The English Language ???

So you think the english language is easy.




1) The bandage was wound around the wound.

2) The farm was used to produce produce.

3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.

4) We must polish the Polish furniture.

5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.

6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.

7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.

A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.

9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.

10) I did not object to the object.

11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.

12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.

13) They were too close to the door to close it.

14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.

15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.

16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.

17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.

1 Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.

19) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.

20) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?



Let's face it -- English is a crazy language. There is no egg in eggplant, nor ham in hamburger; neither apple nor pine in pineapple. English muffins weren't invented in England or French fries in France. Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren't sweet, are meat. We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.

And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers don't groce and hammers don't ham? If the plural of tooth is teeth, why isn't the plural of booth, beeth? One goose, 2 geese. So one moose, 2 meese? One index, 2 indices? Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend? If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it?

If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught? If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? Sometimes I think all the English speakers should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane. In what language do people recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell?

How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites? You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on.

English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the creativity of the human race, which, of course, is not a race at all. That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the lights are out, they are invisible.

PS. - Why doesn't 'Buick' rhyme with 'quick'?

 

You have so far been doing a great job demonstrating your command of the English language.

 

English is 11ty different languages all smushed together as a sausage.

 

Allegedly it's one of the hardest languages to learn, yet many people all over the world figure it out along with speaking their own language well, while most Americans remain uni-lingual and often use their language poorly.

 

That is because it is a useful language to know to many. It is supposed to be one of the most difficult, that does not decrease the worth of knowing it to many.
On the other hand Americans have very little need to learn an different language.
As an American myself, I think it is much more useful for us to learn other skills instead of second languages. People can not learn everything so we must prioritize the worth of knowledge.

 

People who learn more than 1 language usually have higher skills in their native.

 

I think having other languages is fairly useful, but outside of that I fundamentally agree. In Europe countries are smushed right next to each other and that makes having multiple languages something to strive for, but the U.S. is huge, the vast majority don't leave the country and the necessity level of learning another language is not as relevant.

And, as you noted, with the U.S. being a superpower, it's useful for other countries to be able to speak English.

 

I've heard that and also that ability to learn languages is related to music and other creative skills.

On the other hand, when almost everyone in many countries speak two languages, I'm not sure that correlation is definite.

I have seen it argued that learning two languages starting at a young age actually increases intelligence much as working out builds muscle. I think that might be the relationship, right there.

 

Exactly, I agree.

 

It's weird that while those words are spelled the same, they are pronounced differently.

And how does one pronounce 'Buick'? I always thought it did rhyme with 'quick' lol...now I find I am wrong?

 

It is pronounced---BU ICK IT IS A CAR

 

Why do we drive on parkways but park in driveways?

 

good one LOL

 

It's pronounced BYOO-ICK.

 

Would you need wood? I bought a rough bough through there! Nice bark - from Berkshire - came over by barque.

Silly language!

ETA - I though some of that would sum it up!

 

...and 'volatile' is not pronounced 'vulladdle' as Americans insist on doing. 'Herbs' does not have a silent 'h' and 'access' is a noun, not a verb.
Thank goodness there's American English and the proper sort-English!

 

If you really want to examine the uniqueness of the English language, I'd like to suggest a word.

This exceptionally versatile word can be used as a noun, a verb, an adverb, an adjective, as well as a preposition, a conjunction, and an interjection. It can be used to describe a gamut of emotions and feelings, from pure happiness to deepest sorrow, and everything in between. It can be used as a curse of the most vile sort, or as a greeting among close friends.

The word I refer to?

Four letters, starts with an "F", and rhymes with "truck"...

 

I hate English; its very illogical and is in need of some massive reforms. Not to mention it sounds ugly, to boot.

The Founding Fathers considered a menagerie of languages, I am told, when deciding whether or not to implement a national language... Shame they stuck with the status quo.

 

so you don't like it here go some place else.

 

I suppose Latin might be considered 'logical' by some, because it has dominated European grammar, but there is really nothing logical about any language - and 'ugliness' is in the ear of the listener, since most languages have much the same sounds.

 

What an astonishingly asinine post. I'm quite content here in the US, thank you very much. What I'm simply saying is that we could have done better for a national language.

 

That makes no sense. How has Latin dominated European grammar? Latin is simply the derivative of a larger Indo-European language (which Greek, Sanskrit, and the Slavonic and Germanic languages descend from, as well), which was characterized by a systematic, synthetic morphology. German did not borrow its declensions from Latin, nor did Ancient Greek, or Russian, and so on.

English, apart from Mandarin perhaps, could easily qualify as the most obscure major language in existence. Take "dog food," for example. What is it? Food for a dog? Food made of dogs? Or maybe food with dog-like characteristics? How do you differentiate between all these options?

In Latin, food for a dog would be cibus cani; food made of dogs would be cibus canum; food with dog-like properties would be (if memory serves) cibus similis canes.

Or perhaps in French? La nourriture pour chiens; La nourriture de chiens; La nourriture comme les chiens.

Many languages are much better at conveying their points than English.

This isn't true...

Perhaps, in degrees anyway. But I imagine there are scarcely any people who would not prefer listening to French to, say, Cantonese.

 

Love or hate the language, anyone who wants a career in international
aviation needs to be moderately proficient in the English language.

English is the official language of the ICAO; International Civil Aviation Organization.
You want to be a commercial pilot who flies abroad?

You must prove efficiency in the English language for all radiotelephony communications...

 

Here's one. To be honest, I find French a particularly unpleasant language to listen to, but that's just me. It doesn't make it any 'better' or 'worse' than any other, it's just that I don't personally find the sound particularly enjoyable overall. I don't find the same problem with Cantonese.

It's all personal, and entirely subjective.

Some people even find Welsh unpleasant to listen to - I personally find it a very beautiful sounding language. I's just a matter of taste.

 

The English 'Grammar schools' were where you learned Latin grammar, and anyone asked 'Who's there?' who replies 'I' has been taught Latin, not English grammar. I taught English at one time, and the grammar I taught was Latin. I think you'll find that is true for other European languages to some degree: it's a prestige thing.

Like Cenydd I prefer Cantonese. Incidentally, I once knew a man who spoke some Welsh, English, Mandarin and a little Cantonese. He married a woman who spoke Cantonese and a little Mandarin. He brought her home to live with his mother who spoke English and Welsh, and a Grandmother who spoke only Welsh. On the whole he thought Welsh sounded best!