On 18/09/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
Wikipedia Anglo-Saxon?! Wikipedia Middle English?!! Wikipedia Scot's English?!!! I want Wikipedia English English!!!
I am going to to reply to the original post, since the follow-ups are irrelevant.
American-dialect English (also known as American-English) is more related to English of the 17th-18th century than 'Commonwealth-English' is. Neither Commonwealth-English nor American-English are 'English-English' or proper English more than the other; if you want proper English, look to Shakespearean early Modern English.
By the way, I am an American.
--Mike
On 19/09/05, Mike Kuklinski admin@kuattech.com wrote:
On 18/09/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
Wikipedia Anglo-Saxon?! Wikipedia Middle English?!! Wikipedia Scot's English?!!! I want Wikipedia English English!!!
I am going to to reply to the original post, since the follow-ups are irrelevant.
Irrelevent, how?
American-dialect English (also known as American-English) is more
related to English of the 17th-18th century than 'Commonwealth-English' is.
What you mean is, the American dialect appears to have retained more obvious features of C17th English, whilst also evolving new ones of its own.
Neither Commonwealth-English nor American-English are
'English-English' or proper English more than the other;
Whilst neither Commonwealth English nor American-English *are* 'English English'; but, Commonwealth English includes English English and the accents and less divergent dialects of Commonwealth countries, which are more or less the same as written English English. So you're basically incorrect. Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English. American-English is an out and out dialect of English. How can English English be a dialect of English? (NB, I'm basing my definition on the written word not the regional spoken dialects of England).
if you want
proper English, look to Shakespearean early Modern English.
Incorrect, if you want proper English, go to England; that is where the English language is spoken by the English people, of England.
By the way, I am an American.
That was fairly obvious from the "get go".
--Mike
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 9/19/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English.
Look, this is getting tiresome. The only argument you could provide on why written British English has greater legitimacy than written American English is that it happens to be written by people who mostly still live where the writers of the written language ancestral to both once lived.
This is a political consideration, not a linguistic one. Since this political point is not commonly accepted, it is POV and therefore unsuitable for Wikipedia.
Steve
Stephen Forrest wrote:
On 9/19/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English.
Look, this is getting tiresome. The only argument you could provide on why written British English has greater legitimacy than written American English is that it happens to be written by people who mostly still live where the writers of the written language ancestral to both once lived.
What about the French Wikipedia? How do they feel?
This is a political consideration, not a linguistic one. Since this political point is not commonly accepted, it is POV and therefore unsuitable for Wikipedia.
What about the Portuguese Wikipedia? How do they feel?
Alphax wrote:
What about the French Wikipedia? How do they feel?
What about the Portuguese Wikipedia? How do they feel?
If I'm not mistaken, the Quebec dialect of French and the Brazilian dialect of Portuguese are considered acceptable in the French and Portuguese Wikipedias, respectively.
-Mark
On 19/09/05, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, the Quebec dialect of French and the Brazilian dialect of Portuguese are considered acceptable in the French and Portuguese Wikipedias, respectively.
And the various American dialects of Spanish in es.wikipedia, IIRC.
(As an aside - how different are these dialects from "European Spanish"? I remember my Spanish teacher telling us that Mexican usage was easily identifiable as a different form of the same language, but she said nothing about, say, Argentina)
Delirium wrote:
Alphax wrote:
What about the French Wikipedia? How do they feel?
If I'm not mistaken, the Quebec dialect of French and the Brazilian dialect of Portuguese are considered acceptable in the French and Portuguese Wikipedias, respectively.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/90_%28nombre%29 Quatre-vingt-dix ou Nonante redirige ici.
I think that if the original posters' thought would be followed, 'nonante' would not be acceptable on French Wikipedia. Note that 'quatre-vingt-dix ' has 97 Google hits on fr.wikipedia.org, whereare 'nonante' has 43.
But then, those are French, with a *cugh cugh* unusual *cugh cugh* way to count to 100. But then, we, the Dutch, are also quite unusual (well, like German), so it's not up to me to make a mockery (-:
Gerrit.
On 19/09/05, Gerrit Holl gerrit@nl.linux.org wrote:
But then, those are French, with a *cugh cugh* unusual *cugh cugh* way to count to 100.
France, famously, is hard to govern because it has 246 types of cheese. But add another ten, and you've got the base for the world's weirdest number system...
(damn. I so want to try this now.)
