Is English getting more simple?

[Gypsys Kiss]

We limeys, at least this limey, pronounce 'deuce' 'juice', while I think you yanks pronounce it 'doose'

[PLAYER57832]

All languages tend to get simpler.

Just compare Latin with Romance languages, Greek with Modern Greek, Sanskrit with Hindi. Languages, for some reason or other, tend to contract.

Except would our language really seem simpler to Shakespeare?

The simplest language is the one/are the ones you speak fluently. Any other is very difficult by definition.

[ManBungalow]

innit ?

[PLAYER57832]

We limeys, at least this limey, pronounce 'deuce' 'juice', while I think you yanks pronounce it 'doose'

Nay, many yanks do say "deuce" the same as "juice" .. .but also the same as "loose" and "noose"... etc.

[neanderpaul14]

"Me fail English? That's unpossible." Ralph Wiggins

[jonesthecurl]

I dunno if the language is getting more simple, but I DO know that people's attention span is getting shorter. In fact, look, two fish!

[Martin Ronne]

What are you talkn bout¿ Is fine!

[jonesthecurl]

I was just saying that people's attention! Present Arms! At Ease!

[Martin Ronne]

Language is fine! Nusing rong width me speaky?

[InkL0sed]

All languages tend to get simpler.

Just compare Latin with Romance languages, Greek with Modern Greek, Sanskrit with Hindi. Languages, for some reason or other, tend to contract.

Except would our language really seem simpler to Shakespeare?

The simplest language is the one/are the ones you speak fluently. Any other is very difficult by definition.

I don't mean simple as in easy. English might be simpler than Chinese (or the other way around), and yet I'm sure the Chinese have as hard a time learning English as we do Chinese.

No, I'm defining "simple" in terms of the expansiveness of the grammar.

For example, Latin has several words for "him" or "her", whereas English only has the one. This allows Latin to specify exactly which "his" we mean in a sentence like "Paul gave Andy his notebook". In English, we infer which person that "his" refers to; in Latin, it's explicit. But because of the extra word (and the fact that Latin is inflected), Latin literally gets almost a hundred extra forms with just those two small words (2 words x 6 cases x 3 genders x 2 numbers = 72 forms). And then multiply that by three for the other pronouns. And that's not including the 5 declensions for nouns, and the 4 conjugations of verbs, each with 6 possible tenses x 2 possible voices x 4 possible moods x 3 persons x 2 numbers... and that's not even the end of the list.

That's what I mean by comparing complexity. Yes, English has some quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc., but the number of forms in Latin (along with Latin's own quirky rules as well) makes it in my opinion a far more complex language.

My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires).

The same trend is happening in English, except it seems to be trending more in the way of acronyms and further obscuring of the meanings of words. There are also grammatical forms that are dying out, but that's not as recent a trend.

[strike wolf]

Someone stated it was in another thread. I deny this 100%. My reasons:

Ever expanding vocabulary
Hundreds of new words are added to the language each year, loan words appear from other languages and developments in technology contribute massive amounts.

Words shift meanings
Thus "gay" has added meaning now cf 200 years ago, but has kept it's original meaning too.

Number of countries speaking English
600 years ago English was only spoken in one country. Now it is an official language in over 70 countries and widely spoken in many more. Each region has changed English grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary, adding to the complexity. What is a dunny, a toque, mashing a cup of tea for example?

New technology has created new English lol

That's enough to start.

Whoa whoa whoa. Slow down you're like speaking french or somethin man.

[neanderpaul14]

Ohhh I thought the title was "Are the English getting more simple" I kept reading this thread expecting people to talk shit about the English. If that was the purpose of this thread I was going to respond that the French are more fun, and easier, to make fun of.

[MeDeFe]

All languages tend to get simpler.

Just compare Latin with Romance languages, Greek with Modern Greek, Sanskrit with Hindi. Languages, for some reason or other, tend to contract.

Except would our language really seem simpler to Shakespeare?

The simplest language is the one/are the ones you speak fluently. Any other is very difficult by definition.

