Discussion in 'The Guru's Pub' started by Stukov, Aug 27, 2012.
Fascinating the thing called science.
doesn't really surprise me, be it south west russia or turkey. not like they're that far apart.
realistically it's probably over a large area that we won't be able to simply pinpoint.
So I guess 'human' is technically the universal language of earth. We all speak the same language but it just sounds different from culture to culture. Words sound different but mean the same, makes me wounder why we don't just cut the bollocks and all speak the same tongue.
I mean say for example a Samoan bloke is trying to explain to a tourist where the closest public toilets are but while he only speaks Samoan he can understand English, yet the tourist is standing there trying to spell it out in English 'I'm - looking - for - the - closest - public - toilets', Samoan dude knows but cant say it in English.
They're on the same page but just cant communicate it because of a language barrier that serves little purpose other than to say we're different to them, which is strange in a world where we claim that we all need to work as one. Why make things difficult for no reason.
I know it's not that simple but hay.
Time for you to start learning Chinese then.
They tried constructed languages, many times, furthest any got is Esperanto.
Which they should probably teach in schools.
or just english~
Seems unfair for the rest of the world that no?
It is very important to have one main language that everybody understand.
Indonesia has more than 746 local languages, therefore Bahasa Indonesia as the national language is very important here.
I think English is already considered as the language of the world. Me typing in this forum for example. Without English it would be impossible for me to share my opinions here.
Sorry, couldn't resist . An interesting read though, might explain why English is the current most universal language.
However, I'm suspecting Chinese will become the next in this lifetime, or the next.
Why spend the time constructing a language when there is one that already has as much as a quarter of the planet speaking it to some degree? It's not about fairness so much as pragmatism.
While Chinese also has a large base, it has more diversity in regards to dialects, two different writing systems to consider, and in the end necessitates the memorization of a far more complex writing system than most other languages that use purely phonetic symbols versus conceptual and phonetic symbology for writing. Chinese is also geographically focused where the vast majority of speakers are in a single location while English speakers are widely distributed across the planet, largely due to Britain's success at controlling large swaths of the planet historically and further enhanced by American geopolitical and economic influence.
And, really, even from a standpoint of using another language many languages have borrowed grand swaths of lexicon from English over the 20th century and through today. While some tried using their own terminology for concepts and inventions, many of those were since replaced by the English words in those languages. For instance, 電脳 （でんのう dennou) was, at least historically, used in Japan to describe a computer. Literally, it meant 'electric brain'. But that has since been supplanted by far more common terms like パソコン (pasokon, from パーソナルコンピュータ paasonaru konpyuuta) or even just PC, completely nullifying their own writing systems. And Japanese is hardly the only language to do such things, and computers and technology are hardly the only areas where these words are borrowed. Russian has borrowed extensively from English in the past 20 years. A great deal of words relating to business were borrowed from English to describe concepts and such that simply didn't exist under the Soviet Union.
So, while Chinese is a widely spoken language, the same borrowing of words simply hasn't occurred outside of the China region. China, as important and influential as it is, simply hasn't had the time nor dominance to crack into foreign cultures like English, and British and American cultures in particular, have been able to do. Oddly enough, Japan which is spoken by around a tenth the number of people of China has made more influence worldwide. This is largely because Japanese popular culture is consumed far more worldwide than Chinese. While anime (a word that is a double-borrowed word... sorry, my etymological fascination kicks in on things like that), Japanese cinema, Japanese music, and games have all had massive impacts worldwide China has had limited impact. In fact, American movies and such are by and far more popular in China than Chinese in elsewhere. Sometimes you'll have a hit come out, often a martial arts movie as China has had trouble getting other genres popular outside of the home nation. But, even that genre isn't safely China-only territory. China tried its hardest to try and make a hit at home to beat out Kung Fu Panda but has yet to do so.
