7 ms·

Thankfully one language (English, but whatever language it is might not be that relevant) is becoming 'de facto' the language for sciences, and kids are startin

by henvic 6y ago

Thankfully one language (English, but whatever language it is might not be that relevant) is becoming 'de facto' the language for sciences, and kids are starting to learn it from an earlier age. It's still a long way to go, especially for undeveloped countries. However, probably any children born within the next decade will be able to read and speak at least advanced English before reaching 18.

dctoedt 6y ago
> Thankfully one language (English, but whatever language it is might not be that relevant) is becoming 'de facto' the language for sciences, and kids are starting to learn it from an earlier age. Soapbox UX issue: That's why we language sticklers should tolerate and even welcome the "corruption" of English — that is to say, the crowd-sourced, grass-roots simplification of the tongue. Non-native speakers should feel that it's easy to achieve fluency in English without wondering whether they'll be looked down upon for getting it not quite right. (That will also help English stay competitive with, say, Mandarin.) Here's just one example: It should be perfectly fine to say "less errors," vice the supposedly-correct "fewer errors." More examples?
- bsanr2 6y ago
  The one I hate, but that seems to be taking over anyway: the use of "up" rather than "raise."
  - dan-robertson 6y ago
    This is mostly a US colloquial usage but it goes back to the start of the 20th century.
- Nickerchen 6y ago
  There are some articles on "EU English" or "European English", my favourite example is ending any sentence with "..., no?" to make it a question
  - philwelch 6y ago
    That specific usage makes any written sentence sound as though it is in a French accent, no? Similarly, writing sentence without article makes sentence seem as though it is written in Russian accent.
- jozvolskyef 6y ago
  As much as I appreciate that people are chill about mistakes, I'm not sure if I agree. To me, as an English language learner, the grammar is trivial to learn and it is an anchor that gives me at least some reassurance. One of my most useful habits has been to pick a style guide and stick to it; I wish I'd done it earlier. People often say there should be no rules, but has anyone considered that rules ensure different regions don't develop dialects incomprehensible to each other? What makes English actually difficult to learn is its broad vocabulary of idioms. One needs to develop a sense for 'natural expressions' because often there are dozens of grammatical expressions, only one of which feels natural. This is something difficult to understand for a native speaker so let me give you an example. Which if any of these expressions are a natural way to get a teacher's attention? 'Can I have a question,' 'may I have a question,' 'can I ask a question,' 'can I ask you a question,' 'may I ask you a question,' or 'I have a question.' This is by far more difficult to learn than any rule of grammar.
- henvic 6y ago
  As a non-native speaker of English, I really dislike this idea. I indeed make this very error, but I prefer to rely on tools such as Grammarly to help me improve my abilities, than to other people to start accepting my mistakes as basically the natural mutation of the language. Yes, a language mutates, and a simple language may be more welcome, but we don't need to force it. Let it happen naturally.
  - dctoedt 6y ago
    > Yes, a language mutates, and a simple language may be more welcome, but we don't need to force it. Let it happen naturally. Isn’t that more or less what I said?
    - henvic 6y ago
      The way you said it, I imagine that you'd be willing to let a 'less errors' (instead of 'few errors') slip without trying to educate whoever made the error about this, if you were reviewing something (for example).
      - dctoedt 6y ago
