702. DanDillon - Dec. 22, 1998 - 2:41 PM PT
Rask,
I'm not familiar with those terms, "active" and "passive" vocabularies, but I believe what you say. If the by-now-notorious 20- 25,000 words compose one's passive stock, how many, I wonder, account for the active?
703. DanDillon - Dec. 22, 1998 - 2:45 PM PT
ScottLoar,
Unfortunately, I am not familar with the U.S. miltary's style of language instruction. Sounds like a real gas. I did, however, learn the basics of Arabic from a branch of the American government, considering the Peace Corps an arm of the State Deptartment. Were you an enlisted man?
704. Raskolnikov - Dec. 22, 1998 - 3:11 PM PT
Dan: hmmm... I had assumed "active" and "passive" vocabulary were terms in common use, but I have no recollection where I picked them up.
705. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 22, 1998 - 3:13 PM PT
He probably recognises the terms, but is speaking with his linguist's hat on.
706. DanDillon - Dec. 22, 1998 - 3:23 PM PT
Mmm-hmm.
Thank you for so remarkably crystalizing my thoughts, pe. You are too generous and too, too kind.
707. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 22, 1998 - 3:53 PM PT
pseudo Message #681:
"According to Ethnologue, English has only slightly above a hundred million "second language speakers". Hindi has nearly twice as many; Mandarin has about the same as French; and Russian about the same as Spanish."
That number for English is seriously out of whack. There may be 100 million second language speakers of English in India alone. Add the numbers in Pakistan, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Nigeria,and Kenya, which are all very large nations with a significant percentage of the population studying in English, plus the many smaller nations with English as a second language (Singapore, Malaysia, many African nations, etc.), plus immigrants in all the English speaking nations (probably another 50 million), and you will have *easily* over half a million *second* language speakers.
The number for Mandarin is also way out of line. Native speakers of Mandarin probably account for no more than two-thirds of China's population, and that may be a very generous estimate. The remaining third speak Mandarin as a second language (except for a very few hold-outs). One-third of China's population is not a small number.
"All the same, the question was not about second-language speakers per se, but about the total number of those who have studied a language."
If we are talking of *foreign* language (as opposed to second language) speakers, the number for English certainly exceeds one billion. English is a required subject of study in China and Indonesia, as well as most European and Latin American nations.
Ethnologue's numbers make no sense, no matter how you look at it.
708. patsyrolph - Dec. 22, 1998 - 4:03 PM PT
So, I wandered about Spain aquiring or remembering words at a somewhat lesser rate than our three year old. But every day brought more words and fewer charades and an increasing ability to read the Spanish newspapers. With a major degree of hubris I began to formulate a theory of imperative language acquisition in foreign situations. My theory blew apart on the plane to Amsterdam. My seat mate. also leaving Madrid. had such a strong accent that I had some difficulty distinguishing Spanish and English when she spoke. She confided that she was reurning to Austin. Texas where she had been living for 28 years and had never learned to read or write English.
709. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 22, 1998 - 4:46 PM PT
NOTE: We're no longer talking about which is the most STUDIED foreign language in the world, but which language is the most widely spoken as a second language. The two questions are not the same, for many more study English than ever learn to speak with a modicum of proficiency. I think the answer to the first question is definitely English; to the second, I think it's Hindi.
Snirv (Message #707)
I disagree. Ethnologue lists the number of speakers of English as a second language at 150 million. Unlike you, I don't think this figure is out of whack. Sounds just about right to me. First of all, India has no more than 50 million English speakers, tops. As for other countries:
Pakistan: a million, tops
Bangladesh: a few hundred thousand
Nigeria: 2 million, tops
Kenya: ???
Hong Kong: at most a 100,000
Malaysia: say, 5 million
Singapore: say a million
Philippines: I personally don't believe more than a few million, but let's say 20 million.
foreign-born population in the UK, Canada & Australasia: 5 million tops
foreign-born population in the U.S.: 20 million (not all of whom speak English as a second language, because many come from Anglophone countries like Jamaica, but also because some came so young. Does MariaGleason speak English as a second language?)
Tallying up the figures, I find the 150 million figure very plausible.
710. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 22, 1998 - 4:56 PM PT
Africa (ex South Africa) has no more than 10 million speakers of English. The vast majority of these are in Nigeria, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Ghana.
I can't even begin to disaggregate South Africa's English-speakers into native speakers and second-language speakers.
711. thomasd - Dec. 22, 1998 - 4:59 PM PT
Re. 709 -
PE -
Any particular reason you're leaving Europe and Russia out? I'm too lazy to search back, unless you point out the post.
712. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:04 PM PT
Because the number of English speakers in Russia is negligible, and the number in Western Europe, while significant in Germany and Scandinavia, doesn't add to up anything more than a few million. It wouldn't change the world total by much.
I should add that even if India did have a hundred million speakers of English (which I severely doubt), the Ethnologue tally of 150 million second-language speakers of English would be still be pretty close.
713. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:18 PM PT
What percentage of the Chinese speak Mandarin, whether on a native or second language basis? 99%? 80%? 70%? What percentage of the total had to acquire it?
714. ScottLoar - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:31 PM PT
I'd guess that of the 1,246.9 million people in China maybe 935,357,814 speak Mandarin as a native language, plus or minus 2 or 3.
715. ChristinO - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:33 PM PT
Dan,
So what are the terms if any for the words we use v the words we know but don't use? I know that my reading vocabulary is vastly larger than my day to day spoken vocabulary, but I would assume that to be the case with most people. On the other hand this is probably greatly affected by how much and what one reads.
716. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:35 PM PT
Message #714: How many second-language speakers of Mandarin in the PRC?
717. ScottLoar - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:42 PM PT
I don't know. The best way to figure it in lieu of any reliable study is to go by provincial populations, allowing that in certain provinces mostly in the south like Fujian and Guangzhou the mother tongue would not be Mandarin, but all primary school instruction in China is in Mandarin leaving only those born before, say, the mid-60's ignorant of it. And the level of Mandarin in China among people 30 and under is very, very good although I can't speak for the very poorer non-Mandarin hinterlands.
718. ScottLoar - Dec. 22, 1998 - 5:44 PM PT
Corrigendum: I can't speak with authority for the very poorer non-Mandarin hinterlands, just gauge so by personal experience as even among outside labourers my Mandarin is understood and is their reply.
719. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 22, 1998 - 11:21 PM PT
pseudo:
I strongly disagree with your figures for quite a few countries.
English is the medium of instruction in Nigeria, so your figure of 2 million English speakers is way understated. The same is true for Pakistan, where anyone with a high school education is a second language speaker of English. I think you could figure 30-50% of the populations of both these countries, conservatively.
The number in Malaysia is certainly over 10 million, and at least 80% of Singapore's 3.5 million speak English.
I would need my reference books to provide more detailed numbers, but those books are currently in Bali and I'm in Seattle. But I'm quite certain there are significant numbers of second language speakers in Africa in nations such as South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Zambia, Tanzania, Namibia, Uganda, Kenya, and others.
The second language totals for English definitely top the numbers for Hindi, especially since Hindi is not the medium of instruction in much of India. In South India, it is rare to find anyone who speaks Hindi at all, and South India accounts for much of the non-Hindi mother-tongue portion of India. I'd also be surprised if large numbers of Bengalis, Gujaratis, Marathis, Punjabis, etc. are speakers of Hindi.
The only language which, in my estimation, may rival English for second language speakers is Mandarin, and I hope to find more information on this.
720. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 23, 1998 - 4:20 AM PT
IrvingSnodgrass (Message #719)
"The same is true for Pakistan, where anyone with a high school education is a second language speaker of English. I think you could figure 30-50% of the populations of both these countries, conservatively."
The claims for Pakistan are NONSENSE. English is NOT the medium of instruction in state education there, and one is hard pressed to find anyone who is not old, or privately educated, or rich, who also speaks English in the bloody country. Try finding an English-speaking policeman in Karachi or Lahore. You won't.
Obviously, I cannot speak as confidently about Nigeria, Malaysia or Singapore, seeing that I know nothing about these countries.
"The second language totals for English definitely top the numbers for Hindi, especially since Hindi is not the medium of instruction in much of India. In South India, it is rare to find anyone who speaks Hindi at all..."
Yes, I know that. But if Hindi has 240 million second-language speakers, and my tallies for English are correct, then Hindi wins.
721. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 23, 1998 - 4:54 AM PT
According to the 1998 World Almanac and Book of Facts (whose language section is allegedly prepared by one Dr. Sidney Culbert), there are 335 million native speakers of English, and 497 million total speakers.
There is also David Crystal's book, "English as a Global Language", which I won't be able to consult until early January.
722. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 23, 1998 - 4:56 AM PT
Of course all this depends on how high or low the bar is for speaking English.
723. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 23, 1998 - 6:59 AM PT
pseudo:
"Of course all this depends on how high or low the bar is for speaking English."
Well, we can argue about the figures all we want. Until we have some figures we trust, it means little.
But there are very clear and meaningful definitions, which have been set by linguists.
