|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Thanks, yes, that was a good article to come across. I am sure you are right, too Shanks - after all, there were said to be literally hundreds of variant languages in Oz before Brits set foot on land there. Let us know if you find out more, Max?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1 |
I am a 4th generation Hispanic in the Midwest US who's fluency in English is regarded as among the best. My father didn't learn English until he went to 1st grade. and I didn't [begin to] learn Spanish, until I was in 9th grade. Alas, while I can sing some of the old Spanish Folk songs, I cannot speak the tongue. I regard myself as the generation that dropped the ball of our proud family tongue. I will fix that unless I die too soon.
I do believe that the language is the soul of our culture, and needs to be preserved. So I practice a little every day. AND I make sure my kids see me practice and know that I am serious about learning our mother tongue. We do practice at the table almost every night, but I know that TV's influence may outreach mine as they grow.
As for the notion that language will help resolve world peace and put to rest the "power of the Tower of Babel"... Hogwash. Look at how many nations who spoke the same language have warred with each other, English included. So we have a current fad for English that covers almost one third of the globe. Mostly for business and trade reasons. It will solve some mis-communication disagreements and yet be the cause of some new ones. Give it a minute of thought and I think you will agree.
Are you unaware that the Chinese will forever veto such an official and eternal proclomation of "English is THE global language". Any international linguist should be able to tell you how they fight such potentialities since they believe an Oriental tongue will be easier to learn as THE international language…. mostly because so many Chinese already speak one. They have a point but their persuasions are as unskilled and no better than cold war Russian's were. Still, they are as insulted as they want to be, and insist that they be put at the head of the line for being able to push the world's power buttons. Sigh. Someone tell them about catching flies with vinegar. So far they seem pretty unhappy with the West in general. They could have half the globe's population in one quick power grab and who's to say what they really want. I don't think they know yet. Just remember that today's English fad, could become subsumed by economics again, just as it has now.
I believe the winner will be the most flexible language, meaning some new pidgin phonetically spelled English that arises on the internet, that is brokered and filtered with legally agreed to meanings like a good dictionary company would do. That is what will take over in an unstoppable manner. And this will be one that uses internationally accepted phonetic spellings to eliminate all the 11 differerent spellings to elicit the phoneme "sh".
No, it still won't bring world peace or stop world hunger. Language will always be as potent as cannonballs, and some will always regard the sword as their dependable "fallback persuasion".
But a global English WILL still be a good thing. And there may be two gloabl languages, an oriental one and a Western one. Hegemony is not necessary for success of a global language.
Still we ought to shudder at the idea of visiting Italy and no one speaks Italian, or New Zealand and no one speaks Maori. I do. Cultural treasures belong in the culture, not JUST in museums
Thanks for listening
TC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,379 |
As for the notion that language will help resolve world peace and put to rest the "power of the Tower of Babel"…to eliminate all the 11 differerent spellings to elicit the phoneme "sh".After all that, there may be a few librarians who will tell you "Sh" does still bring peace.  Hi, zevahcat, welcome to the looney bin.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 275
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 275 |
On May 15, The New York Times reports that English as a global language is once again being questioned. This time in Brazil. If a powerful member of Congress will have his way, words like "drive-in", hotdog" and "milkshake", "valet parking" and "personal banker" will be illegal.
chronist
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
Illegal as what? Speaking German in the US during WWII?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,189
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,189 |
I think the homogenization of language is a natural process in this age of mass media, and that the ultimate globular language will be a hybrid of all the present tongues (remember, I'm thinking in terms of ages of linguistic evolution here, not years). But, I also think this ultimate prospect, while being good for the strivings of world peace,
also comes with a price as illustrated by the dilution and loss of accents and dialects across the continental United States. I thinks it's kind of sad to see this linquistic variety and diversity fading away due to the influence of the mass media (and, now, what impact is the internet having on this process?). Gone are the broad regional accents...the Boston/New England accent of the Kennedys; the rich Southern drawl and accompanying linguistic imagery which made a 5th grade newcomer from Mississippi (to New Jersey circa 1965) almost incomprehensible to me; the hard-R Western twang, etc. (and if anybody mentions a "Jersey accent" I'll scream...it's a media myth!!) Part of this trend is due to actors and broadcasters being encouraged to "lose" their accents and practice "clear" diction and enunciation...so all these colorful linguistic tapestries are disappearing from the landscape. And, so, I believe that a World Language, following this process, will eventually winnow itself from the multitude of tongues...in short, it will discover, itself. For true believers of a World Community, whatever language helps achieve that goal will be the appropriate tongue...why force the issue? [chat]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Part of this trend is due to actors and broadcasters being encouraged to "lose" their accents and practice "clear" diction and enunciation
Dan Rather is one of those broadcasters, but you can still tell that the midwestern TV accent is not his natural accent. He makes up for a loss of accent flavor with his weird Texas metaphors.
Barbara Walters is another story, though. How in the world did she get into broadcasting with that unintelligible voice?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
In reply to:
Part of this trend is due to actors and broadcasters being encouraged to "lose" their accents and practice "clear" diction and enunciation...
This may be the case in the US, but the BBC seems to be encouraging the use of regional accents by its newsreaders. None of the accents I hear from the presenters on its world TV service are particularly hard to understand despite the considerable variety.
Bingley
Bingley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
This may be the case in the US, but the BBC seems to be encouraging the use of regional accents by its newsreaders.
US broadcasters are probably not encouraged to keep their accents because many Americans find certain accents very annoying (New York, Boston and Southern specifically.) I'm sure if the newscasters had British or Australian accents they would not be encouraged to lose them because so many Americans love them. The Crocodile Hunter is incredibly popular here. Much of that probably has to do with his accent. A local radio station recently hired a female British DJ, obviously partially because of her accent.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 60
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 60 |
Which raises the question: what is the basis for preferring some accents over others? Merely that one sounds more melodious than another, or is it a value judgment on the place of origin itself?
I've noticed that one can hear a much wider variety of accents on public radio and t.v. than on the major networks, probably indicative of the networks' reluctance to risk employing foreign-sounding correspondents. An Ohio accent never offended anyone, as far as I know. And even the least worldly person can understand it.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,328
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
1,226
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