Alphax wrote:
Stephen Forrest wrote:
This is a political consideration, not a linguistic one. Since this political point is not commonly accepted, it is POV and therefore unsuitable for Wikipedia.
What about the Portuguese Wikipedia? How do they feel?
Although Brazil and continental forms are both generally accepted in pt, there are apparently regular eruptions of Brazilians flaming the continentals over dialect, and vice versa. So not a problem unique to en...
Stan
Stephen Forrest wrote:
On 9/19/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English.
Look, this is getting tiresome.
It's only tiresome if you take his proposal seriously. Lighten up!
Ec
Jack & Naree wrote:
On 19/09/05, Mike Kuklinski admin@kuattech.com wrote:
On 18/09/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English. American-English is an out and out dialect of English. How can English English be a dialect of English?
I presume you are referring to the dialect of the ruling classes.
(NB, I'm basing my definition on the written word not the regional spoken dialects of England).
That does narrow your outlook.
if you want
proper English, look to Shakespearean early Modern English.
Incorrect, if you want proper English, go to England; that is where the English language is spoken by the English people, of England.
Which part of England?
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English. American-English is an out and out dialect of English. How can English English be a dialect of English?
I presume you are referring to the dialect of the ruling classes.
American pronunciation is definitely more similar to 17th century English than British RP.
When I went to London, I did have to ask what a secre tree was (any relation to the oak tree?). And a labora tree and an observa tree and a 'lie bree' and the 'straw bree'... :) Were I able to stay longer, perhaps I would have understood better.
And at least we pronounce the 'r' at the ends of words. :)
James
PS - note that this is a sarcastic e-mail. Don't take it that seriously.
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Pawel Dembowski Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 10:37 AM To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak
a
dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the
main
trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English. American-English is an out and out dialect of English. How can English English be a dialect of English?
I presume you are referring to the dialect of the ruling classes.
American pronunciation is definitely more similar to 17th century English than British RP.
James R. Johnson wrote:
When I went to London, I did have to ask what a secre tree was (any relation to the oak tree?). And a labora tree and an observa tree and a 'lie bree' and the 'straw bree'... :) Were I able to stay longer, perhaps I would have understood better.
Since English is really a dialect of French, a lie bree is probably a place where you buy your books, as it is in any "proper language" (-:
And at least we pronounce the 'r' at the ends of words. :)
Like I said, English English English English is a dialect of French (-:
I find the concept of "proper English" quite funny, because if there is one language that is not properly pronounced ([[en:List of names in English with non-intuitive pronunciations]] would be quite short in, say, Italian.
Gerrit.
On 19/09/05, Gerrit Holl gerrit@nl.linux.org wrote:
Since English is really a dialect of French, a lie bree is probably a place where you buy your books, as it is in any "proper language" (-:
I'm not 100% sure if you were joking or just labouring under a misunderstanding, so I thought I'd point out that English is largely a Germanic language, closely related to the various modern Scandinavian tongues, and also to modern Dutch and German.
French is like a distant cousin (sharing great-great-great-great-grandparents in Proto-Indo-European) which recently had a quick affair, so that a few of her features show up in the offspring ;)
You can always trust the French for a quickie! :) Just slip out the back before they wake up.
James
PS - This is sarcasm. Get over it.
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Rowan Collins Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 6:25 PM To: wikipedia-l@wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
On 19/09/05, Gerrit Holl gerrit@nl.linux.org wrote:
Since English is really a dialect of French, a lie bree is probably a place where you buy your books, as it is in any "proper language" (-:
I'm not 100% sure if you were joking or just labouring under a misunderstanding, so I thought I'd point out that English is largely a Germanic language, closely related to the various modern Scandinavian tongues, and also to modern Dutch and German.
French is like a distant cousin (sharing great-great-great-great-grandparents in Proto-Indo-European) which recently had a quick affair, so that a few of her features show up in the offspring ;)
Rowan Collins wrote:
On 19/09/05, Gerrit Holl gerrit@nl.linux.org wrote:
Since English is really a dialect of French, a lie bree is probably a place where you buy your books, as it is in any "proper language" (-:
I'm not 100% sure if you were joking or just labouring under a misunderstanding, so I thought I'd point out that English is largely a Germanic language, closely related to the various modern Scandinavian tongues, and also to modern Dutch and German.
