| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Shiv 
"What a Wonderful World"
|
 Posted - 02/14/2007 : 09:20:52
|
Salopian, your opinions are accepted.
I have an unfair advatage of being linguist, and I have other forums where I can discuss language research. I won't bore people by going on with this . |
 |
|
|
Sal[Au]pian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 09:25:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
Other examples which I know are used are the single 'l' in words like travel(l)ing. There's no reason at all for insisting on a 'll' in those words.
This is a bit different, because it was a conscious and official change - it did not build up through popular usage. There were two Americans who drove it, I seem to remember; I forget their names. -ll- was already established by concensus over history, and I don't really think it was appropriate to override this. (Actually, I never think conscious spelling reform is a good idea, such as the recent German 'changes' that mean -sss- now occurs.) The single-/double-letter difference does also cause problems in that American children have to learn when to have which, e.g. American English does not have submited. (Of course, it is hard to be objective about whether it is easier to learn the British English system, but it is certainly not the case that the American one is completely plain and simple.) |
Edited by - Sal[Au]pian on 02/14/2007 12:30:54 |
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 09:28:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
I have an unfair advatage of being linguist, and I have other forums where I can discuss language research. I won't bore people by going on with this.
Ah, but what am I? Not professionally (although I still work with words), but educationally I am a linguist (x 2). I do accept that I find other Englishes easier to understand than most people seem to, so admittedly I cannot be objective on this front either. No language point will ever bore me. |
Edited by - Sal[Au]pian on 02/14/2007 10:07:30 |
|
|
|
Shiv
"What a Wonderful World"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 10:58:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
I have an unfair advatage of being linguist, and I have other forums where I can discuss language research. I won't bore people by going on with this.
Ah, but what am I? Not professionally (although I still work with words), but educationally I am a linguist (x 2). I do accept that I find other Englishes easier to understand than most people seem to, so admittedly I cannot be objective on this front either. No language point will ever bore me.
I do not intend to sound pretentious or to make assumptions about your or other people's knowledge. I know there will be other linguists out there, and literacy teachers, and some of them will disagree with my theories - that's the nature of research. I have had 12 years of doing not much more than researching, teaching and applying knowledge of language.
But I don't think that the reason this thread was started was because people wanted to be bombarded with detailed evidence from theoretical and applied research. Already the discussion you and I have been having is conflating several linguistic areas, and I just don't think this is the place to get into this. The more you answer the more I am in danger of getting pedantic and tempted to quote research and waffle on about language theory. Like I say, I do that in other forums and I got involved in fwfr for other reasons.
I do like the fact that lots of things are discussed in Fourum but it's more fun when lots of people join in and two people don't end up running away with it as we seem to be doing - and that applies to any topic posted. I've already spewed two long, pompous posts, which have had limited appeal in regard to generating a discussion, so I just want to let it be now. Thanks
|
|
|
|
Sal[Au]pian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 12:41:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
I do not intend to sound pretentious or to make assumptions about your or other people's knowledge.
Yes, sorry - I phrased my post badly and did not mean to suggets that you did.
quote:
But I don't think that the reason this thread was started was because people wanted to be bombarded with detailed evidence from theoretical and applied research.
Well, it was only started because C.L. didn't want me arguing against 'til in a different thread, and I don't think she really minded what the content here then would be. However, I of course don't expect you to post anything that you don't want to.
quote:
Already the discussion you and I have been having is conflating several linguistic areas
Yes, this is fair. I agree that it would be messy to try to continue in an unstructured way such as would be the case here, floating between different aspects.
quote:
I just don't think this is the place to get into this. The more you answer the more I am in danger of getting pedantic and tempted to quote research and waffle on about language theory.
It's definitely fine to discuss it here, especially as it is far less off-topic than most off-topic things (and people here are more aware of linguistic issues than the average person), but as I say, it is of course fine if you don't want to. And for the record, I wouldn't have any problem with you being pedantic or quoting research. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 13:47:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
[quote]But I don't think that the reason this thread was started was because people wanted to be bombarded with detailed evidence from theoretical and applied research.
Well, it was only started because C.L. didn't want me arguing against 'til in a different thread, and I don't think she really minded what the content here then would be. However, I of course don't expect you to post anything that you don't want to.
I moved the discussion over to the "Off-Topic" forum so we can all be free to discuss this topic - or even go off this topic - to our hearts content.
|
|
|
|
Shiv
"What a Wonderful World"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 13:58:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
[quote]But I don't think that the reason this thread was started was because people wanted to be bombarded with detailed evidence from theoretical and applied research.
Well, it was only started because C.L. didn't want me arguing against 'til in a different thread, and I don't think she really minded what the content here then would be. However, I of course don't expect you to post anything that you don't want to.
I moved the discussion over to the "Off-Topic" forum so we can all be free to discuss this topic - or even go off this topic - to our hearts content.
Hi, yes, I appreciate that. I talk about and write about language all the time in my work and I was just getting a little too sucked in. I wanted to back off a bit without seeming as if I was disagreeing with or not wanting to discuss with Salopian, who was only going to push me to more and more intensity! (Especially in light of some frustration expressed in other forums  ) Hopefully people have got something out of the discussion, but there was just so much being talked about I hoped others would come back in with other ideas or observations if I stopped posting so much. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 20:05:28
|
I'm a poet. I love words and language and used to be involved in several forums on the subject. But while I may have published a verse or two, I'm no expert.
(Okay, I'm a language discussion voyeur! So sue me.) |
|
|
|
Shiv
"What a Wonderful World"
|
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 00:13:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
I'm a poet. I love words and language and used to be involved in several forums on the subject. But while I may have published a verse or two, I'm no expert.
(Okay, I'm a language discussion voyeur! So sue me.)
Poets are experts at using and manipulating language and producing written language that may be concious or subconscious - but is quite magical. I couldn't compete with that (I'm a voyeur on the haiku pages!) even though I'm a good prose writer.
I am also a terrible language learner! Give me some language, written or spoken, and give me some linguistic tools (the translation and word class of a few words, hints on some prefixes and suffixes) and I'll do a damn good job of pulling it all apart. By being immersed in a language situation I'll understand enough to get by, but my analytical little mind won't let me just absorb and produce! I overthink, and my ability to produce sounds is frustrating because I know how they should be formed, but whatever is coming out of my mouth is obviously not it!
|
|
|
|
ragingfluff
"Currently lost in Canada"
|
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 20:01:25
|
A lot of English spelling has to be learned, rather than being intuitive. I got picked up on another fourum for spelling authoritative as authoratitive. This is because that's how I say it.
Doesn't that just mean you mispronounce it? |
|
|
|
Shiv
"What a Wonderful World"
|
Posted - 02/16/2007 : 00:06:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by ragingfluff
A lot of English spelling has to be learned, rather than being intuitive. I got picked up on another fourum for spelling authoritative as authoratitive. This is because that's how I say it.
Doesn't that just mean you mispronounce it?
Yup, if you say it the first way for real. Try saying it a few times and see if you really say authorItAtive. Gotta say it as you would say it in speech (as in, don't slow down just to test this out). Of course, we've got to take all the accents floating around on this site into consideration too.  |
Edited by - Shiv on 02/16/2007 00:07:51 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
The Nature of Language
