will to power is a Nietzschean idea that is in *theory* okay but in practice is mostly associated with Nazi appropriation/misunderstanding of Nietzsche's work and well... talking about "will to power" based on collective linguistic nationalism in Europe feels a lil bit tone-deaf lol
ah yes fascism has completely vanished since and isn't an ongoing problem in europe and the AfD doesn't exist and there's no such thing as Atomwaffen and etc etc etc and everything is fine :)
@touch fluffy tail @Izzy Swart Creating the EU has been going alright so far. It has had its issues, mostly the democratic deficit in the institutions built, but I don't think invoking nazi and imperial tropes is going to improve that.
There are people alive today who lived through nazi oppression *and* the subsequent communist oppression, it's not *that* long ago. Europe is trying to find a better way.
Esperanto as the EU standard language sounds like a nice idea, if for no other reason than to piss this guy off. Esperanto has issues too, mostly it being a eurocentric language, but that doesn't quite apply as a problem when making it a euro standard.
personally I don't mind english. We finally have a language that is close to worldwide, and has the potential to let you speak to anyone anywhere. Why throw it away for as you put it imperial tropes, which could just as well be achieved in a way that doesn't consume a year of studying from every person in europe
@Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail Given that English is a mishmash of simplified Latin, simplified Germanic, North Germanic and all the other traditions it looted, it's arguably both an easier language to learn *and* less eurocentric than Latin, especially with the colonized peoples who have turned around and made it their own, while still being more pan-European than Latin.
It's 300 years due a spelling reform, but otherwise I don't mind English too much. I expect its descendant to be a pan-galactic language some day.
The idea of a language you can use to communicate with anyone is a major benefit for humanity in a sort of star trek unified earth way. I like the idea a lot. It especially helps historically poor european nations who otherwise would only be able to seek employment in e.g. romania, france, lithuania, with english, which is close to a worldwide language, they have many more job opportunities.
Still, as you point out, many foreigners also speak english, so this makes it a poor fit for a specifically European project, since it won't give a special advantage to them. But I think the benefits outweigh the detriments, since unskilled labor is typically local, and you can use migration laws to protect locals that way, while european education gives a strong advantage in skilled labor anyway. So I think it's okay to use a global language like english. But, if the situation changes and it turns out that foreigners are impoverishing locals, we should take action.
Sounds like a very blunt instrument. Just have minimum wage and social security requirements on employers that undermines their ability to race to the bottom, that's it. Immigration is beneficial unless you design it not to be.
I'm not sure that English is intrinsically easier to learn than Latin: the basic grammar is simpler, but there is a lot of semantical complexity to compensate.
What makes English easy to learn is that it's everywhere: in a lot of places (and everywhere in Europe) you get exposure to some English from a very young age, which is not enough to learn it, but it's enough to make it sound familiar, and when you want to learn it there are a lot of courses and resources everywhere.
Which is already enough to give it a huge advantage over other proposals like Latin or Esperanto, IMO.
@Elena ``of Valhalla'' @Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail I think English is easier to learn to speak, but I guess in the end complexity never goes away, it just moves elsewhere. All the subtlety in English is in idiomatic expressions and cultural references instead of having a precise grammar.
@Elena ``of Valhalla'' @Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail I kind of just repeated what you said, but not quite. Here's my point: The semantic complexity can be ignored when you speak, just not when someone who masters it speaks, if you want to avoid misunderstanding them. Latin forces you to have that precision or you're incorrect. An English speaker can choose not to use obscure expressions and sacrifice some of that precision.
I observe many different levels of English understanding here in Hong Kong.
Some native speakers notice it too and can adjust, but most of them don't realize they're being constantly misunderstood or 90% of their precision being rubbed out by the listener.
I'm quite sure that a native Latin speaker would still understand people who get some of the inflections wrong: context helps a lot.
As for the semantical complexities in English, I was thinking more about basic things like the future tenses: understanding when to use "going to" vs "will" vs "'ll" is only easy because we're used to it.
In this city I need to be careful not to use grammar to describe hypotheticals or conditionals, or someone is sure to misunderstand me. It's far better if I'm super explicit and start with "ok, so let's imagine a scenario where ..." than "if we were", which is sure to meet a "but we're not", spoken or not, or worse, simply believing I just stated something factual.
Questo sito utilizza cookie per riconosce gli utenti loggati e quelli che tornano a visitare. Proseguendo la navigazione su questo sito, accetti l'utilizzo di questi cookie.
