Quite the statement for an English comment. English spelling is nonsensical and in desperate need of a major reform. RobWords even made the case for using runes again as it would probably fix a lot of issues already. The language simply isn’t made for Latin letters.
But I don’t want to make this a sole whataboutism comment. Each language poses it’s own challenges. I will say that changing how roughly 100 million speak is easier said than done and would destroy a lot of culture. It would be much easier to force everyone to speak a different language entirely.
Personally I don’t think it should or could be done at all. Unlike a spelling reform that English needs desperately and German had plenty of recently. There is nothing wrong with a language being complicated but there’s plenty wrong with arbitrary spelling if you ask me.
My native language isn’t English in case you were assuming that.
I wasn’t assuming that, don’t worry. That’s why I phrased my message like that.
I guess I agree to disagree here. Language is an expression of culture and heritage too. I would never speak German differently now just because of a reform. Neither would 99% of German speakers I assume. Yet we freely integrate English words into our language because it feels natural. These English words often come and go anyway so I’m not actually concerned the German language will become deluded from Internet lingo or anything.
The point of languages it to be simple and efficient, and they should evolve to that goal eventually.
That’s one hell of an assumption to bring to the table. There is no point to language, no end goal towards which they must, or even should evolve. They’re a natural creation of humans to facilitate communication, but coming from human beings, they’re naturally quite irregular and odd, at times.
I mean, I get it that German isn’t a cakewalk to pick up, but you’re also complaining about the unreasonable complexity in one of the less morphologically complex European languages. Take a gander at Polish, Icelandic, Basque, or Finnish, and German will probably seem quite charming and quaint with its handful of cases and corresponding forms of the articles.
But the point of a language is not to spread to the most people, it is for the peoples using it being able to use it in a way that makes it possible to communicate with their own in a way that makes sense within the local population, its culture and history.
Different languages have a different learning curve based on what language you grew up with. What is hard for you might be a cakewalk for someone coming from a different language, especially if you are coming from a different family of languages.
What’s complex is very relative to you and what you grew up with.
I am not picking up english for everything because it’s simpler and I won’t convince my friends either.
Can’t even get them off Whatsapp 😂
Let’s speak Esperanto then …
here is an evolution and there is a goal, as you said, to communicate
I would argue that this is just humans attributing intent to a natural process that has none, and is the same sort of erroneous conception as when people say that history has some grand end goal it’s working towards. I believe this is amply demonstrated in the lack of success found by Esperanto and similar conlangs that were deliberately constructed in order to be easy to learn for a wide range of people as a neutral lingua franca. If what you claim about the purpose and goal of language were true, these conlangs should have seen widespread adoption and be the most widely spoken languages today, rather than their current status as quirky ideas that are mostly of no interest to people who aren’t complete nerds for studying languages.
Gendered nouns in German are just as stupid and arbitrary as spelling in English. Why is a pencil masculine? Why is beer neutral but coffee masculine? Why is school feminine?
It’s that way because languages grow naturally and are part of a culture. Although if you have breakfast with people from different parts of Germany or even just different households, you may find yourself arguing about the nouns of a popular nougat cream brand. It’s quite controversial for some reason.
Whatever the case, the same can’t be said about spelling, however. Writing is often reformed in many languages many times and it generally works. A language changes the way we think as much as the way we think shapes how we speak. You can’t really reform how people speak from the top. It either happens or it doesn’t.
I don’t know about Latin letters more generally, but at least the issue with the default Latin alphabet, there just aren’t enough letters to represent the sounds used in English phonetically. The English language has between 14-25 vowels, depending on dialect and accent, and a further 24 consonants. When the Latin alphabet only has 26 letters, you’re naturally going to run into situations where one letter has to represent multiple sounds. With that said, I don’t see any reason, aside from the sheer cultural inertia of hundreds of years not doing so, why English couldn’t address the issue with diacritics on different letters to achieve the necessary number of unique letters to represent all of the sounds found in English.
Quite the statement for an English comment. English spelling is nonsensical and in desperate need of a major reform. RobWords even made the case for using runes again as it would probably fix a lot of issues already. The language simply isn’t made for Latin letters.