        I tell my law students that: (A) [as stated above]; (B) the cold reality is that they need to learn the rules of "correct" English, even those rules are often arbitrary. That's because in professional situations, others — including but not limited to hiring partners, clients, and referral sources — are likely to think less of them if their usage doesn't conform to those rules; and (C) When grading their work, I will deduct points when they don't use "correct" English, because part of my job is to help them learn to do so.
- thebruce87m 6y ago
  I kind of agree, but when I hear/read “on accident” it’s like nails on a chalkboard to me.
  - dctoedt 6y ago
    > when I hear/read “on accident” it’s like nails on a chalkboard to me. Agreed!!! I mean, there have to be limits, right? :)
- philwelch 6y ago
  The point of the finer, pedantic questions of English fluency is to be a marker of social class. It is, in fact, perfectly understandable to say “less errors” rather than “fewer errors”, except insofar as doing so marks one as “uneducated” and déclassé compared to someone who uses the “correct” usage. Of course, this particular class marker is less meaningful now that it’s too widely known—it’s more likely a marker of someone being a member of an anxious and pretentious tier of the middle class by now. The pointless difficulty is, in fact, the point. For similar reasons, the word “ain’t” and the double negative are perfectly well-attested usages; they just exist primarily within specific dialects that are not socially prestigious. (Of course, blatant and well-known markers of class status are seen as stuffy and pretentious, which is why politicians tend to code-switch into more “folksy” dialects. As for competing with Mandarin, I’m sure the Chinese upper classes are just as capable of telling each other apart from the rabble.
  - jozvolskyef 6y ago
    This reminds me of a conversation I had with some Scottish bloke. He said he doesn't understand why his Polish girlfriend keeps learning English when she speaks it perfectly well. 'That is simple,' I replied, 'suppose you're learning French. Is your learning goal to sound like a Scotsman who's learnt French, or is it to sound like someone from Paris?' From his point of view it was an apparent pursuit of social prestige while his girlfriend has likely been following the most obvious learning goal. It is like mastering any other medium.
bsanr2 6y ago
You would be surprised. At a previous job, we would receive guests from all around the world, and particularly from African, Asian, South American, and 2nd-tier European countries. The Africans and SEAs were by far the most consistently, fluently conversant. The (comparatively wealthier) Eastern Europeans and East Asians seemed to understand written English most proficiently, but seemed to loathe speaking it; the former broke the "English only" classroom rule most often. Edit: I'm not surprised by the downvote, simply bemused.
- jozvolskyef 6y ago
  I didn't downvote you but it is probably because you are making a straw man argument, countering something GP didn't imply. There is probably some truth to some cultures being more shy when it comes to speaking. I'd wager it is an effect of people being judgmental of others' accents.
  - bsanr2 6y ago
    I'm not sure what else, "It's still a long way to go, especially for undeveloped countries," is meant to imply, but feel free to posit alternatives.
    - jozvolskyef 6y ago
      I see. That could be interpreted either way, but let's give henvic the benefit of the doubt and assume they were talking within the context of the above comment, i.e. Europe. edit: Not that it makes the argument sound: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EF_English_Proficiency_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EF_English_Proficiency_Index
      - bsanr2 5y ago
        I don't think that suffices, because I have never heard European countries described as "undeveloped" (perhaps "underdeveloped"), if that. The benefit of the doubt usually orbits a common sentiment, and in this case there is a conspicuous incongruity. As for the edit: "The test takers were self-selected." The tests also seem to be online-only, and by that measure, likely textual. I'll say that there is an explanation for the phenomenon I've described: if one has the privilege to conduct business and socialize in one's native language, speaking proficiency in a lingua franca could likely be lower.