In the posts above, I have primarily been counting *second* language speakers of English. Here are the three main groups of speakers of English (there is a fourth, but it is insignificant):
* First language speakers. Those persons growing up with English as their mother tongue, chiefly in English-speaking nations (though not always).
* Second language speakers. Those persons living in societies where English has an official role, who are educated in English and use English as their language of work, but who speak another language at home. Examples of Second-language countries: Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, India, Nigeria, South Africa, Kenya, etc.
* Foreign language speakers. Those who learn English through academic study (a subject in school, etc.). Examples of foreign-language countries: France, Thailand, China, Italy, Brazil, Indonesia, Netherlands, Mexico, Sweden, Russia, etc.
These categories do not make any claims about fluency. A second-language speaker can be very weak in their English abilities (I've met many in India, who were educated in English, but wouldn't impress anyone) and a foreign-language speaker can achieve near-native fluency (I've known people from Venezuela, Japan and Switzerland who could pass for native speakers, despite being foreign language learners of English).
724. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 23, 1998 - 7:04 AM PT
I've made clear what *I* have been speaking primarily about -- second-language speakers. I use the same definition as yours. "Foreign language speakers" of English are a negligible lot. To whit, I am not convinced that any Japanese who hasn't spent some time in an Anglophone country can be said to speak English.
725. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 23, 1998 - 7:13 AM PT
pseudo:
Agreed.
Strangely enough, there are a few countries in Europe where English is a foreign language where a fair percentage of the population achieves reasonable fluency without ever leaving the country. I am thinking of the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countires.
You can forget about virtually every other country in the world where English is a foreign language.
726. pseudoerasmus - Dec. 23, 1998 - 7:35 AM PT
In my experience, too, are the people from the Germanic countries the best "foreign language" speakers of English, especially Scandinavians and the Germans among the bunch the least good in English. I wonder if this is because of the structure of the language, which may be the most reasonable thing to say on first approximation. My guess, however, is that their Anglophony has mostly to do with proximity to English-speaking countries and sources. Plus, the relative paucity of speakers of Dutch, Norwegian, Swedish and Danish produces an incentive to learn foreign languages. (Which may also explain why Germans are the least adept at English among the bunch, though they're far better at English than speakers of Romance & Slavic languages.)
727. Ronski - Dec. 23, 1998 - 7:51 AM PT
Does anyone have any information as to which nationality generally has command of the most languages? My guess would be the Finns; some I have known have spoken, in addition to Finnish (Suomi), English, Russian, Swedish, German and French.
728. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 23, 1998 - 9:33 AM PT
pseudo:
To answer an earlier question:
"Does MariaGleason speak English as a second language?"
Yes. So do I.
Message #726:
"Plus, the relative paucity of speakers of Dutch, Norwegian, Swedish and Danish produces an incentive to learn foreign languages."
This is the *primary* reason. Once these people leave their tiny nations, they need English to communicate with the rest of the world.
Ronski:
You won't find any societies with institutionalized multilingualism which involve more than three languages. Furthermore, Finland does not have societal multilingualism. Finland is a monolingual nation (except for a tiny number of Sami/Lapps in the North), whose people learn *foreign* languages to communicate with other peoples, because no one outside of Finland learns Finnish.
729. ScottLoar - Dec. 23, 1998 - 10:22 AM PT
Which nationality generally has the poorest facility in any foreign language disproportionate to the time and money spent within the national education system educating them in foreign language? I'd bet Japan.
Which nationality generally has the greatest facility in any foreign language disproportionate to the time and money spent within the national education system educating them in foreign language?
730. Ronski - Dec. 23, 1998 - 10:51 AM PT
Irv,
Re: Finland. What about the Swedish speakers along the Coast?
I was thinking more in terms of average number of languages learned, not institutionalized multilingualism, though you make an interesting point. I suppose Switzerland is not even an exception that proves your rule, since the Rhaeto-Romanic languages are only spoken in a few cantons, and are not federally recognized as are German, French and Italian.
731. DanDillon - Dec. 23, 1998 - 1:51 PM PT
Chris Message #715,
"So what are the terms if any for the words we use v the words we know but don't use?"
Huh?
732. DanDillon - Dec. 23, 1998 - 1:53 PM PT
Message #724
The expression is "to wit," genius.
733. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 23, 1998 - 6:45 PM PT
Ronski:
Switzerland does have four official languages (German, French, Italian, and Romansch), but virtually no one speaks all four, and knowledge of all four isn't decreed by the state.
I forgot about the Swedes in Finland. I would guess that, as an ethnic group, they are in the process of losing their ethnic identity. At any rate, their language has no official status in Finland.
