Language - its use

[Dave]

Wasn't sure where here, philosophy or even history was the correct slot for this!

I can see Bill the Bard not translating well, it relies so much on word plays that only work in English successfully. I often wonder how the Japanese version holds up.

A German-Jewish artist called Edith Simon, in "The Anglo-Saxon Manner", says that the national culture and character come from the language - I would say it is the other way round, but never mind. But she goes on to talk of the,''íntrinsic formality of French,'' '' the hide-and-seek play of the verb in German,'' ''the Mercurial flexibility of English,'' and, ''the teeming syllabary ambiguities of the Sino-Japanese languages.''

When you think about it the way language is used often reflects the speaker's character. Ben Jonson said, ''Language most shows a man, speak that I might see thee.''

But I think that the change in language over the years has a quicker turnover than the change in basic national character. Having said that, in the pop music world perhaps the two went hand-in-hand, songs changed both the use, even the meaning,of words and the behaviour of people in parallel.

Body language, the ''Gallic shrug'', the Italian hand emphases, is usually fairly explicit across the barrier. Us Anglo-Saxons tend to be a but dumb in this respect, relying on voice tone and volume! I used to amuse friends by declaiming poetry in ''Utter Gobbledegook'' relying on voice tone, expression and the body to actually set the tone and imply the story. Most of them guessed right in rounded terms.

But, being a real mongrel of a language, English supplies all the material for word-play a writer could want.

[xSilverPhinx]

Language is an interesting topic, but I don't know that much about it I'm afraid. I think OldGit, our forum linguist, might like this thread. Hopefully he will add something to it.

[No one]

Violence and stupidity are universally understood human languages. Very sad, but true.  Also mathematics, to a lesser degree.

[OldGit]

"Experts" love to make assessments of national character and match them up with perceived characteristics of languages.  When you read subjective judgments like

'íntrinsic formality of French,'' '' the hide-and-seek play of the verb in German,'' ''the Mercurial flexibility of English,'' and, ''the teeming syllabary ambiguities of the Sino-Japanese languages.''

you realise that neither end of such comparisons rests on anything meaningful.

[Asmodean]

I agree with Git. Those characterisations may sound deep to some, but there is nothing profound in them.

Also, I think that languages are, to a degree, a product of their respective cultures. They evolve with the speakers' ever-changing need for communication.

Does language show the speaker's character..? No. It may vaguely indicate that person's intelligence and level of education, but not in any reliable way.

[Dave]

"Experts" love to make assessments of national character and match them up with perceived characteristics of languages.  When you read subjective judgments like

'íntrinsic formality of French,'' '' the hide-and-seek play of the verb in German,'' ''the Mercurial flexibility of English,'' and, ''the teeming syllabary ambiguities of the Sino-Japanese languages.''

you realise that neither end of such comparisons rests on anything meaningful.

Hmm, agree that it is all to easy to characterise people by what they say and how they say it, but is not your comment one subjective assessment versus another, old git? Do you have qualifications that give your opinion authority over that of Simon?

I have long been a casual observer of people. In the case of the French their language, built on the precision of formal Latin and supported aggressively by the Academie Francaise, is intolerant of the sloppy constructions that English simply shrugs at. This, in my direct experience, shows in the intolerance to what they consider sloppy manners and behaviour. OK, this applies more to meetings between strangers than between old friends in the bar. But even those defences are cracking with the Internet with its predominance of (American) English, following on from English being the prime lingua franca of science - but those are "special" influences.

Irish has no words for "yes" or "no", affirmations and refusals have to be indirect, "I cannot agree with that", or, "That is permissable" for e.g. Now there is distortion over time here since contact with modern English has probably had fundamental effects on what the Irish actually say these days. However I remember a gentle Highlander, who's first language was a cousin of Irish, who did everything he could not to say the word, "No", even in English. The "old" Highlanders could be very formal and direct in every other way in my experience! But mostly polite and respectful, their basic character in everyday dealings (so long as you respect them as well!)

Whether language follows culture or the reverse I still contend that the two are inextricably linked (barring Internetese, though, looking at Facebook and Twitter that seems to be developing its own, often verbally aggressive, culture.)

Dave.

[Tom62]

Hmmm.. this reminds me of Jack Vance's novel "The Languages of Pao", in which the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is a central theme. With other words, the book plays with the idea on how language can sometimes influence and shape the behaviour of a population.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Do you have qualifications that give your opinion authority over that of Simon?

