I'd argue that by your own criteria, English is that language.
this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
53 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
1454 readers
68 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Less then a quarter of people speak English, so not even close.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-speaking_world
Including people who speak English as a second language, estimates of the total number of Anglophones vary from 1.5 billion to 2 billion.
So you’re right: one quarter of people at most. Nonetheless that’s remarkable. Too bad it’s due more to subjugation than cooperation.
Awfully generous of the UK to go out of its way to respect Mongolia. I guess you gotta honor that Klingon code.
Well fuck me sideways I thought it was more than that.
That's not how language or communication work. Humans develop language in real time and in small cohorts. You are lucky if you can understand youth slang by the time you hit 40 and you want to force an artificial lingua franca on four billion people?
Plus, who said language uniformity is a positive? Linguistic diversity is a feature, not a bug. Language is tied to culture, identity and a whole bunch of antrhopological elements. Entire ethnicities are defined by their language. It's bad enough that US cultural imperialism has forced half the planet to watch the same movies and TV shows, why would we do the same with language? If you ask me, there's way too much English out there as it is.
It’s bad enough that US cultural imperialism has forced half the planet to watch the same movies and TV shows
I have a comm for you
Erm erm, one sec.
~Love is the Universal language~
Ok you can crucify me now xD
👉👌
Even the Tower of Babel cannot take this from us.
Kial ne esperanto?
You need a reason for a large group to choose to maintain a single language over over smaller groups creating their own.
Look at Latin, it stayed mainly cohesive due to the Roman Empire and splintered off as the empire collapsed and the necessity for commoners to maintain communication across thousands of miles dwindled.
English is the current lingua francia because the dominant nation has been speaking English for the past two hundred years and created a pop culture market that is both large and rich, creating a positive feedback loop making the market larger and richer.
English is the current lingua francia because the dominant nation has been speaking English for the past two hundred years and created a pop culture market
Cute that you think it's the U.S. and it's little movies that are responsible for English being widely spoken, and not the bloody history of British imperialism being forced on half the planet
I mentioned the bloody imperialism in the first half of the sentence.
load more comments
(2 replies)
You as a 8.1 billion population have to come together and decide as a group and the enact it. If we couldn’t even stop Covid which is still around you think we can do something like this?
For a tiny language, I really like toki pona, but it's meant to be a minimal artistic language, more than an IAL (international auxiliary language).
Last I checked tho, Globasa looks really interesting. The way that they add new vocabulary, and have a good representation of world languages, seems to work well.
Esperanto is also good, but when my partner tried to learn it, they were weirded out by some of it's quirks, like noun declinations based on whether it's a subject or object, that seems unecessary.
Yeah I feel that for better or worse Esperanto hasn’t reached a large enough mass to justify accepting its quirks and indo-eurocentrism, when we know we can do better now.
For sure. A dissapointing number of IALs have nearly all their vocab from european languages, but there are a few that try earnestly to source their vocab from a wide set of language families. Any global initiative for an IAL needs to have a global vocabulary set to have any hopes of being introduced.
If you choose vocabulary that is culturally neutral, then that vocabulary is not easily recognisable.
There's no workaround for that trade-off.
Recognizeable for whom, is the question. The majority of IALs to date have had a highly eurocentric vocabulary, so they can't be recognizeable to even a plurality of the world.
Correct reasoning, incorrect facts.
46% of the world speak Indo-European languages as a mother tongue.
Can't do better than that. No other option comes close.
Aren't you Irish? You know the English colonizers did their best to wipe out the Irish language and replace it with the one you're advocating for right???
know the English colonizers did .... right???
Nooo I didn't actually know that and needed an enlightened person such as yourself to tell me 🙄🙄
Tá mé tinn de bheith ag glacadh comhairle stráinséara. Imagine some blan started lecturing you about haitian history and how it should affect your opinions, wouldn't you at least tell them to fuck off?
