[HN Gopher] 'Highly Irregular' Review: An Eloquent Confusion
___________________________________________________________________
'Highly Irregular' Review: An Eloquent Confusion
Author : pepys
Score : 35 points
Date : 2021-07-04 04:31 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
| kogus wrote:
| For those interested in the actual reasons behind the myriad
| eccentricities of English vocabulary, grammar, and spelling,
| there is an excellent podcast on that subject called simply "The
| History of English Podcast" [1].
|
| The short short version is that English began as a Germanic
| language, which bumped into Greek-influenced Latin at regular
| intervals. Then the Norman French conquered England in 1066, and
| ruled it for a few hundred years, which brought in a huge French
| (and, because French is a Romance language, Latin) influence.
| Then the UK conquered much of the earth, and absorbed thousands
| of words from many world cultures. As a result, English today is
| like a German christmas tree decorated with so many ornaments
| that you can hardly make sense of it when you see it. That's my
| summary, the podcast is better :)
|
| https://historyofenglishpodcast.com/
| chihuahua wrote:
| "In spelling, pronunciation, syntax and idioms, the English
| language can be perplexingly strange--or charmingly eccentric."
|
| https://archive.vn/IJ5gt
| tbrownaw wrote:
| So maybe German[1] isn't so bad.
|
| [1] https://faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/texts/twain.german.html
| justshowpost wrote:
| _The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of
| expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the
| devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought
| impossible.
|
| The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect.
| Newspeak is Ingsoc and Ingsoc is Newspeak._
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| Unless there's something in the article I was missing (I didn't
| subscribe to get past the paywall), a millennia of unstructured
| linguistic evolution doesn't really match the deliberate desire
| to trim the language and change how people think.
| ctdonath wrote:
| Point is language does limit possible thought. There are
| concepts which are hard/awkward/impossible to express because
| one's language lacks constructs to do so.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| This can be true if language is constantly policed to make
| certain words and thought dangerous to say, as in the 1984
| plot.
|
| In unpoliced discourse, I don't believe this happens. There
| are always some rough edges in languages as they aimlessly
| evolve, but nothing that hard.
| [deleted]
| WJW wrote:
| This is called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis [0], and it is
| generally believed not to be true by linguists. As it turns
| out, natural languages are flexible enough to describe any
| phenomenon even if there are no dedicated words or
| constructs directly available. If a thought cannot be
| expressed by the currently available features of the
| language, people will invent new words "on the spot"
| instead of not thinking the thought in the first place.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-05 23:02 UTC)