the world at the moment is. You need not even take the blinkers off to realise it.
You can use the fact that so many people in such widespread areas speak the language, or how many people learn it as a second language, or how many governments have decided it must be included in compulsory education. If you're so inclined, you can look at it in terms of political power, monetary wealth, business influence, that sort of thing. Mere numbers, I suppose mean nothing, when they're confined to specific areas.
''Where did I say Portuguese speaking countries are tiny nations? I said the ones you refered were young nations not tiny. Brazil is a big country, Angola and Mozambique are not that small. '' But Brazil is linguistic rebel, not like Angola and Mozambique that use Lisbon-wannabe Portuguese in writing and speech.
let's see
Brazil: Brazilian Portuguese used (different in spelling, pronunciation and usage); Continental Portuguese often translated (or dubbed) when presented there
Mozambique: Portuguese is spoken by 10% population, Mozambique entered Commonwealth as English usage is spreading (due to Southern Africa influence). Continental Portuguese officially used.
Angola: Portuguese is used as a 2nd language by 60% population. Normally local languages are used.Continental Portuguese only officially used.
Guinea Bisao, Cabe Verde, Sao Tome': Continental Portuguese officially used, but spoken by small part of population. Local creoles are national languages. (Cabe Verde will proclaim KRIOL as their national language, now they are adjusting the ortography)
Brazil: Brazilian Portuguese used (different in spelling, pronunciation and usage); Continental Portuguese often translated (or dubbed) when presented there
Mozambique: Portuguese is spoken by 10% population, Mozambique entered Commonwealth as English usage is spreading (due to Southern Africa influence). Continental Portuguese officially used.
Angola: Portuguese is used as a 2nd language by 60% population. Normally local languages are used.Continental Portuguese only officially used.
Guinea Bisao, Cabe Verde, Sao Tome': Continental Portuguese officially used, but spoken by small part of population. Local creoles are national languages. (Cabe Verde will proclaim KRIOL as their national language, now they are adjusting the ortography)
HETEROGENEIDADE LINGÜÍSTICA
J. Authier (1987) estabelece o conceito de heterogeneidade enunciativa para descrever o fato de linguagem que consiste em que todo dizer tem necessariamente em si a presença do outro. Aproveito o impulso desse conceito, embora ele ganhe em nosso uso outras determinações, para falar em heterogeneidade lingüística toda vez que, no campo dos países colonizados, temos línguas como o português, ou o espanhol, na América Latina, que funcionam em uma identidade que chamaria dupla. Estamos diante de línguas que são consideradas as mesmas – as que se falam na América Latina e na Europa – porém que se marcam por se historicizarem de maneiras totalmente distintas em suas relações com a história de formação dos países. É o caso do português do Brasil e o de Portugal. Falamos a "mesma" língua, mas falamos diferente. Consideramos, pois, a heterogeneidade lingüística no sentido de que joga em nossa língua um fundo falso em que o "mesmo" abriga, no entanto, um "outro", um diferente histórico que o constitui ainda que na aparência do "mesmo": o português brasileiro e o português português se recobrem como se fossem a mesma língua mas não são. Produzem discursos distintos, significam diferentemente. Discursivamente é possível se vislumbrar esse jogo, pelo qual no mesmo lugar há uma presença dupla, de pelo menos dois discursos distintos, efeitos de uma clivagem de duas histórias na relação com a língua portuguesa: a de Portugal e a do Brasil. Ao falarmos o português, nós, brasileiros, estamos sempre nesse ponto de disjunção obrigada: nossa língua significa em uma filiação de memória heterogênea. Essas línguas, o português e o brasileiro, filiam-se a discursividades distintas. O efeito de homogeneidade é o efeito produzido pela história da colonização.
[Eni Orlandi. A língua brasileira]
J. Authier (1987) estabelece o conceito de heterogeneidade enunciativa para descrever o fato de linguagem que consiste em que todo dizer tem necessariamente em si a presença do outro. Aproveito o impulso desse conceito, embora ele ganhe em nosso uso outras determinações, para falar em heterogeneidade lingüística toda vez que, no campo dos países colonizados, temos línguas como o português, ou o espanhol, na América Latina, que funcionam em uma identidade que chamaria dupla. Estamos diante de línguas que são consideradas as mesmas – as que se falam na América Latina e na Europa – porém que se marcam por se historicizarem de maneiras totalmente distintas em suas relações com a história de formação dos países. É o caso do português do Brasil e o de Portugal. Falamos a "mesma" língua, mas falamos diferente. Consideramos, pois, a heterogeneidade lingüística no sentido de que joga em nossa língua um fundo falso em que o "mesmo" abriga, no entanto, um "outro", um diferente histórico que o constitui ainda que na aparência do "mesmo": o português brasileiro e o português português se recobrem como se fossem a mesma língua mas não são. Produzem discursos distintos, significam diferentemente. Discursivamente é possível se vislumbrar esse jogo, pelo qual no mesmo lugar há uma presença dupla, de pelo menos dois discursos distintos, efeitos de uma clivagem de duas histórias na relação com a língua portuguesa: a de Portugal e a do Brasil. Ao falarmos o português, nós, brasileiros, estamos sempre nesse ponto de disjunção obrigada: nossa língua significa em uma filiação de memória heterogênea. Essas línguas, o português e o brasileiro, filiam-se a discursividades distintas. O efeito de homogeneidade é o efeito produzido pela história da colonização.
