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

A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#41

Post by Swizec »

outsideoflife wrote: post #27

When I worked for a multi-national silicon valley based company we got so sick of the creeping Americanisms (to be fair their jargon was worse, they even had a company glossary for it) that we started a game. We had a tally chart on the wall for anyone who slipped into saying one of them accidentally. I survived for weeks until I rang someone to 'touch base'! They seemed to have a group policy (or something) that cha…

My pet peeve is when Americans say “I itched myself” ... you scratched an itch.

> 3) Reaching out. To mean making contact. What is wrong with, I wrote to x, I called Y etc.

As a young nonnative whipper snapper I think reaching out kinda makes sense in the modern world. We’re connected to people in so many ways simultaneously that the way in which we reached out is irrelevant and often forgotten. I don’t always know if I called, wrote, emailed, texted, slacked, tweeted, messengered or carrier pigeoned you. I just know I reached out.

And before you say most of those are a form of writing, I think they’re often perceived as closer to talking (in person almost) than to writing.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#42

Post by clort »

krzyk wrote: post #19
skywhopper wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "original form" still spoken today. Why would the version that happens to be currently socially accepted as "correct" by most native speakers in England be the "original" form? The vast majority of English speakers don't speak British English.

I don't have any good argument why, besides the one that in non-English speaking countries, English == British English. Same for Spanish, when I'm talking about that language it doesn't even cross my mind that someone might think Mexican Spanish. But English is not my first language so it may be different e.g. for Americans.

Well ok, but British English is composed at least of Scottish English, Yuppie English, Townie English, Farmers English, Northern English, Black Country English, The Queens English and also I'm not sure about Newcastle-upon-Tyne if thats related or a completely separate language.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#43

Post by globcal »

British English is no longer appropriate because it was never properly promulgated in its colonies. Around the world from South Africa to Belize and even in Canada varietal bastardizations of the language have been allowed to emerge creating more English that is not British. Both Spanish and English are languages that have become decentralized and there will never be a global standard in favor of the country where the barefoot barbarians claim to dominate it so completely.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#44

Post by olingern »

No doubt we "Americans" have changed the language, for better or worse, but this comment is more about journalism.

I expect more from the BBC than to let a former Bloomberg journalist make generalizations without anything to back it up. "Awesome" occurring more often than "marvelous" doesn't provide us with anything other than the fact that the author appreciates the latter more than the former.

Seems appropriate that I should go write a piece for the BBC on how journalism has declined and how Brits are contributing, and be sure to cite this article.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#45

Post by Spearchucker »

Arun2009 wrote: post #26

From the perspective of a non-native speaker of the language, it seems to me that the United States is English's killer product. A great deal of the credit for the English language's dominance must go to the US and the culture and technology it exports relentlessly all over the world. Far from killing the English language as the author complains, the US might just have made it prevail over similar contenders like Spa…

Let's see how this turns out over the next decade or so. Both the US and the UK have and are slowly withdrawing from the world stage, making English less and less important. Without the UK in the EU, for example, why would English need to remain the common language when German is the most spoken language in Europe?

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#46

Post by clort »

yesenadam wrote: post #34
Walf wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

International English. Supposably, Americans could care less that other English-speaking countries are closer to en-GB than en-US, despite the relentless onslaught of inconsiderate software defaults.

Hehe.. I set my wordpress site to Australian English, but one look at my new edit page with its permanent "G'day" made me change it immediately back to GB-English.

I always think that the way that is written, is irrelevant to the way that it is spoken. I don't want to read it like it is spoken (Irvine Welsh I dislike your books though have no problem with the films), I want to read the words that communicate the concept.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#47

Post by cjwhite »

Swizec wrote: post #41
outsideoflife wrote: post #27

When I worked for a multi-national silicon valley based company we got so sick of the creeping Americanisms (to be fair their jargon was worse, they even had a company glossary for it) that we started a game. We had a tally chart on the wall for anyone who slipped into saying one of them accidentally. I survived for weeks until I rang someone to 'touch base'! They seemed to have a group policy (or something) that cha…

My pet peeve is when Americans say “I itched myself” ... you scratched an itch. > 3) Reaching out. To mean making contact. What is wrong with, I wrote to x, I called Y etc. As a young nonnative whipper snapper I think reaching out kinda makes sense in the modern world. We’re connected to people in so many ways simultaneously that the way in which we reached out is irrelevant and often forgotten. I don’t always know i…

As an American, I want to punch those people.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#48

Post by mattnewport »

olingern wrote: post #44

No doubt we "Americans" have changed the language, for better or worse, but this comment is more about journalism. I expect more from the BBC than to let a former Bloomberg journalist make generalizations without anything to back it up. "Awesome" occurring more often than "marvelous" doesn't provide us with anything other than the fact that the author appreciates the latter more than the former. Seems appropriate tha…

Perhaps it's not obvious to non native British English speakers but the American use of "awesome" to mean something rather different to its traditional British English meaning is very clear and obvious example of 'undesirable' Americanisation of English. Any native speaker of British English would recognize the phenomenon from their own experience but the author provided some actual numbers to back up the reality of this particular linguistic evolution.

It's a change I've personally lamented due to the loss of the word awesome to use for its original meaning without a good replacement.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#49

Post by posterboy »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #36
outsideoflife wrote: post #27

When I worked for a multi-national silicon valley based company we got so sick of the creeping Americanisms (to be fair their jargon was worse, they even had a company glossary for it) that we started a game. We had a tally chart on the wall for anyone who slipped into saying one of them accidentally. I survived for weeks until I rang someone to 'touch base'! They seemed to have a group policy (or something) that cha…

Not a Brit, but agree with you almost 100%. Although I reached out to Y is different than I called Y. It implies are more tentative, weak relationship between you and Y. I would say let me call Y if the juju between me and Y is strong, otherwise I would say let me reach out to Y

to call is rather objective, so I wouldn't say it expresses a stronger subjective kind of emotional connection, but truly, to reach out implies distance. but once you get in touch, that distance is covered, so its not strictly unpersonal. Not a native speaker, though.

Re: A book claims that Americanisms will have absorbed the English language by 2120

#50

Post by mattnewport »

Fej wrote: post #2

Misleading title, author equates "English" to "British English".

Unqualified, it is not unreasonable for 'English' to refer to the language spoken in England by the English people while 'American English' refers to the variant spoken in the United States of America by the American people, just as Canadian English refers to the variant spoken elsewhere in North America in Canada by the Canadian people.

It is especially reasonable when used this way by an English writer writing for a British publication.

Post reply on HN