But I don’t want to make this a sole whataboutism comment. Each language poses it’s own challenges. I will say that changing how roughly 100 million speak is easier said than done and would destroy a lot of culture. It would be much easier to force everyone to speak a different language entirely.
Personally I don’t think it should or could be done at all. Unlike a spelling reform that English needs desperately and German had plenty of recently. There is nothing wrong with a language being complicated but there’s plenty wrong with arbitrary spelling if you ask me.
deleted by creator
I wasn’t assuming that, don’t worry. That’s why I phrased my message like that.
I guess I agree to disagree here. Language is an expression of culture and heritage too. I would never speak German differently now just because of a reform. Neither would 99% of German speakers I assume. Yet we freely integrate English words into our language because it feels natural. These English words often come and go anyway so I’m not actually concerned the German language will become deluded from Internet lingo or anything.
That’s one hell of an assumption to bring to the table. There is no point to language, no end goal towards which they must, or even should evolve. They’re a natural creation of humans to facilitate communication, but coming from human beings, they’re naturally quite irregular and odd, at times.
I mean, I get it that German isn’t a cakewalk to pick up, but you’re also complaining about the unreasonable complexity in one of the less morphologically complex European languages. Take a gander at Polish, Icelandic, Basque, or Finnish, and German will probably seem quite charming and quaint with its handful of cases and corresponding forms of the articles.
deleted by creator
But the point of a language is not to spread to the most people, it is for the peoples using it being able to use it in a way that makes it possible to communicate with their own in a way that makes sense within the local population, its culture and history.
Different languages have a different learning curve based on what language you grew up with. What is hard for you might be a cakewalk for someone coming from a different language, especially if you are coming from a different family of languages.
What’s complex is very relative to you and what you grew up with. I am not picking up english for everything because it’s simpler and I won’t convince my friends either.
Can’t even get them off Whatsapp 😂 Let’s speak Esperanto then …
I would argue that this is just humans attributing intent to a natural process that has none, and is the same sort of erroneous conception as when people say that history has some grand end goal it’s working towards. I believe this is amply demonstrated in the lack of success found by Esperanto and similar conlangs that were deliberately constructed in order to be easy to learn for a wide range of people as a neutral lingua franca. If what you claim about the purpose and goal of language were true, these conlangs should have seen widespread adoption and be the most widely spoken languages today, rather than their current status as quirky ideas that are mostly of no interest to people who aren’t complete nerds for studying languages.
Gendered nouns in German are just as stupid and arbitrary as spelling in English. Why is a pencil masculine? Why is beer neutral but coffee masculine? Why is school feminine?
It’s that way because languages grow naturally and are part of a culture. Although if you have breakfast with people from different parts of Germany or even just different households, you may find yourself arguing about the nouns of a popular nougat cream brand. It’s quite controversial for some reason.
Whatever the case, the same can’t be said about spelling, however. Writing is often reformed in many languages many times and it generally works. A language changes the way we think as much as the way we think shapes how we speak. You can’t really reform how people speak from the top. It either happens or it doesn’t.
Would love to hear more about why English isn’t made for Latin letters
I don’t know about Latin letters more generally, but at least the issue with the default Latin alphabet, there just aren’t enough letters to represent the sounds used in English phonetically. The English language has between 14-25 vowels, depending on dialect and accent, and a further 24 consonants. When the Latin alphabet only has 26 letters, you’re naturally going to run into situations where one letter has to represent multiple sounds. With that said, I don’t see any reason, aside from the sheer cultural inertia of hundreds of years not doing so, why English couldn’t address the issue with diacritics on different letters to achieve the necessary number of unique letters to represent all of the sounds found in English.
As an English speaker yeah we should switch back to runes
It won’t fix your Franco Germanic Viking pigeon language though. How would it? Almost like any pronunciation is unique and needs to be learned
It’s steering into the skid of weird. Sometimes fixing isn’t possible so the goal is to put up a nice big sign that says “something here is fucky”