I don't mean simple as in easy. English might be simpler than Chinese (or the other way around), and yet I'm sure the Chinese have as hard a time learning English as we do Chinese.

No, I'm defining "simple" in terms of the expansiveness of the grammar.

For example, Latin has several words for "him" or "her", whereas English only has the one. This allows Latin to specify exactly which "his" we mean in a sentence like "Paul gave Andy his notebook". In English, we infer which person that "his" refers to; in Latin, it's explicit. But because of the extra word (and the fact that Latin is inflected), Latin literally gets almost a hundred extra forms with just those two small words (2 words x 6 cases x 3 genders x 2 numbers = 72 forms). And then multiply that by three for the other pronouns. And that's not including the 5 declensions for nouns, and the 4 conjugations of verbs, each with 6 possible tenses x 2 possible voices x 4 possible moods x 3 persons x 2 numbers... and that's not even the end of the list.

That's what I mean by comparing complexity. Yes, English has some quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc., but the number of forms in Latin (along with Latin's own quirky rules as well) makes it in my opinion a far more complex language.

My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires).

The same trend is happening in English, except it seems to be trending more in the way of acronyms and further obscuring of the meanings of words. There are also grammatical forms that are dying out, but that's not as recent a trend.

On the other hand latin didn't have the "quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc." you can put the words in almost any order and figure it out just from their forms. Synthetic vs. analytic languages.

[xelabale]

Also Latin has, for example, a clear future tense. How do we express the future in English? Compli-freekin-cated.

[MrPanzerGeneral]

"My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires)."

What a load of poppy-cock the above ! Languages are getting simpler. (albeit, NP14 - the english have always been simple

Learn Latin then you can speak/understand/make yourself understood in an other half of the world !!
And I don't mean "spelling" it. Learn how it was spoken (the most difficult thing to grasp is accent - and even the best scholars are only guessing there ). eg. I can make myself understood/ & understand in Japan or Turkey or Mozambique or Mongolia, doesn't mean I have to worry about cyrillics or the right way to swish some ink !

[xelabale]

"My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires)."

What a load of poppy-cock the above ! Languages are getting simpler. (albeit, NP14 - the english have always been simple

Learn Latin then you can speak/understand/make yourself understood in an other half of the world !!
And I don't mean "spelling" it. Learn how it was spoken (the most difficult thing to grasp is accent - and even the best scholars are only guessing there ). eg. I can make myself understood/ & understand in Japan or Turkey or Mozambique or Mongolia, doesn't mean I have to worry about cyrillics or the right way to swish some ink !

Merhaba, nasilsiniz? Ben iyiyim, tesekkurler.

Translate that Latin Boy.

Well done, google's great. Now show me a Latin root.

Furthermore show how Latin being a root makes English get more simple.

[InkL0sed]

All languages tend to get simpler.

Just compare Latin with Romance languages, Greek with Modern Greek, Sanskrit with Hindi. Languages, for some reason or other, tend to contract.

Except would our language really seem simpler to Shakespeare?

The simplest language is the one/are the ones you speak fluently. Any other is very difficult by definition.

I don't mean simple as in easy. English might be simpler than Chinese (or the other way around), and yet I'm sure the Chinese have as hard a time learning English as we do Chinese.

No, I'm defining "simple" in terms of the expansiveness of the grammar.

For example, Latin has several words for "him" or "her", whereas English only has the one. This allows Latin to specify exactly which "his" we mean in a sentence like "Paul gave Andy his notebook". In English, we infer which person that "his" refers to; in Latin, it's explicit. But because of the extra word (and the fact that Latin is inflected), Latin literally gets almost a hundred extra forms with just those two small words (2 words x 6 cases x 3 genders x 2 numbers = 72 forms). And then multiply that by three for the other pronouns. And that's not including the 5 declensions for nouns, and the 4 conjugations of verbs, each with 6 possible tenses x 2 possible voices x 4 possible moods x 3 persons x 2 numbers... and that's not even the end of the list.

That's what I mean by comparing complexity. Yes, English has some quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc., but the number of forms in Latin (along with Latin's own quirky rules as well) makes it in my opinion a far more complex language.