It would be hard to measure multilingualism among foreign language learners in various countries. It depends largely on the individual. Which is why I made my point earlier.
734. DanDillon - Dec. 24, 1998 - 9:13 AM PT
Irv et al.,
Understanding fully that multilingulaism is not an inherent part of any one culture or nationality, I must query the notion that people who can rightly claim the moniker of "polyglot" haven't at some time and some place formed clubs, groups, or committees for the express purpose of promoting multilingualism. Sure, they're probably not ministers of a State, but they may very likely be officially sanctioned by an arm, branch, or division of some governmental body. Therefore, by their very mission, namely, the promotion of multilingualism--sanctioned or otherwise, they have direct connections to an issue or issues of said State. And with this, the topic heretofore discussed, tabled, undressed, retabled and redressed ought to be put to bed. For it is in our minds and, ergo by extension, a function of nothing close to our imaginations that such a discussion is long past its bedtime. We need straighway brush the polyglots' teeth (and tongue; why not) tuck it in, kiss it, and say to it roundly and wholeheartedly, nighty-night.
735. ChristinO - Dec. 24, 1998 - 9:37 AM PT
Dan,
It was really just a restatement of Rask's question. See Message #700 & Message #702
Our spoken vocabulary is a subset of our comprehensive vocabulary. I was just wondering if there is a term for the words we use in day to day communication as opposed to the words we know but don't use.
736. RustlerPike - Dec. 24, 1998 - 11:12 PM PT
Haha! Pe made a stupid mistake!!! "To whit"!!! Wee - haw!!! What a half-whit!!!
(jeez Dan, are we 100% sure here?)
ChrisO: you ignorant slut!!! How's it hanging?
737. HCaulfield - Dec. 25, 1998 - 11:55 AM PT
Name that language!
1) Hyvää Joulua!
2) Naya Saal Mubarak Ho!
3) Gajan Kristnaskon!
4) Shub Naya Baras!
5) Nollaig Shona Dhuit!
6) Maligayang Pasko!
7) Sretan Bozic!
8) Vesele Vanoce!
9) Gledileg Jol!
10) Nadolig LLawen!
738. IrvingSnodgrass - Dec. 25, 1998 - 10:46 PM PT
HC:
The only one I know for sure is #6, which is Tagalog, but I'll post some guesses tomorrow if no one else happens along.
739. RustlerPike - Dec. 25, 1998 - 11:18 PM PT
I'm doing a translation job, and I would appreciate it if someone with some knowledge about combat planes and other military stuff could help me out. Here are my questions:
- What do you call it when one plane shoots down another? A kill? An air victory?
- Is the term armored combat vehicles correct, when referring to stuff other than tanks, and not just APCs? If not, what is the correct term?
- Is MiG the correct spelling?
- is air-to-ground machine gunning correctly called strafing, or is there another term for this?
- Is an engine's horsepower the same as its capacity? If not, what is this called?
Bonus question: why does my MSWord grammar-checker keep telling me to replace 'which' with 'that'? What's the big difference?
740. CharlieL - Dec. 25, 1998 - 11:25 PM PT
Message #736:
I'm sure we don't need to name any of those languages, as they probably have perfectly good names already.
741. RustlerPike - Dec. 25, 1998 - 11:47 PM PT
Message #738 I think I'll just have to tag alog with you on that one.
742. LazoJenn - Dec. 26, 1998 - 2:32 AM PT
In reply to (MSG NUM=739) Which \ That. The following is an excerpt from (The American Heritage Dictionary, Mifflin 1259)
Usage: The standard rule is that "that" should be used only to introduce a restrictive (or "defining")relative clause, which serves to identify the entity being talked about; in this use it should never be preceded by a comma. Thus, we say "the house that Jack built has been torn down", where the clause "that Jack built" tells which house was torn down... . Only "Which" is to be used with nonrestrictive (or "nondefining")clauses, which give additional information about an entity that has already been identified in the context; in this use, "which" is always preceded by a comma. Thus, we say "The students in Chemistry 10 have been complaining about the textbook, which (not that) is hard to follow.
There is a Grammar Hotline in each state. Check your local College or University. Sacramento (916) 686-7444 English Helpline, 24-hour recorder.
-I hope this helps...
743. RustlerPike - Dec. 26, 1998 - 4:31 AM PT
LazoJenn -
So "that" is a word that is never preceded by a comma, unlike "which", which always is?
744. HCaulfield - Dec. 26, 1998 - 9:00 AM PT
Irving -- Tagalog is correct.
RP -- Kill; yes; yes; yes; maybe displacement?
