Cynthia,
Like you, I have a fair number of international students in my classes, and I'm invariably impressed by their understandin of language and of the problems of language learning. Another thing I've noticed, though, is that they are even more intensely afflicted by prescriptivism than native speakers. The English they have been taught is formal standard English, and they have no contact with nor any comprehension of dialect variation. They are taught that subject+auxiliary contraction is colloquial, or maybe even slang, and then they are surprised when they start studying American English more closely. They are astonished at the range of variation, for example, the fact that most American English speakers consider the past tense of "sneak" to be "snuck", not "sneaked", and many other such facts. But their sensitivity to language differences tends to be gratifying.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Cynthia Baird
Sent: Thu 3/16/2006 8:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Language Change
Dear Herb,
I decided to reply privately since the listserve was getting a little clogged w/this recent discussion and I wasn't sure my response added anything of import. But I wanted to say that having had several exchange students this past year (which in my small rural Colo. district is a thing of import) I can understand what you are saying and I also realize my own limitations in being monolingual (although I can converse in Spanish). My favorite student right now (in some ways) is my South Korean student who absolutely loves the English language. Like many exchange students, he is fluent in several languages, most dominant is his native language and French. He loves the expressive nature of English, he says. He can say exactly what he wants to say. I don't understand what he's feeling, I only know what he's telling me. And I also recognize that the ability to understand several languages enhances one's ability to understand the range, and limitations, of articulating the !
human
experience, which is what I believe language is all about.
"Stahlke, Herbert F.W." <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Eduard,
Your educational, cultural, and linguistic background is indeed varied
and impressive. While I'm not bilingual, I have reading and/or speaking
knowledge of German, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Yoruba, and a little Swedish.
I've pretty much forgotten my Ekpari and Ewe, a Nigerian and a
Ghanaian/Togolese language respectively. I would agree with you that a
larger vocabulary gives one educational and employment advantages, a
fact that has been borne repeatedly. However, it is not the case that
illiteracy equates with limited vocabulary. Some of the most eloquent
and highly respected users of Yoruba are elders, who may often be
illiterate, even though there is a fairly high level of both English and
Yoruba literacy in SW Nigeria. These elders will be highly regarded for
their facility with language, and even educated, literate younger people
will seek to learn from them and to emulate them. This phenomenon is
reflected worldwide in traditional cultures. You'll find it also in
this country in areas where a traditional linguistic culture has been
preserved, as in some parts of Appalachia, the South, and up and down
the East Coast.
I'm curious whom you might have been meeting in NYC who would speak such
a limited Gastarbeiter English. Very recent immigrants?
African-Americans, Hispanics, and others of other ethnicities who are
native New Yorkers? While some native NYC members of these groups may
not have the command of educated vocabulary of someone with an advanced
degree, their vocabulary will exceed 200 by at least a factor of 7500 to
12,000, or more. So limited a vocabulary as you refer to would be found
at best among brand new arrivals who have just begun to learn English.
Unless you were in contact only with people of that description, your
estimate is not credible.
Now, are all languages equal? Well, English certainly has the largest
vocabulary of any of the major languages in use today, due to its heavy
borrowing from French, Latin, Greek, and scores of other languages. And
English has undergone the sort of vocabulary development that comes with
the development of the sciences and other disciplines among speakers of
a language. There are vocabulary development projects going on in many
languages now to adapt them to handle the concepts and products of the
modern world and the global economy. Adding vocabulary to a language is
not a trivial task, but it's also a very common one. All languages can
do this. Some have just had a head start at it.
Like you, I've read works in more than one language: the Iliad and the
Odyssey in Greek and English, the Aeneid in Latin and English, Schiller
and Goethe in German and English, one of D. O. Fagunwa's novels in
Yoruba and English, books of the Bible in Greek or Hebrew and English,
German or Latin. The difference is far more than vocabulary, although
unquestionably differences in lexicon are an important factor. But
there are crucial differences in rhetoric, in grammar, in metaphor, in
cultural connections and themes mediated by language that go into the
vast differences between great literature in the original and in
translation. And the works in translation aren't inevitably inferior.
