Clarification Edit: for people who speak English natively and are learning a second language

  • Iunnrais@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    Learning a second language AND professionally teaching English to speakers of said language. English is not broken. English is actually much better than many alternatives. We don’t need to worry about noun gender. We don’t have to worry about tones. We have precise ways to indicate number and time. Formality levels are not baked into word construction. The pronunciation of words can generally be inferred from the spelling, despite learning this skill being a little complicated— but that complicated nature even has its usefulness.

    We rag on English, but it is by far not the worse out there, not even close. It’s just contempt for the familiar.

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      The pronunciation of words can generally be inferred from the spelling

      Definitely NOT. English is among the worst languages in that regard.

    • Mkengine@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      As a native German speaker, I really dislike the formality levels and hope someday everyone uses the informal level. In a big company it’s really annoying to start with the formal level and then awkwardly switching to informal level when contacting someone for the first time.

    • extrangerius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      It seems to me that you’re making a strange argument throwing bugs and features into the same pot. The fact that other languages have different complexities does not make one language more or less broken.

  • Justas🇱🇹@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    14 days ago

    All languages that are used are kinda broken, except the synthetic ones, like Esperanto.

    The amount of exceptions and weird rules in non-English languages I speak (Lithuanian and Swedish) and kinda know (Russian) proves it.

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      Yeah, if humans use it long enough, any language becomes bastardized. Every generation comes up with new slang with only minor regard for the rules. Some of that slang becomes permanent.

  • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    Learning German taught me how messed up non-English languages are. Having to memorize if every noun is either male, female, or neuter just so you can use the right form of “the” with it is crazy.

    • Miphera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      As a German myself who tried to learn French a while ago, I gave up because that language has the same issue, but the genders for nouns are different and I just can’t be bothered to memorize two different genders for every noun 💀

    • Mkengine@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      And then you also have different meanings depending on pronunciation, here some examples:

      • umfahren: to drive around something or to run over something

      • Montage: the act of assembling or the plural of Monday

      • übersetzen: to ferry across a river or to translate into another language

      • umschreiben: to rewrite or to paraphrase

      • durchschauen: to look through something or to understand

      • unterstellen: to place something underneath or to imply or accuse someone of something

      • unterhalten: to hold something underneath or to support or to converse with someone or to entertain

      • wiederholen: to fetch something back or to repeat something

  • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    English is the language that beats up other languages in dark alleys then rifles through their pockets for loose phrases and spare grammar.

      • Corr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        Perhaps other people have said it but this is the quote I’m familiar with:
        “The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.”

        James Nicoll

    • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Seriously, other languages at least adapt loanwords to their own grammar, orthography, and whatnot… English just grabs them as they are and runs away without looking back.

      That’s why you end up with the plural of radius being radii, or stuff like_fiancé_ or façade (seriously, how are people who only speak English and have never seen a ç before in their lives supposed to know how to pronounce that‽)…

      Of course it all comes from English being really three or four languages — (Anglo-)Saxon, Normand(/old French), and Norse — badly put together, so sprinkling bits of other languages on top didn’t make much of a difference, when there were already about five different ways to pronounce, for instance, oo, and the whole vowel shift debacle didn’t exactly help with this mess… but while other languages which may have had similar (if maybe less spectacular) growing pains eventually developed normative bodies, mostly from the eighteenth century onwards, that define and maintain a standard form of the language, English seems to have ignored all that and left grammar and orthography as a stylistic choice on the writers’ part, and pronunciation as an exercise for the readers…

    • BudgetBandit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Don’t forget that there once was a time when smart people just added letters to words that don’t do anything - like the b in debt, which was called det before. Or when America got rid of Britains U after O because newspapers charged per letter.

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        British newspapers were only able to subsidize the use of the letter ‘u’ through taxes levied on the colonies, which led to the revolution. So who’s so smart after all?

        Nah, seriously, the Normans added the ‘u’ to French-derived words after they invaded. English orthography wasn’t standardized, though. Johnson kept the ‘u’ out of a sense of tradition when compiling his British dictionary, and Webster elided it in his American dictionary because we don’t pronounce it. Neither spelling, -or or -our, derives from the other.

  • radix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    16 days ago

    When you start a new language, you learn “The Rules” first, and wonder why your first language doesn’t have such immutable “Rules.”

    Then when you get fluent, you realize there are just as many exceptions as your first language.

    • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      Or do Japanese: There are two main types; the one where you and everyone else neatly follows the immutable rules which you speak to superiors and to strangers by default, and the one where everyone blurts out whatever words in whatever order they come up in their brain, aka what’s spoken between friends and to acquainted inferiors

  • boonhet@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 days ago

    Learned English as my second language instead.

    Yeah it’s broken, but y’all have tenses that sorta make senses (in Estonian we have present and past - future is implied by context!) and you don’t need 14 noun cases because y’all have prepositions.

    At the same time, English borrows words from over 9000 different languages, nothing is pronounced the way it’s written, and to be quite honest, I never bothered learning any of the rules in school. The rule for ordering adjectives so they wouldn’t sound off was impossible to remember, but because I’ve been terminally online since I was like 7, it just came naturally.

