Slashdot Mirror


What Language Will the World Speak In 2115?

An anonymous reader writes: Throughout human history, different languages have emerged and died, waxed and waned in relative importance, evolved, and spread to new locales. An article in the Wall Street Journal considers what languages the world will speak a hundred years from now. Quoting: "Science fiction often presents us with whole planets that speak a single language, but that fantasy seems more menacing here in real life on this planet we call home—that is, in a world where some worry that English might eradicate every other language. That humans can express themselves in several thousand languages is a delight in countless ways; few would welcome the loss of this variety.

Some may protest that it is not English but Mandarin Chinese that will eventually become the world's language, because of the size of the Chinese population and the increasing economic might of their nation. But that's unlikely. For one, English happens to have gotten there first. It is now so deeply entrenched in print, education and media that switching to anything else would entail an enormous effort. We retain the QWERTY keyboard and AC current for similar reasons. ... Yet more to the point, by 2115, it's possible that only about 600 languages will be left on the planet as opposed to today's 6,000. Japanese will be fine, but languages spoken by smaller groups will have a hard time of it."

81 of 578 comments (clear)

  1. Cardassian of course by ls671 · · Score: 2
    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:Cardassian of course by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nah, Esperanto is going to win this hands down

  2. Chinglish by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2
    1. Re:Chinglish by Kethinov · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I often wonder how realistic that possibility really is. Lots of Chinese people learn English, but very few English speakers learn Chinese. That has led to a one-way lingual exchange exporting English to China.

      But to create a Chinglish-style creole in the future, the lingual export would need to be bidirectional. English speakers would need to be learning Chinese at at least a comparable rate that Chinese speakers are learning English.

      One could argue that with China's increasing economic prominence that it may some day be necessary for non-Chinese people to learn Chinese, but even as the #2 superpower that still has yet to happen.

      As such, I'd wager that English as it currently exists will continue to dominate in 100 years. The fact that it's the first language of several major countries and virtually everyone worldwide learns English as a second language is a trend that shows no signs of stopping.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    2. Re:Chinglish by RR · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I see plenty of English speakers learning Chinese. A lot of them never learn "proper" English. But I work in San Francisco with the children of Chinese immigrants. Even the elected mayor is a child of Chinese immigrants, now.

      Going back to the OP, the current entrenchment is no guarantee. 100 years ago, everybody who wanted to do science learned German. 300 years ago, everybody learned French. 600 years ago, everybody in the West learned Latin. 2000 years ago, everybody in the Mediterranean learned Greek. For most of that time, everybody in China learned Chinese.

      --
      Have a nice time.
    3. Re:Chinglish by Kjella · · Score: 2

      But to create a Chinglish-style creole in the future, the lingual export would need to be bidirectional. English speakers would need to be learning Chinese at at least a comparable rate that Chinese speakers are learning English.

      The Chinese are big enough to essentially make their own grammar and words, just like US English is similar but not quite the same as UK English. If they start interspersing Chinese words some of them might stick instead of or in addition to the existing word as we read "Chinese English" words and use google. International English is possibly already diverging a bit from the UK/US/AU varieties.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Chinglish by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Mandarin as a language is not that hard to learn. It's fairly regular and very analytic (almost no word changes), even tones are not that hard to get right after you practice a little. I was able to pick up enough of Mandarin from my girlfriend in several months to be able to ask for directions in China.

      However, _written_ Chinese is unlearnable. Simply forget about it. You really need to memorize thousands of symbols just to be able to read an everyday newspaper. Writing is just as hard - imaging having to learn several completely new scripts (Russian, Greek aaand Arabic) at the same time.

      Phonetic spelling using one of many Romanization schemes is also problematic because Chinese is very homophonic - lots of words sound exactly the same.

    5. Re:Chinglish by pmontra · · Score: 2

      French was still more lingua franca in western Europe than English, when I was a child 40 years ago. That role still echoes in the name of many international organizations, especially in sports. Check the title at http://www.fifa.com/ and the name of http://www.fia.com/ The languages at http://www.olympic.org/ and at http://www.uci.ch/ are English and French (the original ones for the Comité international olympique and Union Cycliste Internationale). And wonder why http://www.fiba.com/ is FIBA and not IBF despite the title of the page is International Basketball Association. It used to be Fédération Internationale de Basket-ball Amateur. All of them were born at a time when French (the people) were internationally as active as English speakers are now, and English speaking countries where more centered on themselves than they are now. Ultimately the language follows the power and dinamism of countries: if you have to know a language to make money, you learn it. Chinese could be the next one but it's severely handicapped by the writing system. Nobody really wants to learn by heart thousands of characters unless you're born there and have to. I expect a very bumpy transition, if it will ever happen, and a lot of resistence. A Chinese written with latin alphabet would have more chances. Given the attitude of Chinese rulers maybe I'll see them mandating a switch to latin characters, and don't dare to protest. After all they already use qwerty to write Chinese.

    6. Re:Chinglish by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      There is one official language of China. There are some regional dialects, but the schools teach Mandarin only, and anyone who learns the local dialect, will always be fluent in mandarin as well. Parents generally insist on that, as otherwise, employment outside your region would be impossible.

    7. Re:Chinglish by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't know much about the Chinese language, but I've learned a bit about Japanese writing, which is derived from it.

      For Japanese, there's a distinct set of symbols that are entirely phonetic, called kana, which is divided into two systems. Hirigana is used for learning pronounciation of the imported Chinese characters (called kanji), while katakana is used for foreign words and names. In literature meant for children, you'll see small hirigana symbols above the kanji characters. I presume that once they know the pronunciation, the kids can pick up the meaning by context. Even though there are 80,000+ kanji, Japanese apparently only teach the most common ~2000 in school. No one but scholars and specialists know more than that.

      I have no idea how the Chinese learn their hanzi characters though. A quick search indicates the answer is probably a crapload of study and rote memorization.

      In answer to your question about the dictionary - I believe they're ordered by the number of brush strokes in the character.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    8. Re:Chinglish by Jeeeb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Chinese characters aren't that hard to learn. I learnt them (a subset anyway) while learning Japanese. It took about 3 years of reasonably intense study to be able to pick up and read a novel without too much difficulty. After 2 years I could generally approach newspaper articles. Newspapers are generally one of the easiest written mediums to approach. While there are several thousand characters in use, there is a relatively small subset of frequently used characters. Additional most characters are formed in a regular fashion from simpler characters. Probably the most common form being one phonetic part to indicate the reading and one semantic part to indicate the meaning.