So why are you advocating for the displacement of the majority of the world's language families based on european languages popularity it gained through colonial displacement?
The majority of the world don't speak european languages.
So why are you advocating for the displacement of the majority of the world’s language families based on european languages popularity it gained through colonial displacement?
Same reason you are advocating wife-beating (i.e. I never said anything like that)
The majority of the world don’t speak european languages.
Correct. That's was our starting point: there's no language that the majority of the world do speak.
Indo-European is spoken by a 46% minority.
About 19% of the world's population speak the Indo-Iranian branch alone. It's by far the largest of the 8 branches by number of speakers. By number of languages (which includes tiny languages) it comprises about ⅔ of the family –
For example there are 884 million speakers of Hindi/Urdu + Bengali + Marathi + Gujarati + Odia + Punjabi in India, and Pakistan is almost all Indo-European (Indo-Aryan and Iranic).
Agus in theannta sin, tá Gaeilge (teanga Ind-Eorpach/Ceiltís) ag 0.0002125% den daonra domhanda!
Kind of wild that you use Haiti as an example here, considering the european genocide of the Taino people, as well as the european importation of african slaves, two groups that didn't speak european languages, and had their languages erased by the same process you're advocating for.
w pa ayisyen?
I never said anything approaching the words your putting in my mouth.
When I was a teen I really wanted to learn Esperanto but never got around to it. Globasa seems extremely interesting though, maybe I’ll finally give one of these languages a try.
Esperanto is also good, but when my partner tried to learn it, they were weirded out by some of it’s quirks, like noun declinations based on whether it’s a subject or object, that seems unecessary.
That sounds interesting. Esperanto has no noun-declinations, it's an agglutinating language, you don't bend words (= declination).
But what is barely resembling that what you mention is the two cases of the language, which is nominative and the so called "accusative". Which is adding -n to words to make them an object, depending on whether the verb of the sentence needs one or not. This case also is not just for objects, but also for directions, for measurements and time. That combination normally confuses the heck out of people.
Which is why there is also an in-joke in the Esperanto community "don't forget the accusative", because people forget it or apply it too often.
I would say there is. Body language. Just about any human you meet can understand body language.
I suppose, though very poorly in comparison to what we usually mean by language.
This sparks an interesting question though: can two human strangers communicate with each other better than any other animals can, even when those two people have no language in common? I don’t think it’s so easy a question to answer. Probably they can in many cases but not in some others, depending on what is to be communicated. Whether there’s a bear nearby? How to coordinate an attack on tasty prey?
Edit to add: Unlocking secrets of the honeybee dance language – bees learn and culturally transmit their communication skills
Astonishingly, honeybees possess one of the most complicated examples of nonhuman communication. They can tell each other where to find resources such as food, water, or nest sites with a physical “waggle dance.” This dance conveys the direction, distance and quality of a resource to the bee’s nestmates.
I would argue yes, but not by a massive degree in my opinion. Every animal has body language and several things are shared amongst many of us, especially mammals. But yeah, I think our whole species would understand things like pointing at something or laughing or offering something with an outstretched arm, or a surprised face or a scowl.
👍
But don't try this in many parts of the Middle East.
👌
And don't do this in Brazil.
Yeah I specifically didn't include hand signs in my other comment because that's getting closer to sign language and many countries have unique hand signs. Smiling is also something not universal oddly enough.
Is that the default situation is it??
You dreamed up a scenario and now are asking why it is not the case.
It is a somewhat naïvely-framed question, but also you could have just clicked downvote and moved on with your day.
Tell me, where is this global language where it has 3.5 billion speakers, if not half? You've indicated it's not the case...?
Do you think I ask in bad faith, or do you ask in bad faith?
Waiting on my Universal Translator
People can learn more than one language. If you speak English you can learn Mandarin and increase the people you can communicate with by billions. There is no "one language" because people can know more than one language at a time
To use an analogy, if a culture is the lock, a language is the key, and some keys just don't fit certain locks.
geography is a bitch