745. LazoJenn - Dec. 26, 1998 - 1:40 PM PT
RP (MSG NUM=743) - Yes, that would be a good summation. Just remember, "Which" most often introduces nonessential information.
Take care.
746. Jonesatlaw - Dec. 26, 1998 - 2:29 PM PT
Rustler- Engine horsepower refers to its power or ability to do work. Capacity and displacement are terms of volume for cylinder engines. It represents the total volume of the cylinders at full stroke. Usually in litres or cubic inches. Non-cylindrical engine are usually desinated according to horsepower or pounds of thrust in the case of turbines etc, I'm not sure of the metric equivalent.
747. Jonesatlaw - Dec. 26, 1998 - 2:30 PM PT
Re 737- I think 5 is gaelic.
748. ChristiPeters - Dec. 28, 1998 - 3:08 PM PT
Weird word usage -
In situations where I might huffily state, "Fine! See if I care!", my daughter and her friends say, "Fine! Who gives a care!"
I find this awkward sounding and strange, but it is very popular with the fifth grade girls my daughter has as friends.
Does anyone have ANY idea what could have produced this phrase?
749. Jonesatlaw - Dec. 28, 1998 - 3:10 PM PT
"a care" may be replacing "a Sh#t" for parental consumption.
750. Jonesatlaw - Dec. 28, 1998 - 3:11 PM PT
BTW I am assuming that the phrase is a repetition of an older sibling or schoolmates's usage.
751. ChristiPeters - Dec. 28, 1998 - 3:19 PM PT
Sound theory, Jonesatlaw.
Why didn't *I* think of that? Her whole group uses it. This is a group that thinks "stupid" (when directed at a specific person) is swearing and is *very* shocked if they hear the word "pissed". That one is considered "major swearing".
What can I say, I think this is the Bible Belt, but I wasn't really paying attention that day in class. *g*
752. ChristinO - Dec. 28, 1998 - 5:02 PM PT
Rustler,
Sorry I missed you! I suppose I could say I'm dressing to the left these days after Christmas. (g)
Christi,
I went to grade school in Texas and vividly remember "Who gives a care??" also shortened to "Who gives??" but not to be confused with "What gives?" which really doesn't make any sense at all except that people understand what you mean when you say it.
I also remember being instructed that "Crud!" is worse than "Crap!" and successfully eluding punishment for my first public curse word "Bitch" because it was beyond my fourth grade teacher's imagination that I would ever say such a thing.
753. HCaulfield - Dec. 29, 1998 - 12:43 PM PT
jonesatlaw -- Ok, but you don't get full marks. As an Irishman told me, "we speak Irish".
754. ChristinO - Dec. 29, 1998 - 4:23 PM PT
How different are Scots Gaelic and Irish Gaelic?
755. stostosto - Dec. 29, 1998 - 5:44 PM PT
HC #737
1) Finnish. (Estonian *perhaps* a possibility).
9) Norwegian ("new" Norwegian, that is. They have no less than four variants of their written language...)
The others are volapük.
756. HCaulfield - Dec. 29, 1998 - 9:24 PM PT
ChristinO -- I suppose you'll try to stir up the "who invented whiskey" argument too, but I'm ignoring your troll. (And what are the Manx, chopped liver?)
sto3 -- Finnish is correct. Norwegian is not, but you're in the ballpark.
DISCLAIMER -- I read the questions/answers in a newspaper, but they are not attributed to any source, so if you disagree with the key I have, write a letter to the editor.
757. Jonesatlaw - Dec. 29, 1998 - 10:05 PM PT
HCaufield- I used gaelic to fudge, I wasn't sure of whether it was Irish or Scots Gaelic.;-)
758. DanDillon - Dec. 30, 1998 - 11:48 AM PT
Chris Message #754,
The two languages are not so different at all. Here is the Lord's Prayer in both languages. You do the comparing....
Gaeilge Irish
Ár n-athair, atá ar neamh: go naofar d'ainm. Go dtaga do riocht. Go ndéantar do thoil ar an talamh, mar dhéantar ar neamh. Ár n-arán laethiúl tabhair dúinn inniu, agus maith dúinn ár bhfiacha, mar mhaithimid dár bhféichiúnaithe féin. Agus ná lig sinn i gcathú, ach saor sinn ó olc. Óir is leatsa an Ríocht agus an Chumhacht agus an Ghl/oir, tré shaol na saol. Amen.
Gàidhlig Scottish
Ar n-athair a tha air nèamh: gu naomhaichear d'ainm. Thigeadh do rìoghachd. Dèantar do thoil air an talamh, mar a nithear air nèamh. Tabhair dhuinn an ar fiachan, amhuil mar a mhaitheas sinne d'ar luchd-fiach. Agus na leig am buaireadh sinn, ach saor sinn o olc. Oir is leatsa an rioghachd agus an cumhachd agus a'ghòir gu siorruidh. Amen.