      Chinese (apparently) has more characters in common use than Japanese but the difficulty does not scale linearly with the number of characters and Japanese adds the significant complication of having phonetic (Chinese derived) readings and often multiple, irregular native Japanese readings per character, and huge numbers of irregular readings for combinations of characters.

      One interesting side affect of characters having semantic meaning is that it often makes the meaning of words even new to the reader, immediately obvious. Especially for science and technology related vocabulary the meanings of words rendered in Chinese characters is often much clearer and more immediately obvious than that of English words derived from Latin/Greek. As an extreme example I can often comprehend Chinese (esp. when written in traditional characters) even though I do not speak Chinese

  3. Meanwhile... by Megane · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meanwhile, /. will still not support Unicode characters outside of a very small whitelist. Historians look upon this as a major factor in why Chinese did not become the dominant world language during the 21st century.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    1. Re:Meanwhile... by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thank you! (check my sig). It's bugged me for no small amount of time.

      Unicode support is one of those things that to most Americans is an "Oh, I guess that matters to some people, doesn't it?" afterthought, but to people who use alternative character sets it's one big mess of poor support after the next.

      You all realize that in many cases by not properly supporting unicode you *force* people to use English, right? In this context I'm not talking about Slashdot persay (this is an English-language website and that's fine), but all sorts of other things. For example, in programming, most languages simply don't allow me to use Icelandic characters in variable and function names. So I'm left with two choices: mangle them (like we have to do with URLs and a ton of other things), or simply use English. If I choose to mangle them to remove Icelandic characters, not only is it ugly and less readable (imagine if you had to mangle about a third of the letters in the English alphabet to write), but it almost guarantees messups because you write your *strings* unmangled (you certainly don't want to be outputting mangled text to the user), so you're always switching back and forth between needing to write mangled and unmangled. Even as for the strings themselves, in most languages unicode support ranges from "mildly acceptable" to "bloody awful". Because it's just an afterthought to developers whose native language is English that hardly crosses their mind in the design and implementation phases. They know that they "should" support it, but most really don't care.

      Now, I've seen some people take the concept too far, like trying to localize "for" and "if" and "else" and the like. That's stupid and pointless and asking for problems. But for crying out loud, make my strings work right and let me chose my own variable / function names. :P

      --
      If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
    2. Re:Meanwhile... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      I'm surprised that .Net doesn't have more popularity in other countries. It has full Unicode support for strings and identifiers. Here's an example in Hindi. Java also supports Unicode variable names. I guess they aren't completely open source/free, but if having multilingual identifiers is as important as you state, then you'd expect these languages to be highly used over thing like PHP which seem to have very little Unicode support.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Meanwhile... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      That is complete nonsense. Java uses UTF16 which is a well defined standard. No "shoehorning" involved.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  4. Indication of trolling by tgv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The phrase "We retain ... AC current for similar reasons." makes me believe the author doesn't know what (s)he is speaking about.

    1. Re:Indication of trolling by Rei · · Score: 2

      I think perhaps they meant "120V AC" or something similar. 230V AC, while having a few disadvantages, is in most regards much better for home distribution. More power with less copper and less losses, easier and more efficient to transform, etc. Shocks hurt more, though.

      Either that, or perhaps they're thinking more long term with the fact that high voltage DC transformers are becoming cheaper. There may be something to the concept that in the long run we'll increasingly see at least part of distribution done as DC, it avoids some types of losses and gives you more throughput for a given amount of line over a given distance, plus avoids sync issues between disjoint grids.

      --
      If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
  5. Chinese that speak English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Go to the hippest clubs or most-expensive shopping malls in Shanghai or Hong Kong. You'll see elite Chinese and HK kids speaking English, not Chinese. More often than not, they're speaking English with an English accent too.

    You don't see elite Western kids in New York or London hanging out and speaking Chinese.

    The same goes for rich kids in Rio and Sao Paulo. The same goes for rich kids in Bangkok, Istanbul, Mexico City and Riyadh. The global elite speak English. They're not going to be learning Chinese any time soon.

    (The exception is Japan, of course. But Japan is Japan. They're not going to be speaking English any time soon, elite or not).

    The issue isn't population numbers. It's what the global 1% are doing. And they're learning English in increasing numbers.

    1. Re:Chinese that speak English by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Go to the hippest clubs or most-expensive shopping malls in Shanghai or Hong Kong. You'll see elite Chinese and HK kids speaking English, not Chinese. More often than not, they're speaking English with an English accent too. You don't see elite Western kids in New York or London hanging out and speaking Chinese. (...) The issue isn't population numbers. It's what the global 1% are doing. And they're learning English in increasing numbers.

      The elite has often had their own languages, Latin used to be the language of any classic education. French used to be the language of diplomacy. The difference now is that quite ordinary foreigners learn English to become a support desk worker or software developer or work in an airport or the reception of a hotel and so on. Not to mention here in Europe in many large companies English is now the business language, no matter where you are. Sure if we're in a meeting with just locals but if one person doesn't understand English you switch. The casual email might be in the local tongue if you know the recipient, but all code, deliverables and documentation is in English. Or to put it conversely, if you can't work in English you've significantly limited your employment opportunities. The invisible hand of the market is pushing quite well on this one.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Chinese that speak English by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Informative

      The difference now is that quite ordinary foreigners learn English to become a support desk worker or software developer or work in an airport or the reception of a hotel and so on. Not to mention here in Europe in many large companies English is now the business language, no matter where you are. Or to put it conversely, if you can't work in English you've significantly limited your employment opportunities. The invisible hand of the market is pushing quite well on this one.

      One more advantage of English . . . you can speak it extremely badly, and still make yourself understood. I was once in a cafeteria in scenic Austin, Texas, where a guy from China and a guy from India were talking to each other . . . in English. The English that they were talking would have given my 7th grade English teacher conniption fits, but the two guys managed to communicate with each other:

      English is a fault tolerant language.

      With a relatively small vocabulary, you can say a whole hell of a lot.

      A simple language for simple minds.

      It works.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Chinese that speak English by aliquis · · Score: 3

      ... or because they ruled half the world?

      I read earlier that Germany was the language of science things here in Europe but after the world war(s, whichever), UK and France wanted to take that from them / saw their opportunity.

    4. Re:Chinese that speak English by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      I have often wondered how much the English language contributed to the industrial revolution taking place in Britain as opposed to other Euripean countries. English is more precise in some ways than other languages, is it a better tool for expressing ideas?

      Take a quick glance at German. When I'm sitting in a meeting full of Germans, and one of them mentions Fehlerbehebungsmassnahmen , I know exactly what he is talking about.