I was joking; I know English is a Germanic language. but among all Germanic languages, it has borrowed most from French. It looks far more like French than Dutch or German do - and the Scandinavian languages are even more remote. It may be a Germanic language, but it's a bit of the ugly duckling among them (-;
Gerrit.
Nah - not all US accents are rhotic, and the UK has some rhotic accents too..
Prescriptiveness doesn't work for language, ever.
English imperialism actually offends me more than US imperialism. It's nice to think that nationalists exist only on the other side of the Atlantic but it certainly isn't true..
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of James R. Johnson Sent: 19 September 2005 18:38 To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
When I went to London, I did have to ask what a secre tree was (any relation to the oak tree?). And a labora tree and an observa tree and a 'lie bree' and the 'straw bree'... :) Were I able to stay longer, perhaps I would have understood better.
And at least we pronounce the 'r' at the ends of words. :)
James
PS - note that this is a sarcastic e-mail. Don't take it that seriously.
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Pawel Dembowski Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 10:37 AM To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia English English
Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak
a
dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the
main
trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English. American-English is an out and out dialect of English. How can English English be a dialect of English?
I presume you are referring to the dialect of the ruling classes.
American pronunciation is definitely more similar to 17th century English than British RP.
-- Ausir Wikipedia, wolna encyklopedia http://pl.wikipedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.1/104 - Release Date: 16/09/2005
On 9/19/05, Caroline Ford caroline@secretlondon.me.uk wrote:
Prescriptiveness doesn't work for language, ever.
Tell the French.
Sam
On 19/09/05, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/19/05, Caroline Ford caroline@secretlondon.me.uk wrote:
Prescriptiveness doesn't work for language, ever.
Tell the French.
But it's so much more amusing to pretend it does and let them keep trying...
On 9/19/05, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/09/05, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/19/05, Caroline Ford caroline@secretlondon.me.uk wrote:
Prescriptiveness doesn't work for language, ever.
Tell the French.
But it's so much more amusing to pretend it does and let them keep trying...
Oh, I won't disagree there.
Sam
Caroline Ford wrote
When I went to London, I did have to ask what a secre tree was (any relation to the oak tree?). And a labora tree and an observa tree and a 'lie bree' and the 'straw bree'... :) Were I able to stay longer, perhaps I would have understood better.
The latter two are types of cheese. "Lye brie" is very sharply cut. :-)
Ec
Jack & Naree wrote:
Incorrect, if you want proper English, go to England; that is where the English language is spoken by the English people, of England.
Incorrect. Usage among the educated class of England is no longer definitional of the English language.
In any case, this debate is unlikely to go anywhere. Our friend "Jack & Naree" is obviously a imperialist of the eldest variety, and unlikely to be convinced that his particular bastardized dialect of early-21st-century English is anything but the divinely-sanctioned correct one.
-Mark
On 19/09/05, Jack & Naree jack.macdaddy@gmail.com wrote:
American-dialect English (also known as American-English) is more related to English of the 17th-18th century than 'Commonwealth-English' is.
What you mean is, the American dialect appears to have retained more obvious features of C17th English, whilst also evolving new ones of its own.
Neither Commonwealth-English nor American-English are
'English-English' or proper English more than the other;
Whilst neither Commonwealth English nor American-English *are* 'English English'; but, Commonwealth English includes English English and the accents and less divergent dialects of Commonwealth countries, which are more or less the same as written English English.
What is this "English English" to which you refer then, if it is only "more or less the same" as actual existing varieties of English? Who speaks or spoke it? You? Your wife? William Shakespere?
So you're basically incorrect. Americans seem to want to believe that they speak English, and we speak British English in England (meaning Britain!). They are wrong. They speak a dialect of our language, called American-English, an offshoot from the main trunk if you will, which has evolved somewhat independently of English.
No. We all speak varieties of a language which has slowly evolved from the "Germanic" languages of invaders of the British Isles several centuries ago, diverging and converging according to political expedience, and being heavily influenced by the mostly unrelated language of a later wave of invaders from France. I suggest you read one of the many fascinating accounts of the history of the language - such as those by Robert McCrumb, David Crystal, or Bill Bryson.
