Small changes that can be made to The English Language to highly increase literacy.

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
And why do we need to facilitate English all of a sudden? It has been an international language of the skys and waves for years. Does the OP has knowledge that this may change and our pilots and admirals will need to learn a new language to keep piloting their vessels, and that the language spoken in uk, us, aus, nz et al will suddenly stop being learned by the infants of said countries and they will defiantly remain silent until we speak EuroEnglish?




posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 





There is nothing "dumb" about replacing French and Latin borrowed word for actual English words in the ENGLISH language.


so rather than speak of the "Prick (or Remorse) of Conscience"
you'd rather speak of " Ayenbyte of inwyt" en.wikipedia.org...


þis boc is dan Michelis of Northgate / ywrite an englis of his oȝene hand. þet hatte: Ayenbyte of inwyt.


This book, called Remorse of Conscience, is the work of don Michael of Northgate, written in English in his own hand.

Ymende. þet þis boc is uolueld ine þe eve of þe holy apostles Symon an Iudas / of ane broþer of þe cloystre of sanynt Austin of Canterburi / ine þe yeare of oure lhordes beringe 1340.

Let it be known that this work was fulfilled on the eve of the feast of St Simon and St Jude, by a brother of the cloister of Augustine of Canterbury, in the Year of our Lord 1340.
en.wikipedia.org...

no thanks

i think jakius's video sums up why your OP is not a good idea
english being such a 'ho when it comes to loanwords is the reason it'll still be around in the 30th century, albeit we 21st centurians may not recognize it

while rigidly controlled languages will go the way of latin, koine, and akkadian



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
 


Your response was off topic. It has nothing to do with an English language reformation. You just took something from Middle English and wrote "No Thank You" based on your EMOTION of what is familiar or beautiful.

First of all, the purpose of language is for efficient communication. Second, I never suggested Middle English, I specifically laid out the points of reformation which you specifically ignored rendering your response as an off topic post.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
 


Your response was off topic. It has nothing to do with an English language reformation. You just took something from Middle English and wrote "No Thank You" based on your EMOTION of what is familiar or beautiful.

First of all, the purpose of language is for efficient communication. Second, I never suggested Middle English, I specifically laid out the points of reformation which you specifically ignored rendering your response as an off topic post.


L
L snarky much?


no, it is not off topic

replacing most loanwords with english words will have that effect

my point is that languages should evolve freely on their own
as english has

all those dead languages had artificial restraints imposed by colleges and academies that prevented them from evolving with the times which is why they died out

sorta like what you're proposing
edit on 28-6-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Lord, forgive me for what I am about to say.

So, to eliminate confusion, the O.P. thinks we should rewrite the rules for the English language because people are too stupid to learn how to speak it. Is that correct?

How about this idea ~

How about people making an effort to learn how to use the language correctly?

How about people making an effort to learn how to spell, read, write and speak the language correctly?

You don't see the Germans or the French (
) or the Russians or the Brits saying, "Let's rewrite the rules for the retards!"

ONLY IN AMERICA!



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TechUnique
You seem pretty on it but I gotta say I love the English language how it is. In all its complexities.


I do too, sort of. I really want to get rid of the word 'whom', seeing as no ones uses it, except for snobby know-it-alls.

And lets just make a law that it's always 'ei' no matter what. Beleive, freind... I mean, what gave the letter 'C' so much power? i before e except after c. So, it's believe to perceive. That's just plain trickery. Chief. Their. A guy could go insane trying to remember all this!



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 


Awesome!!!


2nd



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ABNARTY
 

I feel like a derailer.
12 stars for my one post, and one star and one flag for the OP's thread, of which I was the giver. Sigh... a pity flag.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tadeusz
Speakers of Germanic and Romance languages already learn English very easily because over the years English developed into the "lingua franca" of Europe. Now one can see Swedes, Finns, Portuguese -- what have you -- speaking and writing English more fluently than "native speakers" living in North America. This has nothing to do with the lack of complexity in the English language, but rather the quality of education.