      I'm a native English speaker, but learned German as a second language. The German language is like programming C++ . . . you can do some wacky things with it that are a hoot and a half, but "normal" users should probably best tend to avoid . . .

      . . . haben gehabt wäre gewesen sein . . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:Chinese that speak English by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

      After WWI teaching German was actually outlawed in some places in the US, and I'm sure the UK and France (obviously) had similar qualms with speaking/teaching the Hun's tongue.

      During WWII the German scientific community was destroyed/uprooted/turned into ash.

      But prior to that, yeah -- for everything from economics to chemistry; German was the language to learn.

    6. Re:Chinese that speak English by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      English has more ways to say the same thing. So remember one, or parts of many, and put them together, and you can get out an idea.

      But that also makes it hard to master. Even most native speakers mess up "farther" and "further", worse still, most idioms using them use them wrong, so wrong is sometimes right.

    7. Re:Chinese that speak English by Deb-fanboy · · Score: 2
      For me it is not so much what language do they speak internally but what is the common language to speak internationally that is interesting.

      For example the language of the sea, and of the air is English. For example when a French or Chinese air traffic controller is communicating with an aircraft of their own nationality it must be in English, so that all the traffic which is listening on the same channel knows what is going on.

      A similar thing has happened for international trade. I am British but work for a Norwegian International company. The official language including in Oslo head office is English. I was on a course in South Korea with a Norwegian instructor, and Korean, Chinese, Malay and Japanese attending. I was the only native English speaker, but everything was conducted in English.

      I asked one of the Chinese students about how many learned English in China (he was from Shanghai). He said everyone, (but not everyone learns well of course).

      I suppose another factor amongst those on the course is that they view English as a neutral language, so that it feels more equitable for a Korean to be negotiating with a Chinese person in English than Mandarin

  6. English-ish? by jandersen · · Score: 2

    In only 100 years' time? Nothing much will change, is my guess. Historically, we have seen that Latin(-ish) became dominant in much of Europe, then faded away again with the fading influence of the Roman church, but it held out for a very long time in academic circles - in fact, as a little anecdote, when the Flora Europaea was published from the '60es onwards, there was a debate over whether it should be published in Latin or English, according to the foreword.

    English will be the trade language for a long while, but Chinese will grow in influence, no doubt, and may well be the second language in most of Europe. As for language loss - there seems to be a pattern where smaller language groups diminish, but then go through a revival when the speakers become wealthy enough to take an interest in their own, unique identity. Dialects too don't always disappear quickly, so perhaps we won't lose too much.

    1. Re:English-ish? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      English has one thing going for it: despite its odd irregularities, it is pretty easy to learn. Chinese on the other hand is notoriously hard to read, write and speak well. I don't think many people will bother to learn Chinese as a second language. Remember when Japan was the up and coming economic powerhouse of the world? We'd all have to learn Japanese... Except that hasn't hapoened either.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:English-ish? by aliquis · · Score: 2

      Aren't we (Swede here) not just talking dialects of each other languages?

      Swedish and Norwegian sounds very similar.
      Norwegian and Danish spell very similar.

      Norwegians are best at both.
      Swedish is the largest one.

      I think part of the reason is the wars.

      Also I guess over hundreds of years small changes happen. Why would they merge into the same? And which one of them?

      I can still read Danish pretty ok even though I've never learned the vocabulary (so it of course only work by searching for a similar word in Swedish and/or the situation where the word is used.)

      Now Icelandic ... =P (bunch of Scots/people from Britannia there too.)

    3. Re:English-ish? by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Uhm, I'm a non-native English speaker. I'd say that learning that the word order in English sentences is meaningful is one of the stumbling blocks but not even the most painful one. My native language is Russian and the word order is not fixed there, so Yoda sentences like: "When nine hundred years old you reach, look as good you will not" are often completely normal for Russian speakers.

      For me the most complicated part of English is. its pronunciation. And also maybe its grammar tenses (Russian has no direct equivalent of present perfect and future-in-the-past).

    4. Re:English-ish? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The key point about English is that, while it's not the easiest language to learn to speak well, it is one of the easiest to learn to speak badly but comprehensibly. People can speak English really badly and still make themselves understood. This gives it a nice incremental learning curve where the result of a small bit of effort is worthwhile.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:English-ish? by aliquis · · Score: 2

      Off-topic as shit, I don't go AC anyway so I can read the reply.

      From is born I guess.
      But living there may be correct enough.
      Where were you born?
      I'm born and living in Sweden but they are fucking it up. Actually thought about Iceland but it seem to just have grass.. Guess it's colder too. Likely more "fun" in Sweden even with all the fucking immigrants and Muslim invasion :(. Wish it stopped.

      We take in more than Germany.. More refugees than the USA..

    6. Re:English-ish? by jandersen · · Score: 2

      English has one thing going for it: despite its odd irregularities, it is pretty easy to learn. Chinese on the other hand is notoriously hard to read, write and speak well. I don't think many people will bother to learn Chinese as a second language.

      - English is 'pretty easy to learn'? Not really - like any language, it is easy to learn the basics, but that is true for Chinese as well. Learning to communicate well in English is very hard, even to a native Englishman. I work in an international company, and I come across a lot of very awkward English from very well educated people; I really do. They are not stupid - English is difficult to master.

      - Chinese: 'notoriously hard'? Not by a mile or two. It is easy to learn to pronounce, because the standard transcription system, pinyin, is phonetically very consistent, as opposed to English writing. If you want a couple of words that are pronounced in a surprising way, try place names like Uttoxeter, Billericay or Loughborough - not to mention Welsh towns, like Llandysul (yes, I'm cheating a bit here). As for Chinese characters, they are surprisingly logical and easy to both read and write, once you have learned the trick - the only problem is that there are so many, but compare that to the number of icons, road signs etc we all know. It's not a big problem.

      - Chinese as a second language: I know for a fact that Chinese is taught in schools in Denmark and UK. Not yet as the first foreign language, but we may get there yet. It makes a l;ot of sense, all things considered. China is already on the charm offensive in UK in a major way - they mean business, literally, and they are building close ties to EU. I am confident that my grandchildren (I'm that old, you see) will speak good Chinese, and it makes loads of sense to learn it. Plus, it's bloody cool too.

    7. Re:English-ish? by jandersen · · Score: 2

      What makes me think so? Well, having a Chinese wife, who works with these issues both in academia and in commerce probably makes me more attentive to news about the relations between China and UK. What I see increasingly is that China and UK/EU are working hard to build stronger ties. Chinese companies are investing ever more heavily in UK, Chinese students are coming to universities all over Europe, but particularly in UK, etc etc. Chinese is being taught in schools in UK certainly as well as in Denmark as far as I know. It is happening, believe you me. And on a lighter note, haven't we seen a number of very good Chinese movies in the West already? As well as movies with Jackie Chan, Jet Li and others.