by henvic 6y ago

dctoedt 6y ago

> Thankfully one language (English, but whatever language it is might not be that relevant) is becoming 'de facto' the language for sciences, and kids are starting to learn it from an earlier age. Soapbox UX issue: That's why we language sticklers should tolerate and even welcome the "corruption" of English — that is to say, the crowd-sourced, grass-roots simplification of the tongue. Non-native speakers should feel that it's easy to achieve fluency in English without wondering whether they'll be looked down upon for getting it not quite right. (That will also help English stay competitive with, say, Mandarin.) Here's just one example: It should be perfectly fine to say "less errors," vice the supposedly-correct "fewer errors." More examples?

bsanr2 6y ago
The one I hate, but that seems to be taking over anyway: the use of "up" rather than "raise."
- dan-robertson 6y ago
  This is mostly a US colloquial usage but it goes back to the start of the 20th century.
Nickerchen 6y ago
There are some articles on "EU English" or "European English", my favourite example is ending any sentence with "..., no?" to make it a question
- philwelch 6y ago
  That specific usage makes any written sentence sound as though it is in a French accent, no? Similarly, writing sentence without article makes sentence seem as though it is written in Russian accent.
jozvolskyef 6y ago
As much as I appreciate that people are chill about mistakes, I'm not sure if I agree. To me, as an English language learner, the grammar is trivial to learn and it is an anchor that gives me at least some reassurance. One of my most useful habits has been to pick a style guide and stick to it; I wish I'd done it earlier. People often say there should be no rules, but has anyone considered that rules ensure different regions don't develop dialects incomprehensible to each other? What makes English actually difficult to learn is its broad vocabulary of idioms. One needs to develop a sense for 'natural expressions' because often there are dozens of grammatical expressions, only one of which feels natural. This is something difficult to understand for a native speaker so let me give you an example. Which if any of these expressions are a natural way to get a teacher's attention? 'Can I have a question,' 'may I have a question,' 'can I ask a question,' 'can I ask you a question,' 'may I ask you a question,' or 'I have a question.' This is by far more difficult to learn than any rule of grammar.
henvic 6y ago
As a non-native speaker of English, I really dislike this idea. I indeed make this very error, but I prefer to rely on tools such as Grammarly to help me improve my abilities, than to other people to start accepting my mistakes as basically the natural mutation of the language. Yes, a language mutates, and a simple language may be more welcome, but we don't need to force it. Let it happen naturally.
- dctoedt 6y ago
  > Yes, a language mutates, and a simple language may be more welcome, but we don't need to force it. Let it happen naturally. Isn’t that more or less what I said?
  - henvic 6y ago
    The way you said it, I imagine that you'd be willing to let a 'less errors' (instead of 'few errors') slip without trying to educate whoever made the error about this, if you were reviewing something (for example).
    - dctoedt 6y ago
      I tell my law students that: (A) [as stated above]; (B) the cold reality is that they need to learn the rules of "correct" English, even those rules are often arbitrary. That's because in professional situations, others — including but not limited to hiring partners, clients, and referral sources — are likely to think less of them if their usage doesn't conform to those rules; and (C) When grading their work, I will deduct points when they don't use "correct" English, because part of my job is to help them learn to do so.
thebruce87m 6y ago
I kind of agree, but when I hear/read “on accident” it’s like nails on a chalkboard to me.
- dctoedt 6y ago
  > when I hear/read “on accident” it’s like nails on a chalkboard to me. Agreed!!! I mean, there have to be limits, right? :)
philwelch 6y ago
The point of the finer, pedantic questions of English fluency is to be a marker of social class. It is, in fact, perfectly understandable to say “less errors” rather than “fewer errors”, except insofar as doing so marks one as “uneducated” and déclassé compared to someone who uses the “correct” usage. Of course, this particular class marker is less meaningful now that it’s too widely known—it’s more likely a marker of someone being a member of an anxious and pretentious tier of the middle class by now. The pointless difficulty is, in fact, the point. For similar reasons, the word “ain’t” and the double negative are perfectly well-attested usages; they just exist primarily within specific dialects that are not socially prestigious. (Of course, blatant and well-known markers of class status are seen as stuffy and pretentious, which is why politicians tend to code-switch into more “folksy” dialects. As for competing with Mandarin, I’m sure the Chinese upper classes are just as capable of telling each other apart from the rabble.
- jozvolskyef 6y ago
  This reminds me of a conversation I had with some Scottish bloke. He said he doesn't understand why his Polish girlfriend keeps learning English when she speaks it perfectly well. 'That is simple,' I replied, 'suppose you're learning French. Is your learning goal to sound like a Scotsman who's learnt French, or is it to sound like someone from Paris?' From his point of view it was an apparent pursuit of social prestige while his girlfriend has likely been following the most obvious learning goal. It is like mastering any other medium.

bsanr2 6y ago

You would be surprised. At a previous job, we would receive guests from all around the world, and particularly from African, Asian, South American, and 2nd-tier European countries. The Africans and SEAs were by far the most consistently, fluently conversant. The (comparatively wealthier) Eastern Europeans and East Asians seemed to understand written English most proficiently, but seemed to loathe speaking it; the former broke the "English only" classroom rule most often. Edit: I'm not surprised by the downvote, simply bemused.

jozvolskyef 6y ago
I didn't downvote you but it is probably because you are making a straw man argument, countering something GP didn't imply. There is probably some truth to some cultures being more shy when it comes to speaking. I'd wager it is an effect of people being judgmental of others' accents.
- bsanr2 6y ago
  I'm not sure what else, "It's still a long way to go, especially for undeveloped countries," is meant to imply, but feel free to posit alternatives.
  - jozvolskyef 6y ago
    I see. That could be interpreted either way, but let's give henvic the benefit of the doubt and assume they were talking within the context of the above comment, i.e. Europe. edit: Not that it makes the argument sound: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EF_English_Proficiency_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EF_English_Proficiency_Index
    - bsanr2 5y ago
      I don't think that suffices, because I have never heard European countries described as "undeveloped" (perhaps "underdeveloped"), if that. The benefit of the doubt usually orbits a common sentiment, and in this case there is a conspicuous incongruity. As for the edit: "The test takers were self-selected." The tests also seem to be online-only, and by that measure, likely textual. I'll say that there is an explanation for the phenomenon I've described: if one has the privilege to conduct business and socialize in one's native language, speaking proficiency in a lingua franca could likely be lower.