I have a small tip to offer. In this post I have avoided using a certain language feature which I believe -- while it has its place -- cheapens the language when overused. Can anyone guess what I avoided using?

Commas
I don't mind commas, in fact, I am probably one of the people who over use them but the semicolon drives me insane.

Languages are always evolving. the English language in 100 years will be nearly unrecognizable compared to what we speak to day with out us going out of our way to change anything.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 

A pox upon your vile suggestion. The English language is the richest and most versatile instrument of communication that has ever existed. It gets along very well by itself and changes naturally with time and place, just as it needs to. And it will continue to defy all the efforts of idiots to 'reform' it.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by aaaiii
 
Believe me, I'm of the same mentality, but English is so bastardized at this point that the rules we use to make proper grammar are never consistent. It's far easier for an Englisher to learn another language than for the other language to learn ours.

reply to post by JakiusFogg
 
The only thing I'd like to steal is the: "all nouns are capitalized" rule that they have.

reply to post by JakiusFogg
 
Easier for children. Adults learning languages? English and Tonals are hard on those who don't use that in the first place.

reply to post by DaveNorris
 
The only way to do that is to switch to IPA. because ing in running and boing have slightly different n-g combination, that the Roman letters can't handle. Here.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
SUPREME HYPOCRISY!!!

UTTER HYPOCRISY.

How can OP advise on literacy when OP cannot even compose a sentence that is grammatically correct?

"Small changes that can be made to The English Language to highly increase literacy., " is ATROCIOUS ENGLISH.

"to highly increase" is LOUSY ENGLISH. It is a SPLIT INFINITIVE.

Time OP went back to school and learnt how to write before OP started lecturing us on a language in which they clearly cannot compose.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
Verb Tenses

One way to facilitate English, is to get


POOR ENGLISH!!! One should NEVER use the word "get". It is the symbol of illiterate ignorance.



rid of verb conjugations. In this way, we will


BAD, BAD, BAD!!! How can you write about conjugations when you cannot even conjugate the verb "to be"?

First person, present tense of "to be" is "WE SHALL" not "WE WILL" - This is VERY POOR ENGLISH.




not have to memorize how to spell the different tenses of verbs, nor would we have confusion between words like "sang" and "sung" or "swam" and "swum", or "began" and "begun".

"I am singing" for example, can become "I do sing".

"I sang" for example, can become "I did sing".


POOR PUNCTUATION!!!

"for example" should have a comma BEFORE as well as after it.'



"I sing" will remain the same

and, of course, for the future tense, it will stay as "I will sing".


In whose books will it remain that? It has NEVER BEEN THAT. Are you so utterly incapable of conjugating the verb "TO BE"?

The correct English is. "I shall sing".

This is STUNNINGLY POOR ENGLISH.



So with these basic words


LOUSY PUNCTUATION AGAIN!!!

There must be a comma before and after the clause, "with these words"


(did, do, will) we can make different tenses of verbs without actual conjugation.

Different types of sentences

Since "do" will be used for verb tenses, questions will not be formed by changed the structure of the sentence and putting "do" or "did" in front of it. Instead it


SLOPPY PUNCTUATION AGAIN!!!

At what sort of joke school did you attend?

There needs to be a comma after "Instead"


will change by adding the word ", right?" at the end.

For example: "Are you here?" would become "You are here, right?"

Imperative sentences will remain the same. "Look at me!" will remain as "Look at me!" without changes. The format of Verb-Object for imperative sentences (which is already inherit in English) will not be mistaken for a regular sentence.

Sentences like "I did my homework" will become "I did finish my homework", and "I am doing the paper work" will become "I do complete the paper work".


POOR SPELLING!!!

The word is "paperwork", not "paper work"


In order to form a negation, the word "not" will come after the verb.

Sentences such as "I do not know" can remain the same, although sentences like "I am not joking" will become "I do not joke".


Confused BUNK. Since when was "I do not joke" not currently a valid sentence?




