Loading
 

The schmozzle over English language

Simon Winchester's "Professor and the Madman" features the remarkable origins of the Oxford English Dictionary.  It is the offspring of amity among those in the literary community, including the criminal-asylum inmate Dr Minor, an unlikely oddity in Broadmoor.

OED UK-based senior editor Fiona McPherson updates us on their project-in-progress, that 300,000 new words have found a permanent home in the 'compendium' since year 2000.  Even Homer Simpson's popularization of 'Doh!' is given a kindly nod to be included.

And so, many who still debate on whether 'labour' is more correct than 'labor' if 'manoeuvre' is superior to 'maneuver' are unwittingly treading the shallows of mediocrity.  If they were condoned, Bernard Shaw would have been off the mark in suggesting how unhinged our English system of alphabet is.  'Fish' could have looked like 'ghoti', the derivative of the component of 'rough' (gh for f), 'women' (o for e or i) and 'nation' (ti for sh).

Phonics pundits have been wrong.  It is clear a student versed in phonics, in and of itself, cannot by extension be an infallible speller.  To the uninitiated, 'rough' will be 'ruff' as will 'enough' be 'enuff.' Beware of heard, a dreadul word; that looks like beard and sounds like bird, warns a doggeral.

Alphabet

Language instinct in the fields of cognitive neuroscience, psycholinguistics and evolutionary psychology is more pervasive than most have the wherewithals to master.  Its idea is a paean to the breadth of natural potential of language evolution and progress than to its push for artificial re-constitution.  It is for the academic elitists .

Words are symbols - to rehash, capturing the essence of mental abstractions as flows from conceptualization and intellectualization, not to mention DNA and some grey matter.  The conventions of the English language, for instance, dictate that a cup is a cup is a cup for its given function which might well have been symbolized by kup or puk.

No one thinks in pure English or Gaelic.  If thoughts were the function of words, no new words would ever be coined.  We think, then we decide what words would best serve the nature, quality and the intent of our thoughts.  New words may be needed.

What makes the English language unique is the abundantly colorful wealth of its vocabulary even though part of its words system is of foreign imports: macho, schadenfreude, macaroni, typhoon, amok and orang utan - Spanish, German, Italian, Chinese and Malay.

Word usage and grammar is not contingent upon knowledge and learned language skills alone.  Hydrocephalic children as schizophrenics and aphasics have been cited for their incredibly developed grammatical proficiency and accuracy.  How did that happen?  For this, consult with my convincing mentor, Pinker by name.

By: Sam, the Tiger

Share on Google Plus

Comments from visitors

Post a comment

Enter your comments in the space below.

Name or nickname


Page: 1 2
Sort:

Grumpy, you are welcome. If you like Pinker, I read one of his about ten years ago, "Words and Rules". You might enjoy it, too. It's great that you like learning. You mention that pleasure in many of your posts. Good for you. :)

-1

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 21-Nov-10 13:47 

anon, thank you for the kind offer of interpretation; however I prefer to increase my knowledge by looking up any references I don't know myself.

Sam's gripe has already led me into finding an excellent article by Stephen Pinker; now I am about to embark upon an article by Erasmus which mentions the Cordiliers. I love learning!

Sam, I would love to see San Francisco one day; the world of writers like Dashiell Hammett, Clark Ashton Smith and Armistead Maupin. The grumpyoldman may be persuaded to take me one day when we have retired!

+2

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

grumpyoldwoman - 21-Nov-10 11:28 

"I'm as vague as they come. Too bad, which is why I stay away from WG. Damn if you say something, damn if you don't. I'm sorry I offended some of you."

Don't worry. I explained to them what your gripe was about. I used pareidolic interpretation.
If you have anything else to say, I'll translate it for them you...and them.

-1

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 21-Nov-10 10:36 

Mallory - kudos and well said. My point too - but perhaps there are superior readers and writers than I or we. Did we ever think sometimes that tace in Latin is a candle (elusive to some), and indeed so if one cannot hold one's own to speak, read and write the language before the Cordiliers.

I'm as vague as they come. Too bad, which is why I stay away from WG. Damn if you say something, damn if you don't. I'm sorry I offended some of you.

I'm opening me (or myself to some) to a barrage of criticisms, due or not.

-3

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

Sam, the Tiger - 21-Nov-10 03:59 

Grump - you are a lady after my own heart, so sensible and so naturally cultured in your approaches with reason and sanity.

Back to American English - please, rationalize the rhetoric! Tell us in plain, good Brit English or Celtic English or whatever; but state your ratio.

PS - Sorry that I have not visited WG since September. By the way, I'm in Frisco on the way to LA next week. American English serves me pretty well for this Canuck. Join me, Grump.

+2

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

Sam, the Tiger - 21-Nov-10 03:46 

"as long as people understand you I don't see why there should be a standardised way of communicating"

mardi gras; the problem is, if there is no standardised way, people will NOT understand you! Yes the language will evolve; but if spelling and punctuation are not reasonably standardised much confusion will result.

-5

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

grumpyoldwoman - 5-Nov-10 16:09 

the english language like any language is constantly evolving with time. as long as people understand you I don't see why there should be a standardised way of communicating.

0

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

mardi gras the candyman can - 5-Nov-10 15:31 

"It shouldn't be and it's highly annoying. Like I said, there should be no "American English". It's English full stop."

You should be grateful that their language is not "American".

0

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 20-Sep-10 03:38 

"I shall comment on a gripe to do with the English language if I believe it to be poorly written. Like this one. (How ironic)."