English has evolved in various directions, over many centuries, and is the product of a diverging evolution dating back much further still. If you like, it is a dialect of German, which has evolved separately; ultimately, through its Indo-European roots, it is also a separately evolved branch of Spanish, and of various Indian languages. But you couldn't really call it an "offshoot" of those, since they have all developed entirely in parallel. The difference between a language and a dialect is subtle, and sometimes controversial, but whether the variety of English spoken in Sussex and the variety spoken in Manhattan are dialects or just very closely related languages, they are both recent [and eternally shifting] developments, and both equally legitimate branches of an extremely complex grouping generally known as "English".
In short, there is no "main trunk", never has been, and never will be.
American-English is an out and out dialect of English. How can English English be a dialect of English?
Because "English" is a term which refers to a language, in all its dialects and usages, and "English English" is a term you've just made up to refer to the variety of that language you happen to speak, and/or of which you happen to approve.
(NB, I'm basing my definition on the written word not the regional spoken dialects of England).
There is no reason for a dialect to be unwritten - commonly cited vocabulary differences include the word for a small bread roll ("bap", "barm cake", etc), and I'm sure users of those words would quite unconciously use them in writing if they weren't carefully conforming to a particular "standard". The BBC recently had a fascinating "Voices" season celebrating just how varied our language is.
if you want proper English, look to Shakespearean early Modern English.
Incorrect, if you want proper English, go to England; that is where the English language is spoken by the English people, of England.
"Proper English" is a meaningless term. The first systematic efforts to standardise English to any extent came with the invention of the printing press, when it became possible to distribute documents en masse all across the country (William Caxton wrote an oft-quoted "prologue" regarding the difficulties of making printed material understandable by all its readers). The concept of "English grammar" is largely a construct of scholars who wished English was more like Latin (to which it is largely unrelated) and attempted to force it into a similar formal structure. "Correct spelling" is a similarly artificial construct, mostly related to the mutual intelligibility problem.
Meanwhile, if you want to use "English" to mean "the language spoken in England" you will face two problems: 1) this is not how most users of English [or whatever replacement term you wish to use for the sum of all English dialects] understand the term; thus you defeat your own aim of using a "proper"/"standard" language, in favour of using an "idiolect" which requires you to constantly explain your reasoning 2) there is no one variety of English spoken in England; I think this point needs little elaboration
Like I say, read some books about the history of English - it's really quite fascinating, and should correct any misapprehensions you have of a "pure" English ever having existed, even if you still remain on the side of the "prescriptivists" who wish to create such a thing.
On 19/09/05, Rowan Collins rowan.collins@gmail.com wrote:
What is this "English English" to which you refer then, if it is only "more or less the same" as actual existing varieties of English? Who speaks or spoke it? You? Your wife? William Shakespere?
An idle thought: there is a family of four currently living in this house, all lifetime residents of the UK. Every single one speaks a different dialect of English...
"Proper English" is a meaningless term. The first systematic efforts to standardise English to any extent came with the invention of the printing press, when it became possible to distribute documents en masse all across the country (William Caxton wrote an oft-quoted "prologue" regarding the difficulties of making printed material understandable by all its readers).
Several, indeed. For those who've not encountered them, they bear reading. One rather endearing anecdote:
(Some merchants have stopped beside the Thames to buy lunch) "And one of theym named sheffelde, a mercer, came in-to an hows and exed for mete; and specyally he axyd after eggys; And the good wyf answerde that she coude speke no frenshe. And the marchaunt was angry for he also coude speke no frenshe but wold haue hadde egges and she vnderstode hym not. And thenne at laste a nother sayd that he wolde haue eyren. Then the good wyf sayd that she vnderstood hym wel. Loo, what sholde a man in thyse dayes now wryte, egges or eyren; certaynly it is harde to playse euery man by cause of dyuersite & chaunge of langage."
Mutual intelligibility of dialects leaped ahead through printing, and again from the railways. Then another with radio and television, and modern communications generally - the Internet is simply just the next step.
Like I say, read some books about the history of English - it's really quite fascinating, and should correct any misapprehensions you have of a "pure" English ever having existed, even if you still remain on the side of the "prescriptivists" who wish to create such a thing.
Especially Mencken. It's wonderful.
Irrelevent, how?
See, now, this is just what I've been waiting for since the beginning of this thread. Our little friend here who cares so much about "correct" spelling and grammar has fouled up our beautiful language by using an absolutely incorrect spelling, ignorant of the etymology of the word.
It's "irrelevant". In all English varieties.
Mark
P.S.
That stuff I said about fouling up our beautiful language was a joke.
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org