The German translations of Shakespeare's works by von Schlegel and
Wieland, for example, are considered on a par with the originals.
A culture develops the vocabulary it needs. This is true also of
subcultures. Many of us can function well in more than one subculture,
and our vocabulary suits the subculture we're in.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Eduard C. Hanganu [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:50 PM
To: Stahlke, Herbert F.W.; [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Language Change
Dear Herb:
I think you said it very well: "A culture culture tends to have the
vocabulary it needs." An illiterate society needs at most a survival
language. When I lived in New York City the people I met on the
street were speaking a Gastarbait English, that is, about 200 words
on the average, and nothing more. Sorry, but this is not my culture.
You must also consider lexical attrition and language death. Are
these also insignificant changes? I don't think so. And yes, because
I am fully bilingual I can tell you from experience that the size of
a language lexicon makes a difference. Not all languages are equal.
The larger your language lexicon is, the better you can express the
concepts and notions you are dealing with.
I believe that those who believe that language change is neutral are
monolingual and have had very little exposure to the cultures of the
world, otherwise they would not express such an absurdity. I have
command of Romanian and English, and I can read a novelin French,and
I can see from experience what it is to read the same novel in all
three languages: an extraordinary difference. And this difference is
in the largest degree due to the lexicon.
Ed Vavra asked me a little while ago to talk a little about my
background, and maybe now is a good time. I grew up in Romania and
went to public school there. Because I loved languages I took as
many (languages) as I could. I took Romanian for 12 years, Russian
for eight years (from the fifth to the 12th grade), French and Latin
for four years (from the 9th to the 12th grade).
In the 11th grade I began to study English on my own, from grammar
books, language textbooks, and from different recordings. I
continued to study English with my family, so that when we came to
the United States we were all fluent in English.
My passion for language seemed to grow all the time, so I went to
college in New York City, and obtained a B.A. in Linguistics from
CUNY. I moved then to Indiana, and continued with graduate education
in Linguistics, which I completed with an M.A. in Linguistics/TESOL.
At the present time I am continuing my education towards a Ph.D. in
Language Education from Indiana State.
As you see, my knowledge of language includes an experience with
traditional grammar and British English in Romania, and Linguistics
in the United States. The fact that I have lived on two continents
and I have been exposed to a variety of cultures makes it possible
for me to compare cultures and languages and debunk some of the
myths which are so common in a culture which is mostly monolingual
and with very little exposure to the cultures of the world.
Eduard
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Herbert F.W. Stahlke wrote...
>Eduard,
>
>With my question I was taking the Aitchins position, one that is
very
>widely held in linguistics. As to loss and gain in the lexicon, a
>culture tends to have the vocabulary it needs. Without getting into
>what Geoffrey Pullum has properly called "The Great Eskimo
Vocabulary
>Hoax," we can look at domains like kinship terms. I'm sure that in
the
>languages you know different relationships are named that are not
the
>same from language to language. In Yoruba, for example, there is no
>word for brother or sister. The contrast is based on age relative
to
>ego, so egbon means "senior sibling" and aburo means "junior
sibling",
>rather than on sex as in English. If young people are losing the
>distinctions among "soil", "land", "ground", and "mud" it may be
that
>those distinctions are no longer salient in a highly urbanized
culture.
>At the same time they are developing and acquiring names for myriad
>devices that we didn't know about at their age. Whether this loss
is
>good or bad depends on whether you have talk about a domain in which
>those distinctions are important. For most people today, that set
may
>be less salient than it used to be. But notice that as young people
>specialize, they very quickly acquire the new vocabulary they're
going
>to need in their discipline or hobby.
>
>Herb
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Eduard C. Hanganu
>Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 10:19 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Language Change
>
>Dear Herb:
>
>Aitchins (and others)claim that language change is neither
positive=20
>nor negative. I disagree. One language change that is definitely=20
>negative is loss of words due to cumulating (or collapsing)
multiple=20
>senses into one single word. =20
>
>I the region where I live, for example, people have been using
more=20
>and more the word "dirt" to
describe "soil, "land," "ground," "mud,"=20
>and "garbage." While some of these words have overlapping senses,=20
>each term has its own specific use. Collapsing all these words
into=20
>one word is a lexical loss for the language, and leads to a
survival=20
>lexicon.
>
>Eduard=20
>
>
>On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Herbert F.W. Stahlke wrote...
>
>>Craig,
>>
>>I'd like to see more comment on your last clause, "and it may
not=20
>always
>>seem for the best." Therein lies a mammoth body of social=20
>judgments and
>>prescriptivist nostrums. The question is whether there are
language
>>changes that are in some definable sense good or bad.
>>
>>Herb
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>>Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:12 AM
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: comparing superlatives (was: Blue Color; each other)
>>
>>Paul,
>> I'm with you on one level. It's a shame when a perfectly fine
>>(indeed,
>>a unique word) begins to lose its special quality. You would
like=20
>to
>>use it in such a way that everyone knows you mean "one of a
kind".=20
>It's
>>the kind of point I enjoy from William Safire in his columns. Your
>>students, though, are used to thinking of it as meaning "unusual"
>>because that is a common meaning for it in actual use. I confess
I=20
>have
>>probably said "very unique" without thinking about it as
>>problematic.>Thanks to your conversation, I have now looked
closely=20
>at
>>the dictionary and deepened my understanding.
>> I love the idea that you would talk to your students about it.
=20
>When
>>language changes, something is gained and something is lost. You=20
>care
>>about fine shades of meaning, as we all should. Ultimately, I think
>>decisions about these sorts of changes are out of our hands. A
word
>>means what people think it means. But I also think that sort of
>>discussion with students is very productive. Language changes over
>>time, and it may not always seem for the best.
>>
>>
>>Craig,
>>>
>>> My problem with "very unique" is that unique means (to ME),
one=20
>of a
>>> kind (or some emphatic variation of that idea). It is
illogical=20
>to me
>>to
>>> say that something can be "very one of a kind" or "most one of a
>>kind."
>>> I'm not sure how I feel about "thoroughly unique" and "absolutely
>>> unique;" for some reason, and I am hard pressed to express
what=20
>that
>>> reason is, the logic doesn't bother me. Maybe I'm being too fussy
>>about
>>> that usage. What I really meant to emphasise in my previous post,
>>> however, was that many of my students couldn't see the logical=20
>problem
>>> in the expression in the first place.
>>>
>>> It's curious that the two most "objectional" examples from
the=20
>OED
>>below
>>> are first from the voice of a toad (In "The Wind in the Willows")
=20
>and
>>> next from an advertisement (Country Life, 1939). I guess that
>>fictional
>>> toads and real-life ad copy writers have a different sent of=20
>standards
>>> from mine!
>>>
>>> So it goes,
>>>
>>> Paul D.
>>>
>>> Craig Hancock wrote:
>>> >Paul,
>>> I just remembered I can access the OED if I use my UAlbany=20
>account.
>>> Here's a section copied from their entry for "unique". It has
been
>>> "Objected to", as they say, but a fairly common practice in
their=20
>own
>>> examples, dating back well into the nineteenth century.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> From the OED, the second entry for "unique":
>>>
>>> 2. a. That is or forms the only one of its kind; having no like
or
>>> equal; standing alone in comparison with others, freq. by
reason=20
>of
>>> superior excellence; unequalled, unparalleled, unrivalled.
>>> In this sense readopted from French at the end of the 18th c. and
>>> regarded as a foreign word down to the middle of the 19th,
from=20
>which
>>> date it has been in very common use, with a tendency to take
the=20
>wider
>>> meaning of 'uncommon, unusual, remarkable'.
>>> The usage in the comparative and superlative, and with advs. as
>>> absolutely, most, quite, thoroughly, totally, etc., has been=20
>objected
>>to
>>> as tautological.
>>>
>>> 1618 W. BARCLAY Well at King-horne Avij, This is a soueraigne and
>>vnicke
>>> remedie for that disease in Women. 1794 R. J. SULIVAN View
Nat.=20
>I. 3 A
>>> concentrated, and an unique aggregation of almost all the
wonders=20
>of
>>the
>>> natural world. 1809 R. K. PORTER Trav. Sk. Russia & Sweden (1813)
=20
>I.
