Language represents the trains of thought of those who speak it. English began as a Creole of (Norman)French and Olde Anglish, possibly with a bit of Gaelic and Norse thrown in. Although to hear the Etymologists tell it, any word in English that looks non-Romance must come from the Noble, Upright, Teutonic German and not from the disgraced, deplorable gutter argot known as Irish. (I am paraphrasing the Etymologists here, as I understand them.)
I have an affection for Gaelic, though I donât speak it worth a damn. But my patterns of thought are Gaelic. And they tell me that Irish speech patterns in English are modelled on constructions found in Gaelic. As in my Mother telling me âYouâre very through-other!â (Your clothes are disordered.)
One Irish habit is to add ââŚso it isâ (or the like) to any declarative statement. It sounds less odd when you learn that Irish has an Emphatic Mood (or whatever it is) to their verbs.
Another is to say âIt isâ rather than âYesâ as Irish has no single word for âyesâ.
My Father used to say âSowl, and youâre a boy!â as an ejaculation.
I thought he was saying âSoulâ, but it seems equally likely he was saying âSaolâ - the Irish for âlifeâ.
Regardless of âSoulâ, which is a contentious expression, Iâd say that the individualâs ideas are confined and limited by the language they are compelled to use, but an imaginative individual will find a way to express their ideas beyond the normal limits of the language.
I very much doubt it. All the use-words from Irish, Hindi and Chinese were introduced by the English, not Americans. And the many French and Latin use-words come directly from the English love affair with all things continental.
Itâs fuel for fodder and humor I guess, but put simply, English is a complex language reflecting a complex history. Thatâs all it means.
It also offers many choices and levels of complexity for the speaker. I think itâs a fantastic language, but not the most beautiful to hear spoken or for me, to speak. Its ability to absorb words from other languages is an asset, to my way of thinking, but dissatisfying to someone trying to keep it within a box. Itâs least likely to become a dead language for that reason, I guess.
A very interesting, recent documentary, on the history of the English language (by Melvin Bragg) reckons more people now learn American English than UK English. At what point will the English start to get âoverruledâ in terms of what is, or isnât, considered âcorrect Englishâ?
The English spoken officially by the European Union has already evolved away from UK English. Singapore has a form of English most British people could not understand. In the future, development of the âEnglishâ language may be mostly done by the non-English.
I think thatâs true. Think of the Portuguese language, vastly overwhelmed in numbers of speakers by its former colonies, mainly Brazil. At one point, they even moved some of their royalty there and declared a unified kingdom of the two [story]
I mean, part of it was the Napeolonic situation. But I thought that was a telling turn of events regarding colonialism.
I wonder English and the weight of its its variants could grow to such size that some day it would necessarily be considered a linguistic group itself, like Goidelic.
I agree with everything above, except the bit about it not being the most beautiful language for me to speak. My spoken English is very good, nice even. My spoken Hindi and Panjabi are far from beautiful, even though I like those languages very much. If my pronunciation of them was better I might agree with 100% of Weeksâs post.