      ... the Chinese themselves are forgetting how to write their own script and use Pinyin instead.

      You don't really know what you're talking about, do you? The Chinese government has tried a few times to make the Chinese use pinyin only - and failed. There are many good reasons for this. The biggest stumbling block is probably that the writing is what has enabled China to exist as one, huge nation for so long; Mandarin and Cantonese are mutually unintelligible when spoken, but they are written in the same way. Speakers of both dialects agree that they are Chinese - they feel they are part of the same nation. The other reason that makes it very hard to replace Chinese characters with pinyin is that pinyin only corresponds to Mandarin, so you would have to make everybody speak Mandarin the same way. Just think about how hard it is to get one group of 25 primary schoolers to spell correctly and then multiply that with about 400000000 to get to 1 billion. It's what we call a daunting prospect.

  7. Few you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I personally see no reason why a single language, and particularly English, SHOULDN'T replace other languages eventually. Language barriers continue to be one of the causes of cultural conflict and the existence of many different languages, be it 6000 or 600 or even 6 serves absolutely no practical purpose other than as artificial barriers to communication. If a culture or place wishes to preserve its traditional/ancestral language for ritualistic or ceremonial purposes then so be it, but the official language of every country should absolutely be the same and every person on this planet would benefit from being able to understand every other person. There is simply no good argument against that. I personally hope that it takes less than 100 years to shrink the number of existent dialects, particularly those used by very few people for the purpose of maintaining some artificial sense of cultural independence. You do not have to speak a different language to preserve that different culture; it is only one part of the concept, and not necessarily an essential one.

    Imagine an America where even the immigrants spoke fluent English... I know we'll never reach utopia, but I believe that would be a step in the right direction. I personally believe English is a perfectly acceptable candidate for the universal language because, quite frankly, it already is. Most other countries teach it in their school systems to the same degree they teach math and science, unlike in the US where schools offer some arbitrary European languages up to what generally amounts to an intermediate level of mastery. English is the language in which your ideas are most likely to be read and understood.

    Cultural unification must eventually occur anyway. Stop fearing the future.

    1. Re:Few you say? by RoLi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If what you write were true, it would have happened a very long time ago.

      But it didn't. Why?

      Because a language is basically like a uniform that marks "us" vs. "them". It creates group cohesion and community.

      To be exact any non-English language, because English is spoken by anybody anyway, therefore does not give any identity.

      English-speakers everywhere (be it a native US or a cosmopolitan European or Chinese) are having very few children and are living in a destructive "pop culture" that is not very conducive for large families.

      Non-English-speakers on the other hand are isolated from "pop culture" a lot better, therefore can have more stable and larger families - and are growing in all countries.

      That trend can be seen everywhere. Traditional English speakers will be a minority in all the major English-speaking nations (US, UK, Australia). Maybe they can hold out and maintain a majority in New Zealand.

      A good example are the Amish: Just 200 Swiss/Germans came to America and they did NOT assimilate. 200 years later they are 250,000 and still doubling every generation. That is only possible because they are isolated from the majority culture - and their ancient German dialect is one of the things that helps them do that: If the children don't understand Lady Gaga, they won't be influenced by her.

      And that is the reason why no language replaced all the others: When the dominant culture/language becomes decadent, people have no other choice than to push other cultures/languages in order to survive.

    2. Re:Few you say? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I personally see no reason why a single language, and particularly English, SHOULDN'T replace other languages eventually.

      Because it is inadequate for use in other cultures. As a Japanese speaker I can tell you that there are things you can say in Japanese but not in English, and the whole way of thinking about the world and describing it in Japanese is fundamentally different. It's hard to explain, but for example everything is split into animate and inanimate groups, with subtle yet important ramifications. There are four levels of politeness you can use in Japanese speech, and they are an intrinsic part of Japanese culture.

      The only way English will ever replace Japanese is if Japanese culture goes away. I can't see that happening. It's similar with Chinese and Korean, and probably lots of other languages. Fortunately we can overcome the "cultural conflicts" quite successfully - just look at Europe, where many different languages and cultures manage to co-exist peacefully and even cooperate within a larger political structure.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Few you say? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 2

      I personally see no reason why a single language, and particularly English, SHOULDN'T replace other languages eventually.

      Because it is inadequate for use in other cultures.

      THIS. Individual languages develop around culture and then take an active role in shaping it, though most people within that culture don't realize it until they step outside of their language and culture. It can lead to concepts that are truly untranslatable, in the sense that there is no single word or short phrase that could convey the concept precisely in another language.

      Most people who argue that we wouldn't lose much if we all spoke the same language also seem to believe in the "dictionary model" of meaning, where atomic words with exact meanings are combined together to make language. But that's NOT how meaning actually works; it's just an illusion created by dictionary organization. (If it were true, we would have also solved the automatic computer translation problem decades ago.)

      In reality, language and meaning is a complex network of associations, where word choice often conveys subtleties of meaning because of the various connotations and connected concepts in a language. Everyone makes a big deal about mostly mythical ideas like languages that could have dozens of words for snow or something... But it's not only the specialist technical terms where the distinctive character of a language resides. (And those can often be borrowed directly into other languages.)

      Instead, languages often make subtle connections in even the basic core vocabulary. For some perspective on this, take a look at a comparative dictionary of Indo-European languages sometime. You would quickly see that while many basic ideas in a language may derive from the same roots, a specific concept may have a number of different strands of development in different languages. For example, three languages may all have different primary words derived from different roots for concept X, each with their own distinctive set of connotations. While it may seem like there's a simple A=B=C equivalence between words, the meaning that is conveyed in translation could be significantly changed or lacking in nuance.

      In many cases, this may be a small thing -- but the reality is that language does shape thought and even perception of the world. If it's easier to make a particular connection between concepts in one language because of this network of meaning relationships, it can actually change the way people are able to discover new things or consider new possible ideas. Of course, it's not impossible to do this in another language... It's just less intuitive and thus perhaps less easy for people in another language to see the connection.

  8. Re:something new. by ls671 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    English is doing fine. I don't see it fading away so quickly.

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  9. Good riddens... by ParanoidMonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Being able to understand other cultures to form my own opinions would be great! These awful language barriers feed all manner of stupidity (e.g. wars, distrust, etc.). As for culture transfer? Pshh, whatever man, we have art and poetry for that stuff. We shouldn't mourn progress on that account.

