Re: [OT] English language



On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 05:32:34PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 04/03/2011 05:02 PM, David Jardine wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 03:17:55PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:

I don't know if England had its own xenophobic
equivalents, but I think the English would be less likely to accept
changes of spelling decreed from above.

Above? Webster didn't get his dictionary mandated by the government.

By "above" I didn't mean government. Webster was "above".


Who decreed that Webster was "above".

Who decreed that Microsoft was "above"?

But is it _our_ language any more?

Not after you beggared yourself after the two World Wars.

Misunderstanding: by "our" language I meant the language of native
speakers of English - American, Australian, English or whoever.

Successfully spreading your empire (and thus your language) around
the world /de facto/ dilutes your ownership of the language, by
virtue of each group you teach it to morphing it to their own needs.

It's not mipela empire and language, it's yumipela empire and language.

example, we insist on saying, "We've been doing it like this for ages",
who are we to say that "We do it like this since ages" is not correct?


If they were doing it "this way" before I was born, then they've
been doing it for ages... :)

But my grandchildren (mixed English, French, German, Italian) insist
that they have done it since agess. :)


--
"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure
the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally
corrupt."
Samuel Adams, essay in The Public Advertiser, 1749

I just love the spelling of "Advertiser". ;)

Cheers,
David


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404002403.GA4408@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx