|
English as a language of the net (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| UnBracKo |
The top spoken languages on the world (in number of speakers):
1. Chinese
2. English
3. Hindi (India)
4. Spanish
But english is the most common idiom in the occidental part of the world, so it's the used language in the business affairs, internet, conferences, films...
Nowadays know english it's a transcendental point if you go to find a job in my country. The most languages you know and specially english, the most points you have for get the job. However with our education system when you finish the obligatory studies you don't have the necessary base for talk in english, you need to study in a private academy or live in U.K., USA... for can speak english. For this reason not many spanish ppl can speak in english. |
|
|
| Delay Llama |
Thanks for all those who explained the differences between the American and British grammar :)
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
...As for the topic... I think we should all speak Latin ... or Esperanto :P |
Both languages would have some problems:
- Latin is not an official language in any country but the Vatican. This is why it's become a dead language, no one uses it in daily life. We would need to set standards for pronounciation (and nobody really knows what the correct pronounciation was, because it naturally changed as time passed by), and new words from modern society (even if most words do come from Latin and Greek). There would be no slangs and it hardly would reflect the needs of any of the speakers (which is the basic function of a language).
- As for Esperanto, I remember seeing a thread somewhere that mentioned it as an ordinary European language in spite of its will to become universal, which creates a faux (?) equality. I agree with this point of view: what kind of universal language is based only in German, Latin and Slav languages? There's a whole world outside Europe ;)
Is there anyone with a less pessimistic point of view? :toothless
edit: Nice sig, Astroboy :) That messenger quote is from Stigmata, right? |
|
|
| Ian^ |
English is a universal language, and easier than ones like german as they have 'genders' die der das etc and I know other languages do also. It's not as widely spoken as some may think, but you can get by just about if you use it, and most european countries teach english as a second language from a young age, im pretty jealous really cos we were never taught a 2nd or 3rd language in schooling until like aged 11, and i'd have loved to done it earlier, to be more fluent in it and able to communicate with many more people
I speak a bit of german & french, but I find on holidays in spain, the germans have to speak in english to the spanish even if they struggle as they dont seem to know much spanish on the whole, and I do believe that especially for ppl like myself, spanish is a huge bonus to speak, and i am going to try & learn it better. Other languages are more awkward, and the simple number of users here who can speak some english must be more than any other group. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Delay Llama
Is there anyone with a less pessimistic point of view? :toothless |
Yeah, it wasn't a serious suggestion, I was being a dick. No one speaks Latin and Esperanto apart from Language geeks. Both are far harder grammatically than English.
| quote: | | edit: Nice sig, Astroboy :) That messenger quote is from Stigmata, right? |
Thanks, :) Indeed the messenger one is from Stigmata (probably the only good thing to come out of that movie). The other two are from Dancer Upstairs a movie based on a novel, based on events that occured in Peru, pretty good flick imho. |
|
|
| ABTsportsline |
the time reading example is a bad one.... many americans use the 24 hour clock. the entire military does, for starters, and in some schools (like mine), growing up, we had 24 hour clocks in every classroom.
the only differences i've noticed between british english and american english is several words. and even i have come to understand and know those words....
ultimately, a brit in the USA will get by fine and an american in the UK will do just as well.
cheers
-ABT- |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
Heh, now english is a pretty simple language, so it isn't a bad choice for a universal language. But there are several problems with it.
The spelling is screwed up, I think it should slowly be switched to the phonetic spelling, where words sound exactly the way they are written.
The rules are really not rules but general guidelines, as there are more exceptions to the rules than there are rules themselves.
It's a pretty soft language with a bunch of different vowels, so people who learn it for the first time have problems with weird accent as they don't make a distinction between them.
There are some words missing, like a distinction between you (many) and you (one). Unless we take thou into consideration, but noone says that anymore. |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
I'm not aware of any grammatical differences b/w different english dialects. Apart from Americans spelling things differently to everyone else and putting a comma before the "and" when they list things. The "pseudo-grammar" of various regional slang dialects might be different, but slang is grammatically incorrect by its nature.
...As for the topic... I think we should all speak Latin ... or Esperanto :P |
OK, let me elabourate (sp?) here: one, two, and three - the second comma (after 'two'), is called either the Serial Comma or the Oxford Comma. It's used to reduce ambiguity. It's not just "an American thing". Something that I find REALLY irritating in American English is when people quote others and that's the end of the sentence as well. Take a look at these two examples:
John said "have a nice day!". - Logical, used in British English. I've always written this way.