Izzy Swart
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •what the fuck
touch fluffy tail
in reply to Izzy Swart • • •Izzy Swart
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •touch fluffy tail
in reply to Izzy Swart • • •Izzy Swart
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •touch fluffy tail
in reply to Izzy Swart • • •clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •@touch fluffy tail @Izzy Swart Creating the EU has been going alright so far. It has had its issues, mostly the democratic deficit in the institutions built, but I don't think invoking nazi and imperial tropes is going to improve that.
There are people alive today who lived through nazi oppression *and* the subsequent communist oppression, it's not *that* long ago. Europe is trying to find a better way.
Esperanto as the EU standard language sounds like a nice idea, if for no other reason than to piss this guy off. Esperanto has issues too, mostly it being a eurocentric language, but that doesn't quite apply as a problem when making it a euro standard.
touch fluffy tail
in reply to clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 • • •Izzy Swart
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to Izzy Swart • • •@Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail Given that English is a mishmash of simplified Latin, simplified Germanic, North Germanic and all the other traditions it looted, it's arguably both an easier language to learn *and* less eurocentric than Latin, especially with the colonized peoples who have turned around and made it their own, while still being more pan-European than Latin.
It's 300 years due a spelling reform, but otherwise I don't mind English too much. I expect its descendant to be a pan-galactic language some day.
Izzy Swart
in reply to clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 • • •clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to Izzy Swart • • •touch fluffy tail
in reply to clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 • • •The idea of a language you can use to communicate with anyone is a major benefit for humanity in a sort of star trek unified earth way. I like the idea a lot. It especially helps historically poor european nations who otherwise would only be able to seek employment in e.g. romania, france, lithuania, with english, which is close to a worldwide language, they have many more job opportunities.
Still, as you point out, many foreigners also speak english, so this makes it a poor fit for a specifically European project, since it won't give a special advantage to them. But I think the benefits outweigh the detriments, since unskilled labor is typically local, and you can use migration laws to protect locals that way, while european education gives a strong advantage in skilled labor anyway. So I think it's okay to use a global language like english. But, if the situation changes and it turns out that foreigners are impoverishing locals, we should take action.
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •@touch fluffy tail @Izzy Swart Action being ... to require a Europeans-only language on the job market?
Sounds like a very blunt instrument. Just have minimum wage and social security requirements on employers that undermines their ability to race to the bottom, that's it. Immigration is beneficial unless you design it not to be.
Elena ``of Valhalla''
in reply to clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 • •I'm not sure that English is intrinsically easier to learn than Latin: the basic grammar is simpler, but there is a lot of semantical complexity to compensate.
What makes English easy to learn is that it's everywhere: in a lot of places (and everywhere in Europe) you get exposure to some English from a very young age, which is not enough to learn it, but it's enough to make it sound familiar, and when you want to learn it there are a lot of courses and resources everywhere.
Which is already enough to give it a huge advantage over other proposals like Latin or Esperanto, IMO.
touch fluffy tail likes this.
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla'' • • •@Elena ``of Valhalla'' @Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail I think English is easier to learn to speak, but I guess in the end complexity never goes away, it just moves elsewhere. All the subtlety in English is in idiomatic expressions and cultural references instead of having a precise grammar.
Shaka, when the walls fell.
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 • • •@Elena ``of Valhalla'' @Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail I kind of just repeated what you said, but not quite. Here's my point: The semantic complexity can be ignored when you speak, just not when someone who masters it speaks, if you want to avoid misunderstanding them. Latin forces you to have that precision or you're incorrect. An English speaker can choose not to use obscure expressions and sacrifice some of that precision.
I observe many different levels of English understanding here in Hong Kong.
Some native speakers notice it too and can adjust, but most of them don't realize they're being constantly misunderstood or 90% of their precision being rubbed out by the listener.
Elena ``of Valhalla''
in reply to clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 • •I'm quite sure that a native Latin speaker would still understand people who get some of the inflections wrong: context helps a lot.
As for the semantical complexities in English, I was thinking more about basic things like the future tenses: understanding when to use "going to" vs "will" vs "'ll" is only easy because we're used to it.
Izzy Swart
in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla'' • • •like this
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛 e touch fluffy tail like this.
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla'' • • •@Elena ``of Valhalla'' @Izzy Swart @touch fluffy tail Aha. Yes, those are the kind of things that confuse e.g. Chinese native speakers. That's still grammar though, not semantics.
In this city I need to be careful not to use grammar to describe hypotheticals or conditionals, or someone is sure to misunderstand me. It's far better if I'm super explicit and start with "ok, so let's imagine a scenario where ..." than "if we were", which is sure to meet a "but we're not", spoken or not, or worse, simply believing I just stated something factual.
touch fluffy tail
in reply to Izzy Swart • • •clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛
in reply to touch fluffy tail • • •