    TL;DR: English is a great language to just know natively, horrifying one to learn systematically.

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 days ago

    Learning Mandarin. The stereotype of a Chinese person saying “Me no English” makes sense now considering the word is literally 我(Me)不(No)英文(English)

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      “Do you speak English?”

      “I profusely beg your forgiveness, old chap, but my linguistic skills do not reach to the Anglican sphere and thus I am unable to converse in anything but my native language, Mandarin.”

      “So… yes or no?”

      " 甚麼?"

  • LockheedTheDragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    14 days ago

    Learning a second language hasn’t made me think English is broken. I already thought English was messed up but know a little of it’s history so have a general idea why. Learning Spanish means learning the flaws of a second language. I thinking all languages are flawed, but English just goes the extra mile.

    • Brickardo@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Conversely, when we Spanish have to learn English, the thing we hate the most is that words are not pronounced the way they’re written. In Spanish, however, we’ve got some weird rules with irregular verbs and articles, but the former is common to both languages

  • Anatares@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    I don’t feel it’s particularly broken honestly. Some languages are more consistent with their rules and therefore easier to learn but English is surprisingly consistent in practice/sound throughout the world. You also don’t need to memorize the gender of a washing machine…

    • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      I don’t feel it’s particularly broken honestly.

      There are five (5) ways of pronouncing oo, if you people haven’t added a sixth one since the last time I looked.

      Radii, fiancé, and façade are apparently perfectly cromulent English words that native English speakers who’ve never seen an ii, an é, or a ç are supposed to be able to pronounce correctly…

      Your words for food animals come from completely different and unrelated languages depending on whether the animal is alive or dead (since the people who tended to the farms and the people who actually ate their meat spoke different languages)…

      There are probably more irregular verbs than regular ones… (again, probably because of English really being three different languages in a trenchcoat)…

      At some point in the sixteenth century you apparently just up and decided to randomly switch the pronunciation of all your vowels… without changing how you wrote them

      While most languages have developed some form of standard and regulative body, English seems like it’d rather leave the whole grammar, orthography, pronunciation, and whatnot situation as an exercise for the victim speaker, writer, or reader

      Yeah, no, not particularly broken at all… 😒

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        There are five (5) ways of pronouncing oo

        That’s a good thing. Vowels are enormous in the range of ways they can be pronounced. Any vowel can become any other vowel before it’s done being pronounced, and then you can chain that effect. You can tell where people are from by their vowels. Vowels convey analog information whereas consonants convey digital. Vowels therefore have bandwidth to carry extra information. And so not only do we have lots of vowel pair sequences with their own rules for pronunciation, we have tons of rules for how surrounding consonants change those vowels. And then finally we have all sorts of cultural understandings about how altered vowels indicate mood and intent.

        It’s good we don’t try to pretend there are only a handful of vowels.

        • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          That’s a good thing.

          Nah, man. That’s the abused justifying the abuser. That’s pure Stockholm syndrome.

          There’s no world in which the oos in moon, book, door, blood, brooch, and cooperation (I had forgotten about this one. There are six. SIX! 😩) representing SIX different sounds is a good thing. There simply isn’t.

          A sane language would replace some of those with u, ø, ō, ô, ö, õ, whatever, make some rule so that the poor sod attempting to decipher the written word could begin to know how to pronounce it… but not English. Not English. 😞

          • WIZARD POPE💫@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            Are there any other words that have it though? Also if the english spelling were consistent you would not need the dieresis

            • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              14 days ago

              The New Yorker’s style guide requires markers for coöperate, coöpt, etc., but it’s non-standard outside of that one particular publication.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      You don’t really need to memorize the gender in Spanish either. The gender is signaled by the word ending. It’s a maquina; that’s a feminine noun. As you’re speaking you can see “maquina” coming up and arrange for the gender without having to memorize the word’s gender.

      • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Someone learning Spanish as a second language will have to remember that it’s máquina and not máquino when speaking or writing it, though (and will then probably be quite confused if they ever meet some guy nicknamed El Máquina, which would somehow be a perfectly cromulent nickname in Spanish).

        Confusing genders when speaking or writing is one of the most common mistakes amongst people new to the language, because while everything else has some form of rule, this doesn’t (sure, when reading or listening you can most of the time use the word ending, and you’ll probably have an article, too, but when you are the one speaking or writing you have no option but to just know a word’s gender, or how it ends, which is the same thing).

    • norimee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      For what it’s worth, you don’t memorize the gender of things. It’s just difficult, when you learn another language that does it differently. And that’s true for every language you learn, the difficulty lies in how it’s different of your own.

      • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        I mean, you do memorise them, you just don’t realise you’re doing it because you’re a baby or toddler and babies and toddlers are language sponges, and not very aware of how their own minds work.

        When learning a gendered language as an adult you definitely have no option but to memorise what gender each word uses, since there’s generally no specific rule, just how the language happened to evolve. (And this can be particularly hard if your native language is gendered, but you’re trying to learn one that genders words differently, for instance when learning German coming from a Romance language, or vice versa.)

