5 ms·

English is a great lingua franca IMO because of its inherent decentralization and willingness to accept new words. There is no academy regulating its use, as is

English is a great lingua franca IMO because of its inherent decentralization and willingness to accept new words. There is no academy regulating its use, as is the case with French and Spanish.

soldehierro 6y ago
In the case of Spanish, I can't speak for French, having an academy (the RAE in this case) regulating the language sounds like a problem on paper, but really isn't a problem in practice. The RAE accepts Americanisms and treats American Spanish just as it would European Spanish (referring to the continent(s), not the country) and encourages lingusitic diversity. Anglicisms are only discouraged when an acceptable Spanish alternative is in WIDE use (but never prohibited, as can be evidenced by the sheer quantity of anglicisms in the Spanish language.) Spanish is very willing to accept new words, and as diverse as English in terms of decentralization. Grammar doesn't make or break a lingua franca, number of speakers does, which is where English really shines. So what does the RAE do you ask? They write grammars and compile dictionaries, describe phonology and answer people's questions on Twitter. Just like what Merriam Webster or Oxford would do, but the RAE has official backing and creates consensus among the hispanophone countries. English is a regulated language, just not officially regulated.
- vidarh 6y ago
  Similarly in Norway the authority in charge often proposes Norwegian alternatives to Anglicisms, but they'll yield if an import becomes dominant, and will even reverse official reforms if they fail to gain traction.
- orwin 6y ago
  I which french academy was this tolerant.
  - Bayart 6y ago
    The problem of the French Academy isn't that it's intolerant, there are linguistic bodies in Europe that are far more conservative, it's that it's too slow and simply cannot keep up.
- kube-system 6y ago
  I'd say it's more accurate to describe Webster and Oxford as documenting established usage, rather than being informal regulators. They generally view their role as being purely observers and not as active influencers of the language. Some other language authorities do not take a usage-evidence-based approach to defining their dictionaries, and take into account cultural or historical concerns.
- yongjik 6y ago
  Oh how I envy you. Here in Korea we are stuck with the tax-funded imbeciles of National Institute of Korean Language, whose hobby is saying "ALL you Koreans are using the Korean language wrong!" with a straight face at every occasion.
Koshkin 6y ago
To be honest, I still wish it were Spanish, which is easier to learn/read and pronunciation of which is somehow easier for most people (except for native English speakers, as I've noticed).
- GlennS 6y ago
  Surely it will be a Romance/Germanic split? So Spanish is easier for speakers of French, Portuguese, Italian and Romanian, and English for speakers of Dutch, German, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish?
  - Koshkin 6y ago
    Not sure about those others but the Germans that I know struggle with English just like everybody else. (Despite common roots German and English are very different, and, in fact, I find the written Spanish and even French to be quite close to English, and rather easy to understand if you know English and learn a few words that are different or spelled differently; not so with German.)
  - Tor3 6y ago
    What I've noticed while working on most continents is that when people learn just a little English, they can communicate better than I can if I try to learn their language. The reason is, I think, that English grammar is, in a way, so redundant that even if the speaker use wrong grammar all the time the meaning often doesn't change. You can say "I is", which is wrong, but there's no problem with understanding (at least not for non-native English speakers who are so used to hear all kinds of wrong grammar). But make a single mistake in a Romance language like Italian, and suddenly your sentence "I'm stupid" now means "You're stupid". The grammar matters. In English the grammar, for the most part (not for everything, of course) is about correctness more than meaning - which is why the language is so robust, which is one reason it works as a lingua franca: A little English knowledge goes a long way.
Kranar 6y ago
All languages are decentralized regardless of regulation by official government bodies. The role of regulation is mostly a legal role employed by countries that use a civil legal system. Most English speaking countries use a common law legal system and so interpretation of words is fairly fluid and subject to interpretation by the courts. Civil law does not have this kind of flexibility and room for interpretation, so courts will make use of regulatory bodies to uniformly interpret language. This is why almost all countries with a civil law system have a regulatory body, while countries with a common law system do not.