My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires).

The same trend is happening in English, except it seems to be trending more in the way of acronyms and further obscuring of the meanings of words. There are also grammatical forms that are dying out, but that's not as recent a trend.

On the other hand latin didn't have the "quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc." you can put the words in almost any order and figure it out just from their forms. Synthetic vs. analytic languages.

My point is more that languages have contracted, so I guess comparing English with Latin wasn't very useful. But you can definitely say the Romance languages are simplified versions of Latin. I can't really say much about English, since I don't know much about Old and Middle English, but I'm fairly certain those two were also more complicated than English.

And again:

I'm defining "simple" in terms of the expansiveness of the grammar.

[InkL0sed]

"My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires)."

What a load of poppy-cock the above ! Languages are getting simpler. (albeit, NP14 - the english have always been simple

Learn Latin then you can speak/understand/make yourself understood in an other half of the world !!
And I don't mean "spelling" it. Learn how it was spoken (the most difficult thing to grasp is accent - and even the best scholars are only guessing there ). eg. I can make myself understood/ & understand in Japan or Turkey or Mozambique or Mongolia, doesn't mean I have to worry about cyrillics or the right way to swish some ink !

Um what? "Languages are getting simpler" is what I was saying

[MeDeFe]

All languages tend to get simpler.

Just compare Latin with Romance languages, Greek with Modern Greek, Sanskrit with Hindi. Languages, for some reason or other, tend to contract.

Except would our language really seem simpler to Shakespeare?

The simplest language is the one/are the ones you speak fluently. Any other is very difficult by definition.

I don't mean simple as in easy. English might be simpler than Chinese (or the other way around), and yet I'm sure the Chinese have as hard a time learning English as we do Chinese.

No, I'm defining "simple" in terms of the expansiveness of the grammar.

For example, Latin has several words for "him" or "her", whereas English only has the one. This allows Latin to specify exactly which "his" we mean in a sentence like "Paul gave Andy his notebook". In English, we infer which person that "his" refers to; in Latin, it's explicit. But because of the extra word (and the fact that Latin is inflected), Latin literally gets almost a hundred extra forms with just those two small words (2 words x 6 cases x 3 genders x 2 numbers = 72 forms). And then multiply that by three for the other pronouns. And that's not including the 5 declensions for nouns, and the 4 conjugations of verbs, each with 6 possible tenses x 2 possible voices x 4 possible moods x 3 persons x 2 numbers... and that's not even the end of the list.

That's what I mean by comparing complexity. Yes, English has some quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc., but the number of forms in Latin (along with Latin's own quirky rules as well) makes it in my opinion a far more complex language.

My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires).

The same trend is happening in English, except it seems to be trending more in the way of acronyms and further obscuring of the meanings of words. There are also grammatical forms that are dying out, but that's not as recent a trend.

On the other hand latin didn't have the "quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc." you can put the words in almost any order and figure it out just from their forms. Synthetic vs. analytic languages.

My point is more that languages have contracted, so I guess comparing English with Latin wasn't very useful. But you can definitely say the Romance languages are simplified versions of Latin. I can't really say much about English, since I don't know much about Old and Middle English, but I'm fairly certain those two were also more complicated than English.

And again:

I'm defining "simple" in terms of the expansiveness of the grammar.

"quirky rules regarding spelling, word order and usage, etc." IS grammar.

[MrPanzerGeneral]

"My point is that languages seem to have been much more complex in ancient times, but have shrunk in modern times. Latin is much more complex than Italian or French or Spanish. Ancient Greek is more complex than even Latin, but Modern Greek is probably only a little bit more complex than a Romance language. I think it's mostly the old languages became more widely spoken, and were diluted (often with the spreads of empires)."

What a load of poppy-cock the above ! Languages are getting simpler. (albeit, NP14 - the english have always been simple

Learn Latin then you can speak/understand/make yourself understood in an other half of the world !!
And I don't mean "spelling" it. Learn how it was spoken (the most difficult thing to grasp is accent - and even the best scholars are only guessing there ). eg. I can make myself understood/ & understand in Japan or Turkey or Mozambique or Mongolia, doesn't mean I have to worry about cyrillics or the right way to swish some ink !