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 days ago

          No, you don’t memorize it. You memorize the words and how they sound, then based on how their endings sound, you know their gender. You don’t have to maintain a dictionary of words to their gender. There are a few exceptions and you memorize those, but for the most part all you need to memorize is a few rules.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              Not really. In case you’re not catching the implication, it means there is no more memorization of words’ gender in Spanish than there is in English, for instance.

              You simply do not need to memorize gender as it can and is derived on the spot from other memorized info, ie the word itself.

              • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                14 days ago

                Except many languages’ vocabularies share common roots (e.g. Latin and Greek) even if the languages themselves don’t, so quite often someone learning Spanish will be able to make an educated attempt at figuring out the equivalent Spanish word (for instance, an English speaker might figure out that machinemáquin_)… but will have no clue about the gender, having a 50% chance of ending up with, say, máquino.

                And, as I said, misgendering words seems to be a relatively common mistake for people learning Spanish without having a Romance language base.

  • 01011@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    Teaching English to non-native speakers will fully open your eyes as to how broken and outright ridiculous the English language is. “To” and “too”. “Through” and “threw”…

  • uienia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    15 days ago

    ITT: Loads of monolingual native English speakers who has no knowledge of linguistics or even how their own language is not unique in all the ways that they think it is.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Actual itt: “internet experts” clash with casual passing commenters

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    15 days ago

    This post kind of ignores basics of grammar instruction that we’ve known for centuries. Some people try to teach grammar from a prescriptive fashion. They tell us what the rules are, they have us memorize them, and then we can speak perfectly.

    The problem is, that’s not how language works in reality. Even if you had a perfect language to begin with, something with no exceptions of any kind, after 20 years people would have added their own changes. So then the original instruction that you gave, that wouldn’t prepare future language learners for reality.

    This is why we have to teach grammar and spelling descriptively. We’re talking about what actually happens in the world when people actually speak and write in English. Of course it’s nice to point out common customs and conventions, but we don’t get to ignore all of the irregular things just because they’re irritating to memorize.

    And this is true for all languages that are used by even a medium-sized population over time. You cannot avoid it, you’ll find it in every language, sorry.

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 days ago

    Its taught me all languages are broken in some way. Romance languages have words that have arbitrary gender needing conjugation. Some have two genders, some three! Then the Romanian language comes in with its own tricks.

    Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese) lack an alphabet so words are conjunctions of smaller words, or sometimes worse the phonetics of smaller words without the meaning of the word.

    Starbucks (the coffee company) in Mandarin is 星巴克. 星 is the literal translation of Star. So far so good. However 巴 can mean “to hope”. 克 can mean “to restrain”. The reason they use 巴克 for the second half of Starbucks is that when you pronounce them they vaguely sound like “bahcoo” (buck). So the first half is the traditional use of direct translation ignoring what it sounds like phonetically, but the second half ignores direct translation and instead uses the phonetics of the second two characters to sound like “buck”.

    • Glowstick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      I mean that makes sense because that’s kind of how it is in english too. “Star” makes you think of a star, but “bucks” at the end of the word doesn’t make you think of anything specific, it’s just a sound

      • Skua@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 days ago

        Oddly enough, “starbuck” has nothing to do with stars. It comes from some Old Norse meaning “sedge river”. This became the place name Starbeck, a town in northern England. People then took that as a surname, and the spelling changed to Starbuck at some point. Herman Melville then gives a character in Moby Dick the surname Starbuck, and eventually the founders of the coffee chain picked it for no particular reason other than that they liked the sound of it

        So the “buck” part is, I guess, “river”. Or “brook”, to pick the more closely-related English term. This doesn’t change anything you said, of course, as nobody actually thinks of it like that, I just found the winding path it took kinda interesting

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        “buck” is a common slang for a US Dollar. Its also a male deer. These are both very common words in American English. The “buck” in Starbucks doesn’t use either of these meanings, and thats fine, in this case you’re right that that part of Starbucks doesn’t carry any meaning from English…HOWEVER neither does “star” in Starbucks. The modern Starbucks logo has no star shapes in it, and nothing referencing astronomical stars. Its equal to “bucks” in that it is just a set of sounds. Yet in Mandarin, the “star” is literally translated as “star” like the astronomical body and spoken it sounds close to “sheen”, while the “bucks” sounds close to “bahcoo” for a total pronounced word of “sheenbahcoo”. So literal for the first part, phonetic for the second part. Essentially using two completely different sets of rules inside one word.

    • skeezix@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      Somebody who was aware of all this once invented a language that was supposed to fix all the problems. He called it Esperanto.

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        Esperanto isn’t the only constructed language, and I think it is more Western-oriented, for good or ill. It does do a lot of things right within that framework, though, with certain rules that make everything explicit while removing other rules for structure that are no longer needed due to the explicit nature of the language.

  • OhmsLawn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 days ago

    It isn’t broken. It’s quirky, and they all are.

    What I appreciate about Spanish over English is the ease of spelling and pronouncing new words. What I appreciate about English over Spanish is the ease of creating new words.

    I have some limited ability/understanding in other languages, but not enough to judge. Except for French.