[Eni Orlandi. A língua brasileira]
««But Brazil is linguistic rebel, not like Angola and Mozambique that use Lisbon-wannabe Portuguese in writing and speech.»»
Linguistic rebel: hahaha.
If you also call the USA, Australia, Argentina Mexico linguistic rebels. At an educated level Brazilians write and can speak like "Lisbon-wannabe Portuguese " too. Do North Americans or Australians use "London-wanna be" English, or Argentinians use "Madrid-wanna" Castilian in writing and speaking?
If street talk is the best language style you manage to learn keep your self in the illusion of a linguistic rebel Brazil.
Linguistic rebel: hahaha.
If you also call the USA, Australia, Argentina Mexico linguistic rebels. At an educated level Brazilians write and can speak like "Lisbon-wannabe Portuguese " too. Do North Americans or Australians use "London-wanna be" English, or Argentinians use "Madrid-wanna" Castilian in writing and speaking?
If street talk is the best language style you manage to learn keep your self in the illusion of a linguistic rebel Brazil.
<Mozambique: Portuguese is spoken by 10% population, Mozambique entered Commonwealth as English usage is spreading (due to Southern Africa influence). Continental Portuguese officially used.<
South Africa has 11 official languages: Afrikaans, English, Ndebele, Northern Sotho, Southern Sotho, Swati, Tsonga, Tswana, Venda, Xhosa and Zulu. In this regard it is second only to India in number. As a result, there are many official names for the country.
The country also recognises eight non-official languages: Fanagalo, Khoe, Lobedu, Nama, Northern Ndebele, Phuthi, San and South African Sign Language
Many white South Africans also speak other European languages, such as Portuguese (also spoken by Angolan and Mozambican blacks), German, and Greek, while many Asians and Indians in South Africa speak South Asian languages, such as Hindi, Gujarati and Tamil.
There are 11 official names for South Africa, one for each of the official national languages. While each language is technically equal to every other, English has emerged recently as the chief-among-peers as it is the most widely spoken language across racial barriers as well as globally, even though it is not the most widely spoken language by population. <wikipedia>
South Africa has 11 official languages: Afrikaans, English, Ndebele, Northern Sotho, Southern Sotho, Swati, Tsonga, Tswana, Venda, Xhosa and Zulu. In this regard it is second only to India in number. As a result, there are many official names for the country.
The country also recognises eight non-official languages: Fanagalo, Khoe, Lobedu, Nama, Northern Ndebele, Phuthi, San and South African Sign Language
Many white South Africans also speak other European languages, such as Portuguese (also spoken by Angolan and Mozambican blacks), German, and Greek, while many Asians and Indians in South Africa speak South Asian languages, such as Hindi, Gujarati and Tamil.
There are 11 official names for South Africa, one for each of the official national languages. While each language is technically equal to every other, English has emerged recently as the chief-among-peers as it is the most widely spoken language across racial barriers as well as globally, even though it is not the most widely spoken language by population. <wikipedia>
oH Kendra
vc já alguma vez se questionou que provavelmente não e so brasileiro que tem dificuldade no portugues?Aqui, eh uma das disicplinas consideradas das mais dificeis plos alunos.
E tem mais, 1 vez eu vi a luso-canadiana numa entrevista num programa brasileiro aquando da promoção de um de seus albuns,e fiquei com uma duvida, como eh possivel que gente como a kendra afirmar que nao percebe o portugues de Lisboa conseguir perceber a variedade mais dificil de perceber, o açoriano.
vc já alguma vez se questionou que provavelmente não e so brasileiro que tem dificuldade no portugues?Aqui, eh uma das disicplinas consideradas das mais dificeis plos alunos.
E tem mais, 1 vez eu vi a luso-canadiana numa entrevista num programa brasileiro aquando da promoção de um de seus albuns,e fiquei com uma duvida, como eh possivel que gente como a kendra afirmar que nao percebe o portugues de Lisboa conseguir perceber a variedade mais dificil de perceber, o açoriano.
Look what I found, what Brazilians think of their usage and how they react:
Redação – Verão de 2002 – Tema 2
Paulo, João e Renata estão conversando no bar de sua escola, onde costumam se encontrar, após a aula, para um bate-papo. Paulo, ao ouvir de João e Renata frases como: “Ele trouxe os convites para mim entregar.”, “Tu foi na festa da Alice?”, “Não vi ela nos últimos dias.”, procura logo corrigi-los, afirmando que eles deveriam ter dito: “Ele trouxe os convites para eu entregar.”, “Tu foste à festa de Alice?”, “Não a vi nos últimos dias.”
Considerando a situação descrita acima, questionamos:
O que você pensa da atitude de Paulo? E das falas de João e Renata?
Qualquer que seja sua resposta, fundamente sua opinião com argumentos lógicos e consistentes.
