Languages and the future

[RichardCranium]

Neither are separate sciences - but don't start me on that one ...

When you don't have any industry and you don't give tax breaks to small scale R&D, why would you need scientists?

All scientists are good for are developing more efficient ways of making things, inventing new stuff to make, discovering cheaper & better treatments for illnesses, provide a better understanding of the environment, ...


Sorry. I forgot. We've just had a decade of a Catholic young earth creationist lawyer as Prime Minister, haven't we? What would he know about the use of scientists? After all, they just want to tell the truth about WMDs and then they have to be gotten rid of, don't they?

[Pogle]

When you don't have any industry and you don't give tax breaks to small scale R&D, why would you need scientists?

All scientists are good for are developing more efficient ways of making things, inventing new stuff to make, discovering cheaper & better treatments for illnesses, provide a better understanding of the environment, ...


Sorry. I forgot. We've just had a decade of a Catholic young earth creationist lawyer as Prime Minister, haven't we? What would he know about the use of scientists? After all, they just want to tell the truth about WMDs and then they have to be gotten rid of, don't they?

He's a convert - they're always the worst

[Drewster]

To continue the Cyrillic theme, there are examples of Russian words making their way into modern political speak to support your statement eg aparachnik

Sorry but...... apparatchik Shirley!

Other than using a nonsense word I generaly agriski

[Sysman]

*Brits aren't arrogant about language - they're mortally embarrassed about how crap they are at it and that come across as arrogant.

I had a Eureka moment a couple of years ago when asked why the English don't speak other languages. My theory went back to sadistic school teachers who would physically beat you for making a simple mistake. That leaves us with a terror of making mistakes and/or sounding like an idiot, which doesn't seem to bother foreigners when speaking English. My experience was that we spent too much time concentrating on grammar and spelling and not enough time speaking. The marking system didn't help - a few spelling errors had you heading for a fail no matter how fluent you were.

Does George Bernard Shaw's statement also apply?

"It is impossible for an Englishman to open his mouth without making some other Englishman hate or despise him."

If we are so conscious of getting it wrong in our own language, what chance do we have in other languages?

A much better way to gain confidence in a foreign language is to get stuck in, which is the antithesis of the way I was taught. On the German course I did half a dozen years ago we spent a much greater percentage of the time talking than in any lesson I recall from my schooldays.

[swamp]

Eastern Europeans don't learn Russian any more; they learn English instead. I expect the same thing will happen to other minor empire languages: French, Spanish etc. Former colonies will no longer speak their former masters' minor languages, and they will learn English instead.

[AtW]

Eastern Europeans don't learn Russian any more; they learn English instead.

I would not be so sure - German and French markets closer to them and I'd say probably more relevant.

[swamp]

To continue the Cyrillic theme, there are examples of Russian words making their way into modern political speak to support your statement eg aparachnik

Mamouth is a Russian word also.

[swamp]

I would not be so sure - German and French markets closer to them and I'd say probably more relevant.

Maybe as a third language. My point is that Russian was compulsory in the USSR, I believe (for those who didn't speak it). Young people have replaced it with English.

[threaded]

Does George Bernard Shaw's statement also apply?
.

Why doesn't 'ghoti' sound like 'fish'?

[Doggy Styles]

Why doesn't 'ghoti' sound like 'fish'?

But it does.