Fine. Whether it's well written or not is highly subjective. Let your declared beliefs inform the world.

+4

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 20-Sep-10 03:36 

It shouldn't be and it's highly annoying. Like I said, there should be no "American English". It's English full stop.

-6

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

alice - 20-Sep-10 01:11 

Most spell checkers are set to American English which is why it picked up on colourful in the same way it picks up recognise and wants you to spell it recognize.

The writer of this gripe is Canadian.

-1

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

yet another anon - 20-Sep-10 00:50 

anon - it's just an irrelevant gripe...a load of paragraphs not really flowing into each other, and becoming jumbled up. I'm taking it the Griper is American from the spelling of the word "colourful", which bizarrely has just been highlighted by my spell-checker.

I shall comment on a gripe to do with the English language if I believe it to be poorly written. Like this one. (How ironic).

+3

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

alice - 20-Sep-10 00:13 

Mallory, if you skim and move on that's fine by me. But you said you had read and reread the article and still couldn't divine the author's meaning. I think you are obviously adequately educated and therefore you must agree that the dismissing/trashing an article having only skimmed it is a precarious act. If you have an interest in English beyond communication use, dismissing the article in question would also be quite surprising. So, if you aren't interested in the subject, and aren't prepared to read the article either, what would make you feel that anything at all you have to say is newsworthy? It's no more meaningful than a dog barking at a passing car.

-6

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 16-Sep-10 15:30 

@anon - Please don't attempt to patronise me, I am an intelligent woman and more than capable of understanding correct English - your comment about The Sun is misguided and shows you to be a judgemental ignoramus.

Furthermore, I was not 'whinging'; I merely wished to point out that the gripe is a series of statements about the English language, rather than a crystal clear complaint about it. I can fully understand why some readers have had trouble finding the point. Having read it through a fourth and fifth time, I can just about see how you come to the conclusion as to what it's actually griping about, but please remember that most people on here do not read, but skim. If the point isn't immediately obvious, they naturally draw (possibly incorrect) conclusions.

Another point I should have made about your comment to Alice: It is rudeness in the extreme to tell someone that their comment in irrelevant when in fact she was merely giving her opinion on the gripe - as per the aim of the site and, indeed, the original poster (one would assume). Who are you, or anyone else, to decide which comments are relevant or not? Especially considering the fact that others agree with her; that alone should imply relevancy.

Got it now?

0

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

Mallory - 16-Sep-10 12:33 

GL - no they just think it's cool innit. Didn't pay enough attention in English classes, that's if they even bothered to attend in the first place.

-3

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

alice - 15-Sep-10 23:50 

I have refrained from commenting here until I'd had time to look up the references. Has anyone else who has already posted comments? I think not! Education does not need to stop when one leaves school. The story of the creation of the OED is a fascinating one and I have started to read Stephen Pinker's article "Language Aquisition".

Anon is perfectly right, the gripe is about allowing a language to evolve, which I agree with. It happens! Personally I am rather fond of the portmanteau word "chillax" as it fills it's purpose perfectly. A great many of the words we use frequently have indeed been imported from other languages.

However, too many use "language evolution" as an excuse for laziness. There have to be some rules or communication is impaired. While American spellings are generally more logical than ours poor spelling should be avoided. The confusion of similar words (eg. loose/lose, their/ there, his/he's) can lead to misunderstandings. Poor (or no) punctuation makes prose unreadable.

I (and others) have already said elsewhere that many sensible points and comments, here and elsewhere, may be lost to potential readers due to excessively poor writing. Some posters show a complete lack of respect for their potential readers by writing unintelligibly. After all, nobody these days needs to leave school without a working knowledge of basic English. Therefore lack of same is usually down to wilful ignorance.

Some try to defend the use of "text speak" on this site. I feel that this is wrong as it excludes those who do not use it in their everyday lives. It is only appropriate when used in its proper place, as a text message. It may have evolved as an offshoot of English but it is only an offshoot and nothing more. Some people know shorthand (or at least used to) but they would not use it when posting on a forum (subject to characters being available) as they would realise that it has a limited use and many people don't know it!

-2

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

grumpyoldwoman - 15-Sep-10 09:06 

Mallory, it's very simple and crystal clear. The "gripe" says don't whinge about changes to English because they are natural and continuous and the rules are never written in stone anyway. It's well written in content and expression and so you are whinging because it's not in the language of The Sun. Got it now?

+5

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 14-Sep-10 10:02 

@anon - if we don't know what the OP is griping about, how can we say if we agree or not? I'm with Alice et al; it sounds like the OP just wanted to get as many high-faluting words into his/her gripe as possible, and in doing so, forgot to actually make a point. I've read it through 3 times and still can't find what the actual gripe is about. Perhaps, anon, since you believe it's a valid gripe, you'd care to enlighten us as to what's valid about it?

0

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

Mallory - 14-Sep-10 08:56 

Alice, it's a valid gripe whether or not it entertained you personally. Therefore your comment is an irrelevant one. The idea is to agree, or disagree not to let us know whether or not it has passed your entertainment value test.

-1

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

anon - 14-Sep-10 08:35 

Well, anon, I read all of it in the hope that it'd get better.....and I'm giving my opinion on it as that's what this box is for! *rolls eyes*

+2

 Vote for this commentVote against this commentClick to rate  Report This Report

alice - 13-Sep-10 22:27 

Page: 1 2
Sort:

Close

Enter email to receive updates:RSS Feed

Twitter