John said "have a nice day!" - Illogical, used in American English, as the quote has puncutation but, the end of the sentence does NOT.
The American practice of discarding the punctuation after a quote had to do with typewriters and printing press that couldn't handle putting, say a " and . right next to each other (".). This practice should be stopped.
Usage of the Serial Comma should be done more, as it makes things clear for the reader. In the example I gave above, it wasn't necessary to use but, in other examples, such as the ones I found on a Google link ( http://ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm ) one day, it's necessary. Plus, on a personal opinion, I can't help but, see 'one, two and three' look 'incorrect', even though it is indeed a valid practice.
Can someone who knows more about British English explain the correct British usage of the single quotation mark that looks like an apostrophe ('), a double quotation mark ("), and this symbol: ` ?
Thanks! |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
Usage of the Serial Comma should be done more, as it makes things clear for the reader. |
Yeah I've always used it, but i remember my grade 6 teacher telling me off cos it was an "American thing". I always used it anyway cos, for example if you're listing a number of things one of which consists of more than one element, the serial comma prevents ambiguity.
eg: On my camping trip I brought: a bag, some socks, a knife and spoon, and a vibrating George Foreman grill.
So I always assumed it was the one thing about the English language the Americans got right, but I stand corrected, it seems it was part of it all along. |
|
|
| Nell |
" = quotation marks, simply used to quote something or someone.
' = even as a brit and studying A-level english i don't know the main purpose of these, but you can use them when giving 'examples' of things :)
the apostrophe of course is used when ommiting a letter from something i.e. "it's really nice", instead of "it is really nice", this should only be used in speech in order to follow the 'rules' :)
anyway, what the hell is european english? what other countries in europe speak english as a first language other than england? english is just english in britain. there is american english, but i've never heard of ausie english?! what is the difference there, other than dialects? do aussies actually spell things differently etc?
question for aussies.. do you spell it "colour" (english) or "color" (american english)
americans have loads of extra words like 'gotten' which can't be used over here as they are classed as being incorrect. instead we just use the word 'got' in a slightly modified sentence. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| You can use " and ' to distinguish quotes within quotes |
|
|
| starglider |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
Can someone who knows more about British English explain the correct British usage of the single quotation mark that looks like an apostrophe ('), a double quotation mark ("), and this symbol: ` ? |
As far as I know the (') character is typically used when it's necessary to have quotes inside other quotes.
e.g.
John replied, "The man looked up and yelled 'Where do you think you're taking that?' so we dropped the stuff and ran".
I don't know of any usage for (`) in English and in fact I'd be surprised if it had any accepted usage at all. I tend to see it occasionally on here as a substitute for the apostrophe (which is of course incorrect) probably because some foreign-language keyboards have it keyed as such. |
|
|
| jinxed84 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
...... Something that I find REALLY irritating in American English is when people quote others and that's the end of the sentence as well. Take a look at these two examples:
John said "have a nice day!". - Logical, used in British English. I've always written this way.
John said "have a nice day!" - Illogical, used in American English, as the quote has puncutation but, the end of the sentence does NOT.
The American practice of discarding the punctuation after a quote had to do with typewriters and printing press that couldn't handle putting, say a " and . right next to each other (".). This practice should be stopped.
Usage of the Serial Comma should be done more, as it makes things clear for the reader. ...... |
ive grown up in the US and i always learned to use the serial comma(didnt know it was called that untill now, thankyou :) ) and i always end a sentence containing a quote after the end of the quotation.
ive never seen it done any other way, like you said they just look blatently wrong. i guess my education wasnt that bad after all.
and as for the universal language, i think we should speak like pirares YARRRRRRRR are ya savvy?! ok so maybe that wouldnt work.
i think english is fine as a universal language, if you know it well enough you can explain yourself pretty much as much as needed, although some languages like latin have verb tenses that cant even be described in english because they are just so wierd( note: i dont exactly know what they are, i was told this by my latin teacher, i only went to latin 1)
some of the romance languages are just annoying with somethings. being a native english speaker and then going to spanish(3 yrs) and latin(1yr) is a little strange. escpecially with the genders,tenses, declensions, etc etc but i think all the exceptions and rules in english would drive me batty if it wasnt my native tongue.
double meanings, strange prnounciations "phlegm" for instance (i think thats actually a latin cognate if i remember correctly. i remember something comming up about it in latin one day and me being stuck saying "plegmata" for the rest of the afternoon....long time ago)
wow, tangents, im gonna stop now,
Mike |
|
|
|
|