It's funny, but for all of this talk of China taking over the world they seem to be content doing so while speaking English. And, until China is able to crack into the popular consciousness of the rest of the world like English, or even Japanese, I just don't see the language picking up as a lingua franca as I could easily see (and do see) with English. In fact, Chinese used to be the lingua franca in much of Asia but it has often been supplanted by English.
Sorry about the wall of text, I just have an interest in languages and the way they evolve and are used. The long and the short of it is that unless there are massively dramatic changes worldwide I don't see the continued adoption of English as the lingua franca worldwide as waning and that in fact I only see it accelerating. This forum is a prime example of that.
Actually English is the most spoken language in the world, for first languages is Chinese, followed by Spanish/English depending on the statistics you use, but if you include 2nd and 3rd spoken languages, I believe the number is 2/3-3/4 of the world speaking (or writing) English.
Honestly, English - proper english can suck for use. However, you can speak or use really bad or broken english grammer and most of the time you can communicate. Abstract concepts of idioms make take time, but english as a bastardized language still works.
This has nothing to do with the article though.
No one mentioned India? Hindi is used my billions worldwide due to the large population of India. Second biggest after China.
Portuguese is also a widely used language around the world. And it´s beautiful. Very complex and poetic.
English is fun.
Well here you go guys Learn it with Karl Pilkington!
yey my grandparents country
the thread title is misleading though, they claim indo-european languages rooted in anatolia (modern day turkey). english, along with many many other languages, are part of the indo-european language tree.
that doesn't mean english itself comes from turkey.
Hence the 'originated in Turkey'...
Yeah, if you look from that perspective, but you have to bare few facts, here is population by region in millions:
World - 7,058 - 2012
Asia - 4,216 - 2011
Africa - 1,072 2012
The Americas and the Caribbean - 942 - 2011
Europe - 740 - 2011
Oceania - 37 - 2011
As you can assume, most people in Europe, Africa, Asia do not speak English very well, or at all. While even in America, i think it is half-half or even larger % of people do not speak English (correct me if I'm wrong).
I think whats happening is indeed acceleration if spreading of English language, and that's not only because culture (music, movies etc.) or technology, but also because it is most easier language to learn (for others in Europe etc.) compared to for example Chinese, Japanese etc. Also, we should acknowledge that actually only parts of the world where quite a bit (but still less then 50%) of people do know and use English language (at this time) is America (for obvious reasons) and Europe (also for obvious reasons). Other than that, majority of people in other areas (correct me if I'm wrong) do not even know one word on English (even literally speaking).
So the concept of one Language for all, is quite a bit difficult to introduce, especially when you want to introduce English as that language (for again, obvious reasons). Take for example this forum, here, we would have hard time to communicate if we don't know English language, but, here you can see people that are majority from America (as continent) and Europe, and that also shows that statistic is correct one.
While i don't know Turkish language, i do know a bit of English , as name suggest "Indo-European", you can assume places from where that language originate. So, those languages do actually originate from area in and between India And Europe, and by simple look at World map, you would know why that tree of languages is most spoken in the world (quite a large Area). Since India culture is the oldest one (or one of the oldest), it is natural that most languages have roots there. But, with migrations etc. languages are changing, and new was born when those root languages are mixed with alredy existent in those areas (now unheard of, forgotten), and we can assume that's how we have so many of them.
Perfect example for this is America, since it is a new discovered continent, we do know all history about it when new large migrations are in question. And you can see, by look on the map, unified language areas, for example USA (English), Canada (English and France), Mexico (Spanish) etc. So, where was majority of people speaking English, unified language become English, and other non English speakers adopted to it, also for Spanish and French etc.
So, at the end, it is impossible to pinpoint exact location where language was created, because of constant changing, and long period of creation (it is not created in few years etc.), and that research are pure speculations.
But as 2nd language, i do believe that English is most used language.