    1. Re:Good riddens... by realkiwi · · Score: 2

      Good riddance - if you want to dominate the world learn to spell first!

      Wars are not started by languages but by greed and stupidity.

      --
      realkiwi
  10. Re:something new. by rwa2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    100 years isn't so interesting, maybe after a 1000 years.

    By then English shall have fragmented into a bunch of different dialects, quite distinguishable from each other. Even today, try getting a Brit and a Texan into the same room and see if they can communicate. English will just become the root for a bunch of new languages, like Latin was the basis for the Romance languages.

    Perhaps there was some convergence during the brief period of broadcast media over the last century, but even that is fragmenting into smaller groups as people tune in to more localized youtube channels... you won't have everyone tuning into a single "impartial" news source anymore with anchors with relatively neutral accents from the midwest.

    People like using language to separate themselves from each other.

  11. Universal Translators? by Selur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What about universal translators? In 100 years time, won't they be good enough for general use?
    -> my bet is that the world will still speak lots of languages and use translators. :)

    1. Re:Universal Translators? by Kjella · · Score: 2

      If you try to use very simple, concrete words that can't easily be confused for the purpose of translation then maybe. But for general text with all kinds of irregularities (idioms, euphemisms, allusions, metaphors, jargon, slang, all kinds of word play) translations will still suck bad. The real issue is that you don't know if what the translator was right, even with a very limited vocabulary of your own you can usually make something simple and understandable. With the translator you hopefully have a broad vocabulary and speak grammatically correct, but you've no way of knowing. Reminds me of a girl I once talked to from Quebec, she had taught a visiting guy "pickup lines" in French. Well not really, he tried them at the bar and ended up at the hospital. What are friends for...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Universal Translators? by by+(1706743) · · Score: 2

      But for general text with all kinds of irregularities (idioms, euphemisms, allusions, metaphors, jargon, slang, all kinds of word play) translations will still suck bad.

      100 years is a long time, though. There are a countable number of these idioms, euphemisms, etc. For example, if I google translate "I haven't the foggiest idea," Google gives me, "No tengo ni la más remota idea de" -- but if I translate, "foggiest" I get "más brumosa" (my emphasis in the quotes).

      100 years ago, we barely had vacuum tubes -- and only diodes and triodes at that. We already have context-aware translations, albeit of limited utility. In another 100 years, I suspect our translators will be able to cope reasonably well with the subtle nuances of language.

  12. Re: something new. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know. Not long ago the Boston accent was fairly prevelant through Boston suburbs, but now most kids sound like they're from California. There is a trend towards homogenization, and I don't think the desire for locals to distinguish themselves will be expressed through dialect. It's too hard with media so prevelant, and that's not gonna change.

  13. Terry Pratchett say... by rwa2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    If a language grows to be dominate most likely it won't be one we currently have, more likely it will be a mish mash of existing languages, similar to what English has become.

    "English doesn’t borrow from other languages. English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.”

    1. Re:Terry Pratchett say... by mjwx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If a language grows to be dominate most likely it won't be one we currently have, more likely it will be a mish mash of existing languages, similar to what English has become.

      "English doesn’t borrow from other languages. English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.”

      This,

      English will remain the dominant language because it is so versatile and malleable. You can mess up the sentence structure to hell and back and you can still understand it (I.E Chinglish, Indian English and so forth... Thanking you very much sir for the reading of my post), you can use the wrong word entirely and still make sense. We can borrow the mannerisms and even structure of other languages and still be understandable. Also unlike other languages, in particular Asian languages English is very imprecise, meaning it can handle being spoken incorrectly, if you look at Thai for example, the word "mai" has five meanings depending on which tone it's spoken in (high, mid, low, rising and falling), Strict language requirements tend to limit its spread. China has been a dominant force in Asia for some time yet Chinese isn't a dominant language because English is much easier to learn and communicate with.

      That being said, it wont be the same English we speak today because English is a living language and will change with time. Think about how different the language was back in the 80's if you're old enough, pretty rad huh.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  14. Sure, sure English will rule the world by realkiwi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First of all do not confuse language and dialects. People around here speak Basque, one of those tiny languages which are gong to disappear according to some. But young people here are becoming more and more interested by their cultural heritage and more and more are learning Basque. That is because there is a unification of the several Basque dialects into a single language understood and spoken by all. Dialects have disappeared or are disappearing but the language is reinforced

    English is my mother tongue but where I live I had to learn another language, French, in which I am fully bilingual. Right now I am learning Spanish because I live 11 km from the border and it is quite handy. My girlfriend speaks French, Spanish and Basque and has decided to learn some English. Many Europeans speak several languages and it doesn't seem to be an issue for them.

    --
    realkiwi
    1. Re:Sure, sure English will rule the world by deviker · · Score: 3, Informative
      Epa, I'm Basque. I live in Spain. I've always been quite poor and unable to pay private education. I'm learning Chinese, I learnt English on my own reading manuals and aplication notes, using IRC, mail lists, newsgroups and watching series/movies mainly. Even though my English might be broken I use it everyday and had no problems with it.

      I'm able to understand French without any problems (written and spoken and translate it to English as fast as I can move my vocal cords, in real time). I learned French only watching TV (Club Dorothee) without aid when I was a kid and my family and friends don't speak it.

      Now I have to learn Chinese to work with embeded stuff because the comments on the leaked codes are in Chinese and the nearly non existent documentation comes in JPG or images inside PDF files and can not be automaticaly translated by a machine without using an OCR first (and being lucky). Learning Chinese It is not easy but can be done, I'm just older and it is not that easy because I don't have time to absorb their media fast enough but it is not harder than learning another programming paradigm.

      I couldn't care less about the language, I don't even care for Basque, it just happens that I was born here but it is useless for tech jobs (unless someone wants to slack off working in education). Apart from tech, Basque will die because it is useless for flirting and basque people fuck less among them than hikikomori nerds (and I'm not refering to Idiocracy like movie problems).

      My girlfriend is Italian and we use English between us, mainly because we are both too lazy to learn each other's languages with no other practical purpose for it and because we can undertand latin derived languages without dificulties when we have to meet each other's family (and because it is a good excuse not to talk with each other's parents :P ).

      To sum up: "Resistence is futile, your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own"

  15. Re:AC current maintained only by tradition? by Rei · · Score: 3, Informative

    For a given voltage and given mass of wire per unit distance, however, DC has lower losses (dramatically lower in some environments, such as undersea cables). It also is a lot more stable, you don't have to worry about frequency maintenance, off-sync grid interconnects, and a bunch of other stuff.