Here is a webpage that goes into greater detail about the differences. (I had some trouble accessing it myself, but you may as well give it a shot.)
759. cblythsr - Dec. 31, 1998 - 7:00 AM PT
I propose a new "Viagra" word for daily use: viagravation (noun): the natural result (for most men) upon viewing a scantily or suggestively dressed female; an embarrassing natural state for a man, in which to be observed by polite society. Such a state has been previously hinted at by words like, "Your flag is up, I see!" or "You seem to have a problem, old boy!"
There are other persons which may be affected by viagravation, but they know who they are, and they do not need to be identified here.
760. ScottLoar - Dec. 31, 1998 - 8:14 AM PT
Very clever, and you've a neat moniker as well; sounds like a train stop in Wales.
761. RustlerPike - Jan. 1, 1999 - 5:00 AM PT
The ad at the top of the page reads "from Abba to Zappa"!
762. Fraaank9 - Jan. 1, 1999 - 5:16 PM PT
DanDillon,
In response to my question in the "New Years" thread:
Although I have heard of no recent official proclamation declaring southern California the nation's 51st state, one could argue that the mere mention of the southern part of California conjures up certain thoughts, images,stereotypes,ideas,lifestyles,etc.,about it that few other states in this country do just by virtue California's immense large size.
It's its own unique place in what is a very large area, and therefore, I took the liberty to wonder outloud at that moment whether capitalization was compounded in that case.
I have seen others capitalize the "southern" ( Not in the Fray neccessarily ) when speaking of this part of California,so I was just wondering whether it had evolved as such.
I defer to you (or anyone) to maybe enlighten me as to when a geographical location takes wings to merit capitalization.
763. cartman69 - Jan. 1, 1999 - 10:47 PM PT
HC Message #737:
3) Gajan Kristnaskon! -- Esperanto
7) Sretan Bozic! -- Serbo-Croatian
8) Vesele Vanoce! -- Czech (maybe Polish)
9) Gledileg Jol! -- Danish (maybe Swedish)
10) Nadolig LLawen! -- Welsh
764. DanDillon - Jan. 4, 1999 - 3:41 PM PT
I'm surprised my linguistic superiors haven't mentioned this already...
Today is Jacob Grimm's birthday. Born in 1785, this linguistic anthropologist was a pioneer in helping anglophones understand the roots of their native language. But being a regular reader of this thread, you alredy knew that....
765. ChristinO - Jan. 4, 1999 - 3:49 PM PT
Thanks for the link and the comparison Dan!
766. ChristinO - Jan. 4, 1999 - 3:55 PM PT
Does anyone know (Well besides Seamus and Macnas who are seldom around of late) how similar sounding the languages are? Can a person who speaks one understand the other? I would assume so, but then again I have no idea which letters are pronounced and which are not other than a few phrases.
I don't know that I've ever heard Scottish Gaelic. I've heard Irish on several occasions particularly in San Francisco where it seemed that I heard it everywhere I went on weekend.
767. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 5, 1999 - 5:33 AM PT
Around Message #729 or so, Snirv and Ronski had an exchange about Finland. Here is another exchange, with a slightly different perspective.
768. stostosto - Jan. 5, 1999 - 6:09 AM PT
HCaulfield Message #737
Is "Gledileg jol" not new-Norwegian? Then it must be Icelandic. It is definitely not Danish or Swedish - respectively "Glædelig jul" and (something like) "Glädjeleg jul" - but the Swedes use "God jul" more often, I think.
I would also, like cartman, guess that "Nadolig Llawen" is Welsh.
769. tmachine - Jan. 5, 1999 - 6:51 AM PT
no. 9 IS Icelandic.
Rustlerpike: My understanding has been that strafing can happen both from the ground or the air. maybe I'm wrong. It comes from the German word for "punishment," I think. In wartime GB ground firing on planes was called "anti-aircraft fire"; the slang word was "ack-ack" (for AA).
770. Ronski - Jan. 5, 1999 - 9:11 AM PT
Pseudo,
Thanks for the link on Finland.
Room,
And, since Pani Kaosova is not around at the moment, let me add that Vesele Vanoce is Czech only, not also Polish.
771. Ronski - Jan. 5, 1999 - 9:26 AM PT
Has anyone ever posted this site on traveller's phrases in 70 languages?
Where is the toilet?; etc.
772. DanDillon - Jan. 7, 1999 - 5:39 PM PT
Perhpas it's time to revitalize this thread.