Merhaba, nasilsiniz? Ben iyiyim, tesekkurler.

Translate that Latin Boy.

Well done, google's great. Now show me a Latin root.

Furthermore show how Latin being a root makes English get more simple.

Tena koi, inga koi oneroa. (Tis' a common courtesy)

I said nothing about english as a languge becoming more simple - in fact it is one of the hardest languages to learn (grammatical rules wise). It's what "they" call a "borrowed" language. It's also one of the best to know, to make yourself understood, any imbecile can learn it - as evidenced by yourself being able to.

So f*ck off mate. You have no real idea about linguistics.

[thegreekdog]

I know (or is it now) next to nothing about (pronounced a-bout or a-bute) linguistics. So, I thought I'd throw my unlearned (pronounced un, learn, ED) two (or is to or too) cents (or is it sense) in the ring (or is it wring)...

While the English language is certainly complex (just ask any of my straight-off-the-boat Greek relatives), the Internet has gone a long way to dumbing down the language. You need look no further than these forums (not this thread in particular). I need look no further than some of my co-workers, who, as attorneys, need to understand the English language and, most importantly, grammar. As younger people come into my workplace, their grasp of the English language and grammar is becoming stunningly bad. I find myself going throw 100-page memoranda trying to figure out what the hell the person is trying to say. It's really sad.

So, is English getting simpler? I don't know. But I do know that it has been my experience that the people who are writing and speaking the language are getting simpler.

[mpjh]

100-page memorandum -- hmmm -- someone needs to learn to summarize.

I hated that part of the profession -- the word diarrhea. After retiring, I made a comment to a friend that a 3 page email as a standard was too much. He took offense and I don't get any more emails from him -- thank god for small favors.

I remember my most successful negotiation was one where, in response to a question "Just what do you want?" we produced a single-page single-spaced document. The rate structure we negotiated is still in effect some 25 years later.

[thegreekdog]

100-page memorandum -- hmmm -- someone needs to learn to summarize.

I hated that part of the profession -- the word diarrhea. After retiring, I made a comment to a friend that a 3 page email as a standard was too much. He took offense and I don't get any more emails from him -- thank god for small favors.

I remember my most successful negotiation was one where, in response to a question "Just what do you want?" we produced a single-page single-spaced document. The rate structure we negotiated is still in effect some 25 years later.

Law schools now teach that less is more. I graduated law school in 2004 and was taught to use less language to make my point. However, if my posts are any indication, I haven't learned this well.

[pimpdave]

I... was taught to use less language to make my point.

Chandler wrote that the hardest and most time consuming part of writing was making it short. Just read one of his novels and you'll see the benefit for yourself.

However, this is a forum. Most of us are tapping on the fly, or with an ear over our shoulder, wondering who might be creeping on our cubicle.

That leads to two different outcomes: awkward, short statements that don't benefit from the kind of revision that requires at least three revisits to the material or long, rambly posts that don't benefit from the kind of revision that makes a lot of material succinct. Which, of course, also requires at least three reworks and often at least an overnight break before the third revisiting.

This means we should not really expect a standard of elegance any higher than that of a rough draft on these message boards.

[thegreekdog]

I... was taught to use less language to make my point.

Chandler wrote that the hardest and most time consuming part of writing was making it short. Just read one of his novels and you'll see the benefit for yourself.

However, this is a forum. Most of us are tapping on the fly, or with an ear over our shoulder, wondering who might be creeping on our cubicle.

That leads to two different outcomes: awkward, short statements that don't benefit from the kind of revision that requires at least three revisits to the material or long, rambly posts that don't benefit from the kind of revision that makes a lot of material succinct. Which, of course, also requires at least three reworks and often at least an overnight break before the third revisiting.

This means we should not really expect a standard of elegance any higher than that of a rough draft on these message boards.

True. But I prefer long rambling posts to posts like "UR GAY."