    High voltage DC is still expensive to do but it's been getting a *lot* cheaper, and will probably continue to do so. For the time being, though, it's going to be confined to long high-power runs and undersea cables, situations that maximize its benefits and minimize the number of step-up / step-down stations required.

    --
    If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
  16. Re:something new. by jones_supa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    By then English shall have fragmented into a bunch of different dialects, quite distinguishable from each other.

    I predict the opposite: because of globalization, there will mostly be only one way to pronounce English, with accents having become a rarity.

  17. No big changes by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    I'm afraid 100 years is rather short time for languages to develop. Let's compare 100 years backwards to today. Was the combo platter that much different in 1915?

    1. Re:No big changes by pz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes. French was the international language 100 years ago. English was (at that point) an also-ran.

      Interesting observation: in modern-day Poland, when you ride the train, there are multi-lingual signs instructing on how do do things like open the windows or operate the toilet. The signs appear in Polish (it's Poland, after all), German (much of Poland was Germany and vice versa), Russian (it was under the Soviet sphere of influence), and French (the international language). No English.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  18. FORTRAN by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

    2015 is only 100 years away, John Backus designed FORTRAN 57 years ago, so it is 1/3 of the way there and still going strong. I suspect that C will still be in use.

    Oh, what do you mean spoken ?

  19. Re:something new. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or, as we call the language made from a mish mash of existing languages today: English.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  20. Re:something new. by amck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Some accents / dialects have been growing: e.g. Cockney English rhyming. As a result of it becoming 'popular', actual Cockneys have doubled down and made it harder.
    Accents / dialects are "membership" indicators, showing you belong to a community; they take time to learn. There is value in (1) having a common language but also for a community (2) being distinct. I suspect that _bilingualism_ is not going to fade away, though having one common language (English by default) will stay.

    --
    Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist
  21. Infrastructure by Livius · · Score: 2

    The difference between English today and earlier examples like French, German, Latin, Arabic, Greek, Aramaic, etc., is the vast bulk of written material available in English, and increasingly audio and video digital formats, plus the fact that while English is as difficult as any other language to speak well, it is easier than most to speak, and especially to read, passably.

    Technology for translation will make that reality less relevant but is unlikely to change the relative positions of the big languages. English, Mandarin, Spanish, and Russian will still have a lot of wealth associated with them.

    It is a loss for the world because when a language becomes widespread, it loses a lot of its distinctiveness. English has the grammar that it does largely because the English language community went through several iterations of that process.

    1. Re:Infrastructure by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2

      Actually, English is one of the more difficult languages to read because of all the irregularities. Even French is easier.

      Estonian is, by the way, one of the easiest languages to read. No diacritic salad like in Czech, or letter clusters for a single phoneme like in Polish, French and German, no irregularities, long vocals are marked as a double vocals, which makes the most sense, double consonants are exactly that. Everything is written as you would say it. And in contrast to Finnish or German the words are usually much shorter.
      Everything else in Estonian is, unfortunately, absolutely hostile to would-be learners.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    2. Re:Infrastructure by dk20 · · Score: 2

      Plus English has tendency to incorporate features/words from other languages into it resulting in additional complexities (you can sort of tell the words are not "English")

      "vis-a-vis" being a good example.

      In English, what is a "vis"?

  22. Re:Quebec Language Police by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    French has a reputation for linguistic preservation efforts, but it doesn't really seem to take. Television is télévision. Telephone is téléphone. Electricity is électricité. Etc. You know what these words are in Icelandic? Sjónvarp, sími, and rafmagn . Go to Wikipedia and look up random modern technical words from different fields (ideally ones not named after a person, since that's cheating) and browse over the language bar on the left to see what they're called in French vs. Icelandic (or any other languages). For example, photon, integral, mitochondria, polymer, autism, transistor, seismograph, hippocampus, supernova, and tyrannosaurus, to pick some. According to Wikipedia, in French they're photon, intégral, mitochondrie, polymère, autisme, transistor, sismographe, hippocampe, supernova, and tyrannosaurus. In Icelandic they're ljóseind, heildun, hvatberi, fjölliða, einhverfa, smári, jarðskjálftamælir, dreki, sprengistjarna and grameðla, respectively.

    Why does French have this reputation for protecting their language so much? It sure doesn't look that way. Maybe the difference is with common words? For example, Icelandic has a problem with people using English as slang in everyday speech. For example, "hæ" and "bæ" as casual greetings ("hi", "bye") are so common that they're pretty much embedded into the language. Does French do this sort of thing too? Maybe they're better about that. But at least in terms of new words coming into the language, I just don't see where they get this reputation from.

    (It should be noted that not only does Icelandic come up with native-based words for technical terms, but we actually use them. We actually say "tölva", not computer, "sjónvarp", not TV, "rafmagn", not electricity, etc. If there's a technical term that a person doesn't know the proper Icelandic for then they use the English, but in maybe 90% of cases, once the proper Icelandic for a word becomes widely known, it actually gets used) (there are of course those 10% exceptions where nobody liked the proper term so most people don't use it, of course... ;) Pizza / flatbaka being a good example)

    --
    If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
  23. Re:Quebec Language Police by geantvert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of those words use latin or greek root, prefixes and suffixes. It is not surprising that those words are used almost unchanged in French since this is a latin language. Generally speaking, French and English are very close. They have been sharing a lot of words since centuries.

    Islandic is probably very different because of the lack of latin or greek references. For example, a french speaker will immediately associate the greek prefix 'hippo' to horses (as in Hippodrome, Hippopotame, ...). I do not speek Islandic but I suspect that this is not the case in that language so it make more sense to invent new words in islandic.

  24. People Mountain People Sea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least 500 million people know the term 'People Mountain People Sea'

    All the four words that made up that term English words, and yet, native English people may be scratching their heads thinking 'what the hell is that ?'

    Things like that is happening, not only inside China, but all over the world ... Chinese people are 'borrowing' English words to spice up their communications

    And the interesting thing is, the use of English words by the Chinese is by no mean a zero-sum game. The Chinese are not giving up their own Chinese language. The English language to them is yet-another-tool that they can use to talk to others

  25. Re:Quebec Language Police by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You miss the fact that english has a lot of french / latin rooted words.
    So your complaint about telephone, television and electricity makes no sense at all as it is the opposite way around: the english use the same word as the french here.
    Same for the other examples you picked, either they are so scientific, like hippocampus, that it is hard to figure who adapted whom, I would say both languages simply adapted the latin "medical" form, or they are obviously the same in both languages.

    Why does French have this reputation for protecting their language so much? It sure doesn't look that way. First as mentioned above, you look at it from the wrong angle (by picking bad examples, french words that got adopted by english ;D ). And secondly, french is not spoken by many on the planet. So why should they not protect their language? The Icelanders do the same if you have not noticed yet ...