Accepting suggestions.... Go!
773. ScottLoar - Jan. 7, 1999 - 5:50 PM PT
Some short while ago doubts were raised as to the number of English speakers in the world. I accidentally uncovered notes within a presentation outline to the effect that English is not as widespead as assumed. That proportion of the world's population that speaks English as a first or second language, 1958: 9.8%; 1992: 7.6% (source: "The West Unique, Not Universal" Foreign Affairs Nov./Dec. 1996). Not the most authoritative source for linguistic affairs yet not too shabby.
774. ScottLoar - Jan. 7, 1999 - 5:52 PM PT
P.S. The Evening News with Peter Jennings today tells me the world population is now 6 billion.
775. DanDillon - Jan. 8, 1999 - 6:43 AM PT
ScottLoar,
Much can happen within the span of six years. (One might even learn another language.) Do you happen to be privy to the 1998 figures? I'd wager that such a percentage representing the proportion of English speakers around the globe fluctuates regularly. After all, languages, to a degree, are as subject to fashion and favor as much as anything.
776. tmachine - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:16 AM PT
I would bet that the decline of English as a first/second language in India/Bangladesh/Pakistan is a big part of the drop between 1958 (only 11 years after independence) and 1992, particularly since those countries' populations have also shot up during that period.
777. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:17 AM PT
Message #773
I would argue those figures are misleading.
The proportion of the world that speaks English as a first or second language, does not convey enough information to tell us the proportion of the world that speaks English as a second language. (Which was the topic of the conversation earlier, and which I would argue is the better measure of the influence of English than the total number of speakers.) Even by the figures you cited, English as a second language may still command a larger proportion of the world than any other. (Though I still claim that it must be Hindi and English second.)
778. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:19 AM PT
Message #776
English has definitely declined in Pakistan and Bangladesh (both in absolute and relative terms), but I'm sure the opposite is the case in India, whether in raw numbers or as % of the population.
779. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:19 AM PT
And faster population growth in the Third World alone can explain the drop in the proportion of English speakers.
780. marjoribanks - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:22 AM PT
There is no doubt at all that the number of speakers of English as a first/second language in India has gone up dramatically since 1947, even as a percentage of population.
Frankly, I'd be surprised if the percentage of English speakers has declined in Pakistan, though less so in the case of Bangladesh which has undergone a Bengali-first campaign.
781. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:37 AM PT
Marzipranks: The full English language discussion took place much much earlier, and the subcontinent was amply mentioned.
782. marjoribanks - Jan. 8, 1999 - 7:45 AM PT
Okay, I read it.
I'm with Irv.
783. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 8:01 AM PT
Marzipranks
"I'd be surprised if the percentage of English speakers has declined in Pakistan..."
As opposed to absolute numbers? You do realise that unless the population is falling the absolute number of English speakers must rise if the proportion of English speakers is to remain the same?
At any rate, both the number and percentage of English speakers has drastically declined in Pakistan. They're really going all out to stress Urdu. I predict that by 2030, when those educated before 1980 will have died out, only those educated abroad will speak English. The probability today that a person who was not educated in the 1950s or 1960s speaks English is already rather low.
784. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 8:03 AM PT
ERRATA
only those educated abroad PLUS some domestic university graduates, especially those in medicine and engineering, will speak English.
785. marjoribanks - Jan. 8, 1999 - 8:12 AM PT
Your analysis makes some sense.
However, Pakistan's elite will continue to use English as their language of choice, the top universities will continue to use English as the means to education, the best newspapers will remain English language, Star Television is extremely popular there etc, so I find your prediction unwarrantedly bleak wrt English usage in that country.
786. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 8:18 AM PT
Pakistan's elites get educated abroad. (But they usually don't send their daughters, though apparently some Sindhi families have made an exception..., to the country's lasting regret.) And very very few attend university in Pakistan.
787. marjoribanks - Jan. 8, 1999 - 8:23 AM PT
Pakistan's masses watch StarTV in larger numbers than their counterparts in India. I sincerely doubt that they are going to abandon English entirely by 2030 or whenever.
788. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 8:54 AM PT
First of all, StarTV was launched in Pakistan only early last year. I doubt highly that its viewership in Pakistan exceeds India's 20+ million. Second, beacause StarTV features lots of local-language programming (with English language programming at no extra cost), viewership is not a reliable indicator of English language usage. (A statistical sampling of policemen in Lahore and Karachi is a MUCH more reliable figure, and I have done so in person, informally.) Third, a lot (not all) of the viewership for StarTV in any country is just sports. People all over the world watch sports on TV without the slightest understanding of the commentary.
789. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 9:06 AM PT
I suppose 20 million+ is not viewership, but installations.
790. marjoribanks - Jan. 8, 1999 - 9:06 AM PT
Pseuder,
StarTV claims a higher concentration of viewers in Karachi than it does in Bombay.
However, there are a couple of other things which should factor into your reasoning. (1) Maybe the policemen on the street in Karachi and Lahore didn't speak English - I'd be seriously surprised if you wouldn't find most of their superiors fairly proficient. This will not change. (2) the main channels on StarTV are in English. This will also not change. And it is highly unlikely that Pak viewers will progressively give up English as you imply.
791. tmachine - Jan. 8, 1999 - 9:11 AM PT
I bow to your superior knowledge about the subcontinent--so the consensus is that Pakistan and Bangladesh have moved away from English as a second language while India has actually embraced it even more?
792. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 9:30 AM PT
marjoribanks (Message #790)
"StarTV claims a higher concentration of viewers in Karachi than it does in Bombay."
Here is StarTV's Pakistan website. No mention of Pakistan, strangely.
"...the main channels on StarTV are in English."
Irrelevant. One gets more local-language programming on StarTV than from Pakistan Television. All the same, as I said, I wager sport is the primary reason any Pakistani tunes in to StarTV.
"Maybe the policemen on the street in Karachi and Lahore didn't speak English - I'd be seriously surprised if you wouldn't find most of their superiors fairly proficient."
I would not.
My grandfather's siblings did not marry foreigners, and consequently my father has many full-Pakistani cousins, almost all of the males serving in the armed forces or in government at some level. Consequently, I have had some access to persons of authority in Pakistan, and fewer than might be expected, speak English. Indeed, there are generals, ministers, and MPs who speak no English.
"And it is highly unlikely that Pak viewers will progressively give up English as you imply."
I am not saying that Pakistanis will "give up" English. I'm saying that the majority of English-speakers will die out and fail to get adequately replaced.
793. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 9:32 AM PT
Tmachine: did you read about my adventure in Russia (in the international thread)?
794. marjoribanks - Jan. 8, 1999 - 9:43 AM PT
Pseuder,
There are MP's and ministers galore in India who don't speak English, that doesn't adequately reflect the number of English speakers in the country. The impact is better measured by the number of mainstream English publications, the number of English-language educational institutions and their relative import, and the use of the language for internal business purposes. Pakistan is not doing too badly on any of these fronts.
Are there Urdu StarTV channels? As far as I know there is one Hindi language channel (Zee TV) and one Hindi-English channel (Channel V).
795. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 8, 1999 - 10:09 AM PT
"The impact is better measured by the number of mainstream English publications, the number of English-language educational institutions and their relative import, and the use of the language for internal business purposes. Pakistan is not doing too badly on any of these fronts."
You are increasingly wading into statistical analysis, yet making unscientific assertions. To wit, there are eight major English-language newspapers, Dawn (founded by Jinnah) being the one with the highest circulation, about 100,000. Even if we said the readership was 125,000, that would make the total number of readers of English-language newspapers in Pakistan at most 1 million. That's less than 1% of the population. Is that doing well? I don't know.
As for Urdu language programming, I really don't know, since I haven't been in Pakistan since Star became available. However, I assume from Star's practises in other countries that this must be so, or that it simply uses Hindi language programming.
796. tmachine - Jan. 8, 1999 - 11:26 AM PT
pseudo: I LOVED your Nakhodka Novy God. Hilarious. Almost Waugh-worthy. It took me back to the British ambassador's Christmas party in Moscow in 1974, which we got invited to because of being exchange students. However one thing that was available was vegetables--specifically tomatoes and cucumbers, which were status symbols in Soviet Union winters and which we vitamin-deprived students fell on almost as avidly as we did the champagne and vodka (which you mixed when the waiters weren't looking). But I have to admit the decor was simply fabulous, like being at some prerevolutionary ball in Dr. Zhivago. The embassy building is a really gorgeous one.
797. DanDillon - Jan. 13, 1999 - 6:49 AM PT
Might we have a fresh start with this one, Irv? Begin at 1 possibly?
798. CalGal - Jan. 13, 1999 - 8:06 AM PT
Irv,
If it factors into your decision, this thread is completely archived.
799. DanDillon - Jan. 13, 1999 - 8:30 AM PT
A well-oiled machine, this Fray.
800. pseudoerasmus - Jan. 13, 1999 - 10:58 AM PT
I don't understand why grammar needs to be taught at all to first-language speakers. Particularly if one is a descriptivist, why should one think instruction in grammar is necessary?