Tah-dah!  The appeal to authority.  Actually it is one of the most relied-upon devices in making (or justifying) decisions. But then the experts all disagree, so now what do we do?  We end up making out own decisions based on what we have. Old Git has more qualifications than most - he hates the French and knows some Latin.

[OldGit]

Hmmm.. this reminds me of Jack Vance's novel "The Languages of Pao", in which the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is a central theme. With other words, the book plays with the idea on how language can sometimes influence and shape the behaviour of a population.

A good sci-fi story, like all of Jack Vance's.  Best not to take it seriously as a linguistics text, though.

[Dave]

Do you have qualifications that give your opinion authority over that of Simon?

Tah-dah!  The appeal to authority.  Actually it is one of the most relied-upon devices in making (or justifying) decisions. But then the experts all disagree, so now what do we do?  We end up making out own decisions based on what we have. Old Git has more qualifications than most - he hates the French and knows some Latin.

Not an appeal to anything, Ecurb, even OldGit says that experts can be wrong. I was suggesting that one person's opinion, especially in an area where, unlike maths, say, there are not absolutes, is as good as another's.

Hating any subject is a qualification only for hating that subject. It makes any opinion the hater might have, on anything related to that subject, automatically subjective, biased and/or prejudiced. Should a number of well known names come to a similar, but independent, opinion on something then that concensus may have authority - so long as history does not prove them otherwise (which it has a nasty habit of doing). Opinions are not facts. But we all have them!

To study the interplay of language, culture and manners one needs a mixture of philology, philosophy, psychology, sociology and anthropology. Dabbled in them all over the years. But only dabbled, not qualified to offer more than an opinion . . .

[xSilverPhinx]

OG is very knowledgeable on linguistics and languages; I secretly look up to him.

OK, not so secretly anymore.  

[Dave]

OG is very knowledgeable on linguistics and languages; I secretly look up to him.

OK, not so secretly anymore.

Never said he wasn't, just that opinions are, er, opinions - not facts. That language and culture are linked is an arguable matter.

My opinion is that the link is evident in the structure of the language, its rules and the manner in which it is used. The latter may determine factors in the interplay between the speakers. Japanese has three forms: "polite", "respectful" and "humble", using the wrong form could get you into a lot of trouble - interpersonal relationships are very important and your status compared to another, or what you want to achieve, determines how you address them. Just as important as who bows how low, or just nods, to who. Had lessons in it from a Japanese student from a high caste family.

[Tank]

OG is very knowledgeable on linguistics and languages; I secretly look up to him.

OK, not so secretly anymore.

Never said he wasn't, just that opinions are, er, opinions - not facts. That language and culture are linked is an arguable matter.

My opinion is that the link is evident in the structure of the language, its rules and the manner in which it is used. The latter may determine factors in the interplay between the speakers. Japanese has three forms: "polite", "respectful" and "humble", using the wrong form could get you into a lot of trouble - interpersonal relationships are very important and your status compared to another, or what you want to achieve, determines how you address them. Just as important as who bows how low, or just nods, to who. Had lessons in it from a Japanese student from a high caste family.

"My opinion is that the Earth is 6,000 years old." said the creationist.
"My opinion is that the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old." said the professional geologist.
Opinions are not facts.
But some opinions are way more valid and accurate than others.

[OldGit]

In the case of the French their language, built on the precision of formal Latin and supported aggressively by the Academie Francaise, i

Sorry, but those two points are factually as wrong as they could be.  The Latin origins of French lie in the rough common Latin which was miles away from that of Golden-Age literature.  And the Académie has had very little effect on the popular language.

[Dave]

In the case of the French their language, built on the precision of formal Latin and supported aggressively by the Academie Francaise, i

Sorry, but those two points are factually as wrong as they could be.  The Latin origins of French lie in the rough common Latin which was miles away from that of Golden-Age literature.  And the Académie has had very little effect on the popular language.

Yup, concede the first point on reflection, though I rememger reading that "church Latin" had influence, was that also "rough"?

Historically, surely the Academie has had a lot of influence in the upper echelons of French society, it is comparatively recently that "le weekend" and computerese have crept in. Whilst the more recent changes affect the perception of the   "1980"s computer generation the more formal language dominates in diplomacy etc. My own dealings with the French, though in English, have been to find them rather stiff in word choice and meaning, and often in demeanor.

Come to think of it diplomatic language is a subset of most languages and reflects the behaviour of its users, somehow precise yet slippery . . .