    Computer in french is "Calculateur" btw.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  26. Re:something new. by NicBenjamin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    100 years isn't so interesting, maybe after a 1000 years.

    By then English shall have fragmented into a bunch of different dialects, quite distinguishable from each other. Even today, try getting a Brit and a Texan into the same room and see if they can communicate. English will just become the root for a bunch of new languages, like Latin was the basis for the Romance languages.

    Perhaps there was some convergence during the brief period of broadcast media over the last century, but even that is fragmenting into smaller groups as people tune in to more localized youtube channels... you won't have everyone tuning into a single "impartial" news source anymore with anchors with relatively neutral accents from the midwest.

    People like using language to separate themselves from each other.

    Keep in mind that English accents in actual Britain are already more diverse then several language groups. In fact one of them has been promoted a language. When my grandmother grew up in Arbroath in the 20s and 30s everyone in the County spoke English with a pronounced Scots accent. Now they speak the Scots language.

    If you add in the rest of the empire you get accents so strong they could easily be languages in their own right -- such as Singlish and Hinglish -- and people who simply speak with such a strong local accent they are difficult to understand (even Indians speaking English proper tend to have a very strong accent to American and British ears, because they learn it to talk the each-other not you, white boy).

    But there's still a huge amount of people who can speak English with a small enough accent that you will be able to understand them. What's goi9ng on is there's an international English accent, which you can hear most easily if you talk to a Swede or Norwegian, and is somewhere between Britain's RP and the Midwest/California accent American newscasters use.

    So I suspect that's what'll happen in the future. It'll be like Latin in 700-1800, There'll be dozens of distinct dialects on their way to becoming languages spoken by people who don't want to be particularly important, but anyone who does want to be important will learn the Standard Accent so he can talk to foreigners.

  27. Lingua Franca by Martin+S. · · Score: 2

    "English becoming the defacto global lingua franca"

    That sentence suggests why. The English language is proven very adapt at including words and phrases from a whole host of other Languages.

    e.g
    German: Blitz, Bratwurst, Delicatessen, Ersatz, Flak, Frankfurter, Larger, kaput, Muesli, Spritzer, Zeitgeist,
    French: au-fait, belle, blase, brunette, cafe, critique, de-rigueur, deja-vue.
    Spanish: Amigo, banana, barbecue, breeze, cannibal, cargo.
    Japanese: Bonsai, haiku, karaoke, origami, manga, satsuma, tycoon.
    Chinese: char, chow, Ketchup

  28. Re:AC current maintained only by tradition? by Cyberdyne · · Score: 2

    I can see applications for DC power distribution in certain circumstances. High-density computing, for one - why have a full mains PSU in every server? It's expensive, more points of failure, and you end up going from mains incoming to DC for the UPSs inverted to AC to send back to the servers converted back to DC for use inside - and those inverters are not that reliable too. It makes more sense to feed all the servers off of DC (Usually 48V - any lower and current gets silly), and have the power supply stuff all centralized. All the servers need is a DC-DC converter for each rail.

    Telcos have been doing exactly that for decades now: all their exchanges and much of the optical kit runs on -48V: it's a low enough voltage to be safe to work on when live (negative rather than positive because that protects against corrosion on the wires), easy to combine sources (a diode will do it), no need to "switch" to backup power (just connect your load, battery and source together, job done).

    Facebook went the other way for a large server farm, though: running 480V 3-phase AC to the racks (277V per phase). Cleverly, though, they don't need to convert DC from the batteries to AC in power cuts: the mixed DC/AC bus feeds switch-mode power supplies which convert incoming power to DC anyway, so switching between AC utility power and DC battery power doesn't matter. Pretty clever really, IMO.

  29. Re:something new. by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The differences in English between areas over the last century has become more pronounced not less.

    [Citation needed]

    If you travel a lot you can witness it first hand

    Or if you didn't travel, you'd never know that other people talk funny.

    The differences between places like northern Scotland, Australia, the US and England is already massive and getting more so not less.

    You've actually done a longitudinal study, have you? I'd like to read it, where is it published?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  30. Re:something new. by khallow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The differences in English between areas over the last century has become more pronounced not less.

    No, I have to agree with the claim that English has gotten very homogenized. Lot of interesting dialects in US and England have near vanished. For example, cockney is not a dialect, but hundreds or thousands of dialects, most which aren't spoken any more. The US dialects just aren't as strong and weird as they used to be. And I bet your wife would have even more trouble with Australian dialects a century ago.

  31. Re:Quebec Language Police by geantvert · · Score: 2

    You don't get it. He is not saying that French is Latin or Greek but that French is derived from Latin (and indirectly from greek). French like Italian and Spanish, is basically Latin after 2000 years of evolution.

    Even though most french would not be able to understand Latin (as an englishman would probably not be able to understand medieval english), they should be able to guess the meaning of plenty of Latin words because they have a lot in common.

    German and several other languages such as english, allow to create new words by combining existing words from the same language. In English, 'hippopotamus' could have be named a "river horse" and later become a "riverhorse".

    In french you can't really do that. A "cheval de rivière" cannot become a "chevalrivière" or a "chevalderivière".

    However, since the tradition in the scientific and technical community is to create new words using Latin (and Greek), it is very common for some of those new words to be accepted very quickly in French regardless of the country they were created because they share a lot of similarities with existing french words.

    The mistake you make is that Seismograph is not a Scottish word but a greek word invented by a Scot.

  32. One word ... by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... "Firefly"; watch and learn.

  33. Re:Quebec Language Police by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That argument doesn't fly in face of the fact that it still goes on like that to this day here in Iceland, and we're not at all isolated. It's not like in 1850 there were people coining words for smartphone (snjallsími), tablet computer (spjaldtölva), coelecanth (bláfiskur), muon (mýeind), hybrid car (tvinbíll), etc, etc. This is not some old phenomenon, it's actively occurring to this day. Tablets are a great example because that was a really recent thing, when they first came out stores were selling them as "tablets", but once the word spjaldtölva started to hit the public sphere, there was a large-scale shift, and now all of the stores sell them as spjaldtölvur. Probably 90% of new things** that become popular eventually follow that pattern. Not 100%, and it's not an instant shift, but a large majority get there eventually.

    And again, I'm not faulting French for taking English words straight out or English for taking French words straight out or anything of the sort. That's actually the most common thing to do. I'm simply pointing out that the reputation of French for "coining their own words rather than adopting international terms" doesn't even remotely seem to pass muster. If someone in another country invents or discovers something, it seems that almost always the French name for it is just a pronunciation-and-spelling-adjusted version of the international name. That's hardly "preserving the language", at least compared to what happens here with new words.