>>xxv.
>>> 285 As it was thoroughly unique, I cannot forbear presenting
you=20
>with
>>so
>>> singular a curiosity. 1842 J. P. COLLIER Armin's Nest Ninn.=20
>Introd., A
>>> relic..not only unique in itself, but unprecedented in its
kind.=20
>1866
>>> LIDDON Bamp. Lect. v. (1867) 368 [Christ's] relationship to the
>>Father..is
>>> absolutely unique. 1871 B. TAYLOR Faust (1875) II. II. i. 84 A=20
>thing
>>so
>>> totally unique The great collectors would go far to seek. 1885
>>Harper's
>>> Mag. April 703/1 When..these summer guests found themselves=20
>defrauded
>>of
>>> their uniquest recreations. 1908 K. GRAHAME Wind in Willows
viii.=20
>168
>>> 'Toad Hall,' said the Toad proudly, 'is an eligible self-
contained
>>> gentleman's residence, very unique.' 1912 CHESTERTON Manalive
I.=20
>iii.
>>86
>>> Diana Duke..began putting away the tea things. But it was not=20
>before
>>> Inglewood had seen an instantaneous picture so unique that he=20
>might
>>well
>>> have snapshotted it. 1939 Country Life 11 Feb. p. xviii/2
(Advt.),
>>Almost
>>> the most unique residential site along the south coast. 1960 [see
>>DIQUAT].
>>> 1980 Verbatim Autumn 15/2 A high-ranking state Alcoholic Beverage
>>> Commission official said Friday that Wednesday's retroactive=20
>renewal
>>and
>>> transfer of the beverage permit of the rural Bloomington
Liars'=20
>Lodge
>>by
>>> the Monroe County Alcoholic Beverage Board was 'unique but not
>>uncommon'.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't the 'each' automatically make the 'other' singular?
>>>>
>>>> Paul D.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of redundancy, my students often struggle against
the=20
>notion
>>>> that "very unique" doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>
>>>> stein wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Here is your posting Joanne.
>>>> Thank you, Herb and Paul for responding to my question.
>>>> Dalia
>>>> -------Original Message-------
>>>>
>>>> From: Johanna Rubba
>>>> Date: 03/15/06 02:51:00
>>>> To: stein
>>>> Cc: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>>> Subject: Re: Blue Color; each other
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dalia,
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if you could post this for me: (Thanks!)
>>>>
>>>> "I like the blue color" could be another example of the tendency
>>>> towards redundant expressions which seems to be strong in
English
>>right
>>>> now. My students often write things like "equally as good";=20
>there's
>>the
>>>> old "refer back"; "both my sister and brother share this=20
>tendency";
>>and
>>>> others that don't come readily to mind. I can imagine someone
>>>> responding to a question like "Which color shirt do you like=20
>best?"
>>>> with "The blue color." "Color" links the answer to the
question,=20
>and
>>>> puts the queried word ("which color") in the answer.
>>>>
>>>> I also have a query about "each other" -- how do we make it
>>possessive,
>>>> as in
>>>>
>>>> "They are always snooping into each other's business." Should
it=20
>be <
>>>> each others' > ? I keep doing a Gestalt shift on this; right
now=20
>the
>>>> first one looks right. How about a clear more-than-two:
>>>>
>>>> "The students then proofread each other's papers." Here, the
<'s>
>>looks
>>>> wrong; the coreference with the plural "students" is getting
in=20
>the
>>>> way.
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics
>>>> Linguistics Minor Advisor
>>>> English Department
>>>> California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
>>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Tel.: 805.756.2184
>>>> Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596
>>>> Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374
>>>> URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
>>>>
>>>> This mail was scanned via Beit Berl PineApp
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This mail was scanned via Beit Berl PineApp
>>>>
>>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>>> interface
>>>> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and=20
>select "Join or
>>>> leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>>> interface
>>>> at:
>>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>>
>>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>>
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>interface
>>> at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>interface
>>> at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>
>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web=20
>interface at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>and select "Join or leave the list"
>
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>and select "Join or leave the list"
>
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
