You are not logged in.
This forum contains vigorous discussion of which languages might find favor in coming centuries at Mars.
This topic is dedicated to the candidacy of English to survive in some form, precisely because it is such an amalgam of other languages, and because it is continuing to evolve as fast as speakers can think of new words or new ways to use old words.
The link below is to an article about the history of English:
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/engl … wtab-en-us
I'll paste a bit of the article so readers can get a sense of it...
From the top:
Sign up to read this article later
Collect articles, videos, and links from across the web and enjoy them on any device at any time.
Sign UpAdvertisement
Aeon
More from AeonWho decides what words mean
Words as feelings
Are the Exact Words of a Language Arbitrary or Necessary?freestar
Advertisement
GettyImages-92822152.jpgEdward the Confessor, Bayeux Tapestry. From Photos.com/Getty Images.
English speakers know that their language is odd. So do people saddled with learning it non-natively. The oddity that we all perceive most readily is its spelling, which is indeed a nightmare. In countries where English isn’t spoken, there is no such thing as a ‘spelling bee’ competition. For a normal language, spelling at least pretends a basic correspondence to the way people pronounce the words. But English is not normal.
Spelling is a matter of writing, of course, whereas language is fundamentally about speaking. Speaking came long before writing, we speak much more, and all but a couple of hundred of the world’s thousands of languages are rarely or never written. Yet even in its spoken form, English is weird. It’s weird in ways that are easy to miss, especially since Anglophones in the United States and Britain are not exactly rabid to learn other languages. But our monolingual tendency leaves us like the proverbial fish not knowing that it is wet. Our language feels ‘normal’ only until you get a sense of what normal really is.
And from the ending...
Thus English is indeed an odd language, and its spelling is only the beginning of it. In the widely read Globish (2010), McCrum celebrates English as uniquely ‘vigorous’, ‘too sturdy to be obliterated’ by the Norman Conquest. He also treats English as laudably ‘flexible’ and ‘adaptable’, impressed by its mongrel vocabulary. McCrum is merely following in a long tradition of sunny, muscular boasts, which resemble the Russians’ idea that their language is ‘great and mighty’, as the 19th-century novelist Ivan Turgenev called it, or the French idea that their language is uniquely ‘clear’ (Ce qui n’est pas clair n’est pas français).
However, we might be reluctant to identify just which languages are not ‘mighty’, especially since obscure languages spoken by small numbers of people are typically majestically complex. The common idea that English dominates the world because it is ‘flexible’ implies that there have been languages that failed to catch on beyond their tribe because they were mysteriously rigid. I am not aware of any such languages.
What English does have on other tongues is that it is deeply peculiar in the structural sense. And it became peculiar because of the slings and arrows – as well as caprices – of outrageous history.
John McWhorter is a professor of linguistics and American studies at Columbia University.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
This post is reserved for an index to posts that NewMars members may contribute over time.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here