Who, What, When , Where, Why, and How sentences will follow the common English "Subject-Verb-Object" structure.

Example sentences:

That is who?

We are where?

You are who?

You want what? (from "What do you want?")
Compounds

In order to make the language even easier to learn, Latin and French borrowed words will be replaced with English counterparts or compounds.

Words such as "literacy" will be replaced with "readiness",


This makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. "readiness" means to be prepared, a completely different concept to "Literacy".



and "an ascension" will become "an uplifting", "the creation" will become "the making".

alphabet reformation (optional)

This is just optional to my original idea but if we really wanted to make English easier, we would also reform the spelling.

Get rid of "x" and replace it with "ks", get rid of "q" and replace it with "k", get rid of "c" and replace it with "k" or "s" depending on if it is a hard or soft c.

x = ks
q = k
hard c = k
soft c = s

Spelling reformation (optional)

This too, is also optional to my original idea. Words should be spelled as pronounced.

a = ah (a in father)
e = eh (e in bed)
i = ih (i in sit)
o = oh (o in gold)
u = oo (oo in food)

ae = a as in cat
eo = uh as in cup
ee = ee as in eel or feel
eu = u in cute, keu would sound "Q"
ai = "ight" as in "light"
ei = ai in aid

I know there are many dialects of English, but with these basic sounds of English we can estimate to the closet sound.

peepeol will be "people"
keut will be "cute"
kaet will be "cat"
get will "get"
geit will be "gate"
kaen will be "can"
kein will be "cane"

and so on...

The two optionals are not necesary (spelling and alphabet reform) but


POOR PUNCTUATION AGAIN

Do you not know that conjunctions must always have a comma before them?




I highly suggest the compounds / English word replacement and the simple verb tense. What do you think about this? or should I say "You think what about this?"



As you are clearly far from literate in English, perhaps you should attend classes in "English as a second language" before commenting on literacy.
edit on 28-6-2012 by bearwithredhat because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-6-2012 by bearwithredhat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
"Only in America"?

This is the country where people are so stupid that some of them even use that that hack rag "Webster's" as a reference source, and some, I know this is hard to believe, even think it defines the English language. "Just how ignorance are Americans?", I ask you!



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
How bout this....you learn $%^&ing ENGLISH.

Your learning how to communiate effectivley and accuratly.....
I got an Idea on how to improve the literacy rate.....LEARN

English does not need changing. People need to stop beeing @*$(&@()* lazy and put down the god #$%^ phones and texting.

THIS BOILS ME TO NO END!

If i was going to learn another langauge i wouldn;t go around asking to change it to ease my ability to speak/understand it!
...
Jessus how damn........ ARRRRRRG.......

end of rant.......



edit on 28-6-2012 by Vardoger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
The thing about language is that it's organic. It melds, evolves and is shaped everyday. It's shaped by geography, religion, conquest and new inventions. Having a universal language would quickly evolve into distinct dialects within a generation.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by bearwithredhat
 


reply to post by Vardoger
 



I agree with you completely. I made so many mistakes while writing that, and based on all of the writing I see on the internet, most of the people write incorrect English too, even when they are trying their best. The language is extremely incoherent.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   
This thread is double plus good...



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


A very well written post, arpgme, but, with respect, I personally would like to see our language continue as it is.

What irritates me ( U K.) is slack spoken English....e.g:

" Gonna " instead of " Going to "

" Tranna " instead of " Trying to "

Sentences with the word " like " used several times.. ( Mostly a teenage phenomenon.)

Written English: " Till " when a person means ' Til ' ( Until.) Now rampant, and seen as the norm, now.

...Or, maybe it is all part of our ever changing use of our language, and phraseology ?

And the loss of local dialects...there's another topic in itself.

It is educashun wot needs to like, improve, like, not stooping to the lowest common denominator, like.

I feel sorry for the children of today learning English, they have far more distractions to learning than I did as a child.

