English

[NeMo]

@newportnobby

The problem is drawing a line between poor English and evolving English. That's a very subjective distinction.

Some things we can agree are wrong, like "alot" for "a lot" or "should of" where the speaker means "should have".*

Other things seem to be genuine changes, along the lines of how "gay" has come to mean something quite different to what it meant a century ago.

So the word "impact" for example should be a noun, as in a force acting upon something else. But much as it annoys me, in commonly spoken English, especially in business and the professions, it's become a verb, as in, "your delays impact on us all". According to the BBC this transition from noun to verb has actually been going on for literally hundreds of years, giving an example from 1601!

The big issue in the UK, compared with the US, is that spoken English is inextricably linked to class (or by proxy, the intelligence and education level). Listening to Radio 4, I'm always struck by the number of broadcasters and academics who pronounce the word "homosexual" as if the first syllable was rhymed with "Tom", so it sounds more like "hommosexual". Technically, that's correct, given the Greek roots of the word, but I've never met anyone pronounce the word that way in real life!

The explanation is of course social class, the Radio 4 broadcasters coming primarily from upper middle class, privately educated backgrounds -- or if they didn't, emulating that sort of speech as a way of fixing their own (I'd say rather self-important!) status in society.

I could go, finding this a fascinating topic.

Cheers, NeMo

*Teachers do try their best here, but the reality is that if good written and spoken English aren't reinforced at home and in the workplace, English at schools amounts to about as much good as GCSE French -- enough to pass exams, but that's about it.

[acko22]

Ok then this has been educational, I do think that I may have learnt more on this thread about the correct use of grammar and spelling than I managed at school.

Although that could be as I am northern and not on of them posh southern folk! 

( Now time to find some hard cover for the incoming! )

[Chris Morris]

@newportnobby


Other things seem to be genuine changes, along the lines of how "gay" has come to mean something quite different to what it meant a century ago.

Yes indeed, a couple of years ago I was reading a railway magazine from the late fifties. The author described a train as "running at a gay old pace".

[Jerry Howlett]

Didn't the Flintstones have a "Gay old time" ?

[NeMo]

It strikes me that Europeans who have English as a language have been taught better than our children are being taught. Certainly that is my experience of travelling in Europe on business.

I don't think it's about how well English is taught in schools. But there's a huge difference in how important English is perceived to be.

For the average white working class person, there's a perception they already speak and read English just fine, and anything done at school is merely icing on the cake. It's because of this perception that literacy rates in the UK are quite startling once you drill down into them; the commonest stat quoted is a 16% functional illiteracy rate in the UK (which means a reading age of about 11). Such a person could read The Sun newspaper or send a text message, but would be hard put to understand a legal contract or anything else written at that level.

The contrast is in Europe (and most of the rest of the world) where being able to access English gives you access to all sorts of goodies, from enjoying pop culture to doing business. It's the silver bullet. If you only speak Italian or German or Japanese, you're either stuck working within your home market or else reliant on an interpreter. Of everything taught in school, English as a second language is by far the most valuable, almost regardless of what your personal interests might be. So even for youngsters, being able to follow a pop song or watch an English-language sports commentary gives you something useful. As you get older, it becomes financially valuable in terms of getting a job, working in the US or UK, travelling abroad for medical or scientific jobs, or working in international settings like hotels and airlines in your own country.

But selling 'better' English as something worthwhile is extremely difficult in some sections of British society. One of my colleagues is a retired naval officer but now an English teacher. He's able to give the students examples of front-line situations where what you say, and how you say it, can be a matter of life and death. But for the average teacher without that depth of experience it can be a really tough sell.

Good teachers inspire, of course; but without support from home, it's hard to do anything other than train the kids to pass exams.

Cheers, NeMo

[railsquid]

It strikes me that Europeans who have English as a language have been taught better than our children are being taught. Certainly that is my experience of travelling in Europe on business.
I fear @railsquid may be able to confirm this but the Japanese youth appear to have learnt American which, as we all know, is a different language to English

I shall, no doubt, have to spend much time disbunking the assertion that e.g. there is an "e" in "hat"

[dannyboy]

"'Ere you go luv"
I had been in my first job for ten days when it was my birthday, so, as was the tradition, I had to buy cream buns for the office staff. I passed the box to one rather prim and proper lady and, in my best Yorkshire accent said, "'Ere you go luv". She gave me such a withering look and said in a rather posh accent, "I am not your love"

"But dropping aitches"
- should that be "But dropping haitches"     

[railsquid]

The contrast is in Europe (and most of the rest of the world) where being able to access English gives you access to all sorts of goodies, from enjoying pop culture to doing business. It's the silver bullet. If you only speak Italian or German or Japanese, you're either stuck working within your home market or else reliant on an interpreter.

And those are G7 countries with substantial economies and a wide range of media in the respective local language. I don't have much experience with Italy, but English is by no means universally spoken in Germany, and even less than Japan (though in both countries the level of English is way better than the level of any foreign language in the UK). However if you come from a smaller country, English is pretty much imperative.

Of everything taught in school, English as a second language is by far the most valuable, almost regardless of what your personal interests might be. So even for youngsters, being able to follow a pop song or watch an English-language sports commentary gives you something useful. As you get older, it becomes financially valuable in terms of getting a job, working in the US or UK, travelling abroad for medical or scientific jobs, or working in international settings like hotels and airlines in your own country.

Or working in any kind of international environment, the company I work for has a majority of non-native English speakers based in various locations around the world, company language is of course English, and the majority speak/write it at a very high level.

I also assert that speaking at least one foreign language makes you a better speaker of your native one. Unfortunately, to effectively learn and use it, you need exposure and an imperative to use it which is very difficult to obtain in a largely English-speaking country.

[woodbury22uk]

There is a debate in another place (OK RMweb) about a country where the government has changed from using "Ministry of ...." to "Ministry for,,,". The latter is the literal translation of the expression used in the country's other official language.

In America the present and past tense of several verbs in English has changed since the 15th century. One example I have to remember when writing to Americans is "fit" used as a verb, where English English would have used the word "fitted". Fitted in American English refers to having fits, in the medical sense of the word.

In English, people who commented were commentators, but they no longer comment. Today they "commentate". We used to prime our models before extra coats of paint were applied but in the past week I have seen several references to "primering" for "priming", and I am going to "primer" it, where "prime" it would have been perfectly OK.

Our language is dynamic, but I do not have to like some of the directions in which it is moving.

With prior apologies to anyone who sees offence in what I have written.

[oscar]

So, when did I replace OO as in GID for GOOD?
Also, it's I'm well or I'm fine, not I'm gid when asked how you are.
I'll decide whether you're good! 

[Malc]

What annoys me is when people put an aspirant on the single letter H. It is spelt and pronounced aitch. As a northerner, I often drop my aitches, so when people add them when the shouldn't it stands out.

Rant over, I'll get me coat and tin 'at.

[jpendle]

I notice that Terry, the OP, has been conspicuous by his absence from this thread.

John P

[oscar]

Probably enjoying the English lesson!

[railsquid]

Didn't the Flintstones have a "Gay old time" ?

That was due to the Yaba-daba do.

[joe cassidy]

You might need to explain what yaba is RS, for those less widely-travelled than yourself.

Best regards,


Joe