English is a great lingua franca IMO because of its inherent decentralization and willingness to accept new words. There is no academy regulating its use, as is the case with French and Spanish.

soldehierro 6y ago

In the case of Spanish, I can't speak for French, having an academy (the RAE in this case) regulating the language sounds like a problem on paper, but really isn't a problem in practice. The RAE accepts Americanisms and treats American Spanish just as it would European Spanish (referring to the continent(s), not the country) and encourages lingusitic diversity. Anglicisms are only discouraged when an acceptable Spanish alternative is in WIDE use (but never prohibited, as can be evidenced by the sheer quantity of anglicisms in the Spanish language.) Spanish is very willing to accept new words, and as diverse as English in terms of decentralization. Grammar doesn't make or break a lingua franca, number of speakers does, which is where English really shines. So what does the RAE do you ask? They write grammars and compile dictionaries, describe phonology and answer people's questions on Twitter. Just like what Merriam Webster or Oxford would do, but the RAE has official backing and creates consensus among the hispanophone countries. English is a regulated language, just not officially regulated.

vidarh 6y ago
Similarly in Norway the authority in charge often proposes Norwegian alternatives to Anglicisms, but they'll yield if an import becomes dominant, and will even reverse official reforms if they fail to gain traction.
orwin 6y ago
I which french academy was this tolerant.
- Bayart 6y ago
  The problem of the French Academy isn't that it's intolerant, there are linguistic bodies in Europe that are far more conservative, it's that it's too slow and simply cannot keep up.
kube-system 6y ago
I'd say it's more accurate to describe Webster and Oxford as documenting established usage, rather than being informal regulators. They generally view their role as being purely observers and not as active influencers of the language. Some other language authorities do not take a usage-evidence-based approach to defining their dictionaries, and take into account cultural or historical concerns.
yongjik 6y ago
Oh how I envy you. Here in Korea we are stuck with the tax-funded imbeciles of National Institute of Korean Language, whose hobby is saying "ALL you Koreans are using the Korean language wrong!" with a straight face at every occasion.

Koshkin 6y ago

To be honest, I still wish it were Spanish, which is easier to learn/read and pronunciation of which is somehow easier for most people (except for native English speakers, as I've noticed).

GlennS 6y ago
Surely it will be a Romance/Germanic split? So Spanish is easier for speakers of French, Portuguese, Italian and Romanian, and English for speakers of Dutch, German, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish?
- Koshkin 6y ago
  Not sure about those others but the Germans that I know struggle with English just like everybody else. (Despite common roots German and English are very different, and, in fact, I find the written Spanish and even French to be quite close to English, and rather easy to understand if you know English and learn a few words that are different or spelled differently; not so with German.)
- Tor3 6y ago
  What I've noticed while working on most continents is that when people learn just a little English, they can communicate better than I can if I try to learn their language. The reason is, I think, that English grammar is, in a way, so redundant that even if the speaker use wrong grammar all the time the meaning often doesn't change. You can say "I is", which is wrong, but there's no problem with understanding (at least not for non-native English speakers who are so used to hear all kinds of wrong grammar). But make a single mistake in a Romance language like Italian, and suddenly your sentence "I'm stupid" now means "You're stupid". The grammar matters. In English the grammar, for the most part (not for everything, of course) is about correctness more than meaning - which is why the language is so robust, which is one reason it works as a lingua franca: A little English knowledge goes a long way.

Kranar 6y ago

All languages are decentralized regardless of regulation by official government bodies. The role of regulation is mostly a legal role employed by countries that use a civil legal system. Most English speaking countries use a common law legal system and so interpretation of words is fairly fluid and subject to interpretation by the courts. Civil law does not have this kind of flexibility and room for interpretation, so courts will make use of regulatory bodies to uniformly interpret language. This is why almost all countries with a civil law system have a regulatory body, while countries with a common law system do not.