----------------------------------------
Atitude de Paulo e a Linguagem Usual
Na situação descrita, Paulo, ao tentar corrigir seus colegas, demonstra ter conhecimento do português culto. No entanto, essa atitude não parece ser de maneira alguma eficiente, e sim ao bom senso no uso da linguagem.
O português formal não é utilizado cotidianamente pela maioria das pessoas, e menos ainda pelos jovens. Um adolescente que consegue usá-lo de forma correta durante a maior parte do seu tempo, como Paulo, além de ser uma exceção, corre grande risco de ser considerado pedante pelos colegas. Paulo já deveria estar consciente de que seus amigos não falam segundo as normas, e de que tentar corrigi-los seria provavelmente inútil. Até mesmo se os pais ou professores de João e Renata os corrigissem, os mesmos não passariam a se comunicar formalmente entre eles, justamente porque a linguagem coloquial não é essa.
João, Renata e a maioria dos adolescentes podem não utilizar a linguagem oral de acordo com a norma culta, mas eles a utilizam de uma forma específica, inserida dentro um contexto comum a todos os jovens, com suas próprias expressões. Exemplo claro são as palavras utilizadas pelos vários grupos ou “tribos”, ou até mesmo por falantes de diferentes regiões do país.
Acima de tudo, a atitude de Paulo não foi inteligente. Querer simplesmente mudar a maneira como se utiliza a linguagem cotidiana é justamente coibir a diversidade de nosso idioma. Não existe apenas “um” português, mas sim vários, e todos merecem respeito.
Juliano Mernak Bittencourt,
18 anos
Redação – Verão de 2002 – Tema 2
Paulo, João e Renata estão conversando no bar de sua escola, onde costumam se encontrar, após a aula, para um bate-papo. Paulo, ao ouvir de João e Renata frases como: “Ele trouxe os convites para mim entregar.”, “Tu foi na festa da Alice?”, “Não vi ela nos últimos dias.”, procura logo corrigi-los, afirmando que eles deveriam ter dito: “Ele trouxe os convites para eu entregar.”, “Tu foste à festa de Alice?”, “Não a vi nos últimos dias.”
Considerando a situação descrita acima, questionamos:
O que você pensa da atitude de Paulo? E das falas de João e Renata?
Qualquer que seja sua resposta, fundamente sua opinião com argumentos lógicos e consistentes.
----------------------------------------
Atitude de Paulo e a Linguagem Usual
Na situação descrita, Paulo, ao tentar corrigir seus colegas, demonstra ter conhecimento do português culto. No entanto, essa atitude não parece ser de maneira alguma eficiente, e sim ao bom senso no uso da linguagem.
O português formal não é utilizado cotidianamente pela maioria das pessoas, e menos ainda pelos jovens. Um adolescente que consegue usá-lo de forma correta durante a maior parte do seu tempo, como Paulo, além de ser uma exceção, corre grande risco de ser considerado pedante pelos colegas. Paulo já deveria estar consciente de que seus amigos não falam segundo as normas, e de que tentar corrigi-los seria provavelmente inútil. Até mesmo se os pais ou professores de João e Renata os corrigissem, os mesmos não passariam a se comunicar formalmente entre eles, justamente porque a linguagem coloquial não é essa.
João, Renata e a maioria dos adolescentes podem não utilizar a linguagem oral de acordo com a norma culta, mas eles a utilizam de uma forma específica, inserida dentro um contexto comum a todos os jovens, com suas próprias expressões. Exemplo claro são as palavras utilizadas pelos vários grupos ou “tribos”, ou até mesmo por falantes de diferentes regiões do país.
Acima de tudo, a atitude de Paulo não foi inteligente. Querer simplesmente mudar a maneira como se utiliza a linguagem cotidiana é justamente coibir a diversidade de nosso idioma. Não existe apenas “um” português, mas sim vários, e todos merecem respeito.
Juliano Mernak Bittencourt,
18 anos
Se valerem os conceitos universais para a classificação das formas de comunicação dos povos, o Português, falado no Brasil, não pode ainda ser considerado uma língua. Ele não tem uniformidade, as regras são falhas e sua evolução é mais rápida do que a capacidade de organização dos especialistas.
Isso porque, ao contrário das línguas mais antigas, suficientemente domesticadas, o Português do Brasil contém mais exceções do que regras e, em alguns casos, simplesmente não respeita regra nenhuma.
A nossa é o tipo de língua que não favorece o falante por causa da quantidade de detalhes que possui.
Em vez disso, o que vemos no Brasil é que existe uma linguagem empregada no telejornal e outra nas novelas. A primeira, bastante correta; a outra, de qualidade duvidosa.
Isso porque, ao contrário das línguas mais antigas, suficientemente domesticadas, o Português do Brasil contém mais exceções do que regras e, em alguns casos, simplesmente não respeita regra nenhuma.
A nossa é o tipo de língua que não favorece o falante por causa da quantidade de detalhes que possui.
Em vez disso, o que vemos no Brasil é que existe uma linguagem empregada no telejornal e outra nas novelas. A primeira, bastante correta; a outra, de qualidade duvidosa.