Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Unsuitability of English (2015)

chronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 319 posts

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#131

Post by singold »

tosseraccount wrote: post #64
purpled_haze wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So true. And since you've gone the intellectual route, I'll choose the emotional one: I propose the Dutch don't like English because their language is also bastardization of different languages. As a defensive mechanism, they're picking on English to distract everyone from their soddy language. :) Sure, the writer's English, but he had to pander to the locals.

Most similar language to English, except for Frisian, is Dutch. Here's an admittedly imperfect graph showing this : https://alternativetransport.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/lex... . French, Spanish, Italian , Portugese and Romanians can often understand each other to a limited degree as all are modern mutations from Latin. English speakers might be a little surprised that,if they listen very carefully, can understand…

I have some English knowledge as a non native speaker, and dutch was like Chinese for me, until some said something similar to this.

Not that I can speak or write anything but sometimes some isolated words make sense for me because of the English similarity

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#132

Post by WalterBright »

I'm not too impressed with the article. Any language that achieves worldwide domination is going to expropriate whatever words are convenient from other languages, and they'll never fit in properly with the rest of the language.

English is one giant polyglot of other languages, including a hilarious mixture of old English with French (from when the French conquered Britain).

English also has many dialects and accents, some of which are borderline incomprehensible to other native (whatever that means) English speakers.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#133

Post by flatline »

newman314 wrote: post #119
wodenokoto wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no it isn't and no it doesn't. All natural languages carry a large portion of ambiguity, to the extend that Steven Pinker even count ambiguity as a defining factor of natural language!

One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I’ll never know. Try saying that in Japanese or Chinese. Not the same effect.

Chinese is more full of double (or more) meanings than any other language I've studied. Chinese literature and poetry are famous for playing on multiple meanings of a single character or sound.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#134

Post by PakG1 »

newman314 wrote: post #119
wodenokoto wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no it isn't and no it doesn't. All natural languages carry a large portion of ambiguity, to the extend that Steven Pinker even count ambiguity as a defining factor of natural language!

One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I’ll never know. Try saying that in Japanese or Chinese. Not the same effect.

You raise an interesting question as to whether the language can be separated from the culture. I'd wager that there's a ton of imprecision in Asian languages due to culture where a lot of communication is unspoken and relies on context. Korean-Canadian working as a manager in China and finding that I don't know how to communicate with my team even after 1.5 years on the job. Part of it is that I suck at being a manager, but part of it is that my team expects me to be able to read their minds. Chinese people tell me that the normal thing is to say something and mean something else.

If you separate language room the goal of communication and the context of culture, it's easy to analyze language differences the way you would analyze the difference between Python and Swift. But that analysis may not be so useful or applicable in day-to-day life.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#135

Post by titanomachy »

jan_g wrote: post #43
danieltillett wrote: post #5

The thing English has going for it (other than it is my native language) is it very easy to speak badly. With a minimal grasp of it you can get across what you are trying to say. I do agree about the insanity of English's spelling. Spelling reform is one of my lost causes that I think could be fixed by technology [1]. 1. http://www.cutspel.com

With a minimal grasp of it you can get across what you are trying to say. Exactly this and in addition it's also relatively easy to understand other people speaking English. This is really a key strength of English language, i.e. low barrier to entry. On the other hand, consider Danish language: similar grammar to English, also many almost same words, but one needs lots and lots of learning/practice to be able to spe…

I wonder though, is this a feature of the language itself or the fact that we are so used to hearing broken English? Hardly a day goes by that I don't need to communicate in English with non-native speakers, and I've gotten pretty good at it. Even if your accent is terrible you can probably still communicate with me. Contrast with Greek, for example: the vast majority of its speakers are native, and the Greeks have a hard time understanding non-native speakers despite the language's clear and consistent phonology.

Danish has rather complex and tortured phonology (to my ears), so I'm sure that's part of the problem; but English is pretty weird too.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#136

Post by crazygringo »

Yes, English has irregular spelling. And phrasal verbs, the whole "to/-ing" thing[1], and "th" is hard for some people to pronounce.

On the other hand, it doesn't have nouns that need to be remembered as masculine or feminine. Or a hundred+ unique regular verb conjugation endings. There are no subjunctive tenses (with one tiny exception). There are no tones. I could go on... Every language has its annoyances.

And honestly, the spelling's not that bad. Having spent years as an English teacher abroad, spelling was just never an issue. It's easy to complain about, but it's just not a big deal in practice.

[1] I.e. you must say "I detest fishing" instead of "I detest to fish", while you must say "I want to fish" instead of "I want fishing" while and both "I like fishing" and "I like to fish" are fine. And normal dictionaries won't even tell you which verb takes which.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#137

Post by Qwertious »

curun1r wrote: post #80
danieltillett wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true, but given human nature it unlikely that people will both to go to the effort of learning a second or third language once there is an easier approach.

Which is a shame, since the value of learning a second (or third, fourth, fifth, etc) language isn't limited to being able to converse with the people who speak it. Learning a new language can help you understand the world and yourself to a greater degree than is possible when you're forced to think inside the confines of a single language. It's a trippy feeling the first time you realize that you're unable to transl…

I've come across the latter concept myself despite only speaking english, and basically intend to learn another language for the reasons you mentioned. Not 100% sure which one, though.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#138

Post by vacri »

While I understand that the article is more about academic fun than seriousness, it does annoy me that articles like this go "X is not ideal! Y is better than X at foo, and Z is better than X at bar!". You never get a gestalt comparison, just "English is a shit language, because Spanish is better at this one item, and Hawaiian is better at this one item, and Swahili is better at this one item".

You get similar articles in the vein of animal comparison: "The human is physically feeble and weak, because our vision doesn't match that of an eagle, our jaws don't match those of a jaguar, and we can't swim like a dolphin", when in fact, we're physically just fine. Jaguars don't have eagle eyesight either, nor can they swim like dolphins.

> then went on to discuss how English managed to attain its astonishing (and increasing) global status despite its manifest unsuitability.

Not that mysterious: the global superpowers of the 19th (UK) and 20-21st centuries (US) both spoke English, and both were significant exporters of culture. If you wanted to be a have instead of a have-not, you were better off speaking English than Spanish, Hawaiian, or Swahili...

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#139

Post by smegel »

I wonder what linguists would consider the "best" current language in widespread use (at least 1M first-language native speakers say in a single dialect) for international exchange, taking into account all relevant aspects of the language including writing system.

Re: The Unsuitability of English (2015)

#140

Post by danieltillett »

Swizec wrote: post #89
curun1r wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a shame, since the value of learning a second (or third, fourth, fifth, etc) language isn't limited to being able to converse with the people who speak it. Learning a new language can help you understand the world and yourself to a greater degree than is possible when you're forced to think inside the confines of a single language. It's a trippy feeling the first time you realize that you're unable to transl…

There is an established theory that language shapes your thoughts. If you only know one language, then you are confined to a single way of thinking. Another interesting phenomena is that you are more logical in a 2nd or 3rd language than you are in your mother tongue, where you are more emotional. This can be a useful superpower.

I have a personal hobby of trying to find one of these thoughts that only can be thought of in one language and not another and I have yet to find one. All modern languages seem to be able to be used to express all human thoughts that can be expressed with any language.
Post reply on HN