Here is another thing those researchers should have knowledge about (and i doubt they do actually have). It is not rare in history of languages, that one language is further devided to more languages, and, it is also not rare, that root language is called sub-language, while sub-language become root (because of political influence). If they do not take into account amount of power one culture had over another, they can't even get "close to" picture. Take for example, again English language. What if, people in USA, have their own country, and, just rename English to Usaish language? Over time (as short as century), even (especially) with technology we have, one day, it could be stated that English is sub-language of Usaish language without problem. It's a bit absurd, but you get the point.
Other than that, there is much more reasons not to use unified language then to use it. Preserving culture, history, legacy, and even own language.
What if i tell you that in basic schools in here, at first grade kids (6-7 years old) learn foreign language (most cases English)? While at that age most kids do know to speak and write native language (using both scripts), i think they did not developed it well at that age, and learning foreign language can only bring bad influence to them, or confuse them. But that's how some stupid minister (or whatever) decided. Point here is, that those kids, will, thanks to technology and too early learning of foreign languages, destroy it's own language (as they actually all ready do).
Again huge post , those are some opinions considering this topic and questions rised from it, and reasons why i do actually have intention to push trough law that will forbid schools to learn kids at such young age foreign languages . It may sound stupid, but i think it's necessary .
That was partly my point. English as a language is the most spoken in the world, though not by primary speakers. It has become the most common lingua franca, again, a term I used specifically because of how it applies to English. It may very well not be the best choice from an ease of use or ease of learning standpoint, but the sheer number of speakers continues to make it the ideal choice simply due to saturation.
As for not teaching foreign languages at young ages, that's something we're rather intimately familiar with in the US. Most schools don't offer foreign languages until junior high, and many more until high school. That's a mistake to be frank. Language learning is best and easiest prior to junior high, ideally as early as possible. We've not done that in the US and our citizens' ability to learn and develop other languages in turn has suffered greatly. And, to be blunt, it has negatively affected their ability even with just their one language. In short, it does far more good for the child's learning to learn multiple languages early on than it does to not do so as developing language skills affects all other areas of learning and helps improve those skills in kind.
I think that is a good thing you have in US for example. It may make it harder to learn other languages, but why would you learn except out of curiosity? On the other hand, people outside of US and UK etc., or non English native speakers need to learn English language, simply because, for example PC technology, most program languages are written on English and so on. Other than that, thanks to the diversity in culture that US have, mixed with tech etc. people are interested in learning English, for example, i liked some of music genres/groups from US, and there is no argument not to consider them as best in their genre, so in order to understand actual song for example, i do need to learn language. I'm not saying that music or anything else is worst in any other part of the world, contrary, it is the same, but root diversity culture in US, make it fine example, as rich at modern/cultural things.
But there is a drawback in that. IF kid learn language at such young age, then, what you got, thanks to tech. etc, is one sided mixing of two different cultures. And those kids, not knowing what is good and what is bad for them (most) take both. And that's where problem starts, it even goes so far, that i (for example) do not watch TV at all, only because I'm sick of using of borrowed words etc. when there is actually a word on mine own language for that, before, or after English word, it douse not matter really (if you understand me). So at the end, you got bunch of non existent words, and if people who lived for example 100 years ago would by some magic come in our time, and just watch TV or listen young people (those who catched that mix) they would have hard time to understand their own language.
Take for example internet slangs, such are lol, rofl, omg, wtf etc. Those people actually use them, and there is a rare examples where they do not use them, as French (mdr for ex.), Russians (sps for ex.) etc. So, it is fine, if i write to you "thank you" or in short (chat for example, here on forum etc.) "ty". But it douse not make any sense, if i use same when i chat to another person from mine country, and that happens by large margin (i can only est. by 80% or more).
And for example, on TV, TV personal (speakers, reporters etc.) says "bekstejdz" (spelled backstage), and meaning backstage, while you have word for it long long time ago, or, "mejkap" (makeup), while you have word also, and so on. While having borrowed words for new terms is usual standard, and happened also in English, and that is fine in all directions.
I do hope you now understand why is actually a good thing that system of learning foreign languages you have there. Ofc., it would be harder to influence US for example, but you got a picture.