I thought my parents were mean, not having a TV, when I was a child ( 1960's.) They probably couldn't afford one, but this meant I read instead....



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:42 AM
link   


This guy understands why the English language is so hard to learn.

We should understand that most of us are taught this as our first language, therefore it's easier.



Dearest creature in creation,
Study English pronunciation.
I will teach you in my verse
Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse.
I will keep you, Suzy, busy,
Make your head with heat grow dizzy.
Tear in eye, your dress will tear.
So shall I! Oh hear my prayer.

Just compare heart, beard, and heard,
Dies and diet, lord and word,
Sword and sward, retain and Britain.
(Mind the latter, how it's written.)
Now I surely will not plague you
With such words as plaque and ague.
But be careful how you speak:
Say break and steak, but bleak and streak;
Cloven, oven, how and low,
Script, receipt, show, poem, and toe.

Hear me say, devoid of trickery,
Daughter, laughter, and Terpsichore,
Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles,
Exiles, similes, and reviles;
Scholar, vicar, and cigar,
Solar, mica, war and far;
One, anemone, Balmoral,
Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel;
Gertrude, German, wind and mind,
Scene, Melpomene, mankind.

Billet does not rhyme with ballet,
Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet.
Blood and flood are not like food,
Nor is mould like should and would.
Viscous, viscount, load and broad,
Toward, to forward, to reward.
And your pronunciation's OK
When you correctly say croquet,
Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve,
Friend and fiend, alive and live.

Ivy, privy, famous; clamour
And enamour rhyme with hammer.
River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb,
Doll and roll and some and home.
Stranger does not rhyme with anger,
Neither does devour with clangour.
Souls but foul, haunt but aunt,
Font, front, wont, want, grand, and grant,
Shoes, goes, does. Now first say finger,
And then singer, ginger, linger,
Real, zeal, mauve, gauze, gouge and gauge,
Marriage, foliage, mirage, and age.

Query does not rhyme with very,
Nor does fury sound like bury.
Dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth.
Job, nob, bosom, transom, oath.
Though the differences seem little,
We say actual but victual.
Refer does not rhyme with deafer.
Foeffer does, and zephyr, heifer.
Mint, pint, senate and sedate;
Dull, bull, and George ate late.
Scenic, Arabic, Pacific,
Science, conscience, scientific.

Liberty, library, heave and heaven,
Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven.
We say hallowed, but allowed,
People, leopard, towed, but vowed.
Mark the differences, moreover,
Between mover, cover, clover;
Leeches, breeches, wise, precise,
Chalice, but police and lice;
Camel, constable, unstable,
Principle, disciple, label.

Petal, panel, and canal,
Wait, surprise, plait, promise, pal.
Worm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair,
Senator, spectator, mayor.
Tour, but our and succour, four.
Gas, alas, and Arkansas.
Sea, idea, Korea, area,
Psalm, Maria, but malaria.
Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean.
Doctrine, turpentine, marine.

Compare alien with Italian,
Dandelion and battalion.
Sally with ally, yea, ye,
Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, and key.
Say aver, but ever, fever,
Neither, leisure, skein, deceiver.
Heron, granary, canary.
Crevice and device and aerie.

Face, but preface, not efface.
Phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.
Large, but target, gin, give, verging,
Ought, out, joust and scour, scourging.
Ear, but earn and wear and tear
Do not rhyme with here but ere.
Seven is right, but so is even,
Hyphen, roughen, nephew Stephen,
Monkey, donkey, Turk and jerk,
Ask, grasp, wasp, and cork and work.

Pronunciation -- think of Psyche!
Is a paling stout and spikey?
Won't it make you lose your wits,
Writing groats and saying grits?
It's a dark abyss or tunnel:
Strewn with stones, stowed, solace, gunwale,
Islington and Isle of Wight,
Housewife, verdict and indict.

Finally, which rhymes with enough --
Though, through, plough, or dough, or cough?
Hiccough has the sound of cup.
My advice is to give up!!!

pauillac.inria.fr...



new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join