    ** The big exception nowadays, and the one that's causing a lot of concern with lingustic traditionalists, are *software* terms, things like, for example, what you may see in your menubar. Relatively few apps have Icelandic support. Heck, people even say "CVS" as "See-Vee-Ess" rather than "Seh-Vaff-Ess", they pronounce the letters as they're pronounced in English. Where this will all lead, I don't know....

    --
    If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
  34. Re:Quebec Language Police by geantvert · · Score: 2

    > Why does French have this reputation for protecting their language so much?
    > It sure doesn't look that way. Maybe the difference is with common words?

    France is one of the few languages that is controlled by an official organism: L'Académie Française defines the rules since 1635. In practice, that means that French has not changed a lot during the last 2 or 3 centuries (at least in France itself).
    Texts from the French revolution (1789) still look very modern ( http://www.matierevolution.fr/... )
    New words or rules are of course added every years by the Académie Francaise with more or less success (e.g. "courier" for "email")

    Also, France is actively trying to protect the language by laws. For example, French radio stations have a limit to the amount of non-french speaking songs they can play. Some companies were also fined for providing english documents without a proper translation to some of their french employees.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

       

  35. Re:Quebec Language Police by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

    Take a simple exemple: Geography this word was made in french from the greek words ge and graphy (earth and to write) this word was then imported in the english language during the XVI century

    What's with all of this revisionist history? Seems like everyone is trying to take the opportunity to misattribute the coining of words to French. No, the French did not coin the word geography. The word geography was coined by the ancient greek philosopher Eratosthenes. The French took the word from the Latin geographia, who in turn took it from the Greek.

    French is a romance language (use wikipedia to understand what it means)

    Why not just explain to me what the word "cat" means is while you're at it? I'm sure I know far more about the flow of languages in Europe than you do. Without looking it up: tell me, which major branch of proto-Germanic has no modern descendents? Which modern eastern European language is related to Finnish? Which modern western-European language is not descended from PIE? Which languages apart from classic Greek has it been suggested that ancient Macedonian was related to? I can keep going.

    and it is a basic feature of this language to use latin to coin its own words

    But they're not coining these words. They're just taking them. And they take them regardless of the origin. Robot has a slavic origin. French? "Robot" (Icelandic: vélmenni). Tsunami is Japanese. French? "Tsunami" (Icelandic: flóðbylgja). Opossom comes from freakin Algonquian, but even that hasn't gotten them to pick anything more French than "Opossum" (Icelandic: pokarotta). Even the "Latin and Greek still count even though neither are understandable in French and Greek isn't even related" excuse doesn't remotely stand up to scrutiny.

    The simple fact is, French does very, very little to what it's stereotyped as doing (re-coining international terms into French), while there actually exist languages that *do* change international terms.

    --
    If you play a Ke$ha song backwards, you hear messages from Satan. Even worse, if you play it forwards you hear Ke$ha.
  36. Re:Quebec Language Police by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

    Others have examined slightly larger sample sizes.

  37. Re:something new. by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason that languages fragmented in the past was that populations were fragmented and rarely communicated. That is not the case today. Increasingly concentrated mass media in English will cause accents and dialects of English to converge. Mind you, the root English will also evolve over hundreds and thousands of years, but eventually, everyone will speak this root English.

  38. KFC~PFK by Kenshin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Quebec is a weird case.

    KFC is KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicken) in France.

    KFC is PFK (Poulet Frite Kentucky) in Quebec.

    Because laws.

    --

    Does it make you happy you're so strange?

  39. Common vs. Rare Vocabulary by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    There's more French than German in the English language.

    You are comparing apples with oranges. Our common, everyday words are far more like German than French: bruder=brother (vs. frere), Ich war = I was (vs. j'étais) etc. However our more complex words are largely from French e.g. economics=economiques (vs. Wirtschaft).

    One of the things which makes French so much easier than German to speak for an Englishman is that if you don't know the word (which usually means rarer vocabulary) you can often get away by picking a suitable English word and saying it with a French pronunciation (it does not always work but it is worth a try). With German you cannot do that since the overlap is with the simple, everyday words that you learn when you learn the language. This makes it far harder to both speak and to understand since you have to relearn every word in German whereas with French not so much.

  40. Re:Linguistic speciation... by taiwanjohn · · Score: 2

    It's kinda cool that we can witness this process in real time, as populations in Singapore, India, etc. gradually adopt more English vocabulary, norms, and syntax. Singapore is a great example of this phenomenon... say a Cantonese-speaking guy marries a Malay-speaking girl. Neither one of them speaks "native" English; they both have an accent. But they also can't speak each others' native tongue. Their only shared language is "broken" English... and that's what their kids grow up with as their native language.

    Living in Taiwan all these years, I find myself confronted with a host of different accents and dialects that I would never have encountered back home in Iowa. I've heard all manner of "English" from Kiwis, Ozzies, Scousers, Paddies, etc... not to mention folks from other language families altogether.

    Even as the old divisions fade away, you can see the new divisions emerge...

    To quote Mr. Spock... Fascinating!

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
  41. Re: something new. by TWX · · Score: 2

    The trend toward homogenization is based on communication as well, and since the goal seems to be encouraging everyone, everywhere to be able to communicate with everyone else, everywhere else, that will only help make everyone sound more similar to each other than before.

    In Europe, already a large portion of the population speaks English, technically as a second language, but almost as effectively as their first. Numerous European pop music groups have sung just about the entire body of their work in English even though they're not from English-speaking countries (ABBA, Aqua, Rednex, etc) and are most popular in countries that never were established by the British Empire.

    French could have had this level of expansion, but French has been intentionally held back as language, new words are basically forbidden. This has meant that large combinations of words to describe new things have been necessary when English simply creates new words or appropriates words from other languages as needed.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  42. Re:something new. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Doubtful. English has barely changed at all in the last 100 years, even though the world has changed immensely since WWI. Any literate English speaker can pick up an English-language book from the early 1900s and read it with very little difficulty. In that time, we've gone from the British Empire never having the sun set on it, to going through two world wars, a cold war, the British Empire completely falling apart, the USA turning from a mostly agrarian nation into the world's largest superpower and a huge industrial and technological economy. Despite all that change in the two major English-speaking nations, the language hasn't changed much at all.

    Remember, we're talking about what languages we'll speak in 100 years, not 500 or 1000.

  43. Re: something new. by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    Yep, English is the Borg of languages. You will be assimilated. It actually works quite effectively.