|
29-01-2006, 14:37 | #81 |
Sad Little Monkey
|
Why would dialect be a product of lack of education? And furthermore... why should the language artificially be held together through a unitarian political regime? Doesn't it make much more sense for language to evolve depending on what the people who lived on certain teritories experienced? Isn't it completely normal that former citizens of the Roman empire who lived on the terriroty of today's portugal would have totally different experiences/influences compared to those who lived on the territory of what is today Italy? Forcing a formal language down people's throats will only make it unpopular and rigid. Like I said: it's not that the formal language per se is redundant - it's vital. But then so are all it's dialects and slangs.They make it richer and more diverse rather than endanger it. No modern language in existance that has at least 1 milion active native speakers and has clear grammar rules can be considered as threatened in the first place, let alone threatened by dialects. All the various slangs and accents that stem from the basic english language are just a testiment of how popular and accepted the language is.
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
freddie | TatySite.net t.E.A.m. [ multyman@hotmail.com ] Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. |
|
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 15:03 | #82 |
The Black and Blue Wizard
|
But the Italian's dialect are very different respect of Portugal's dialect because The Napoletan or the Milanes were Influenced by the Spanish or German language!!
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
IT'S REVENGE'S TIME!: Ho preso pali,mi hanno date buche,mi hanno defraudato e tradito ma ora miei cari BASTA!!E TEMPO DI VENDETTA! (J.B) |
|
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 16:51 | #83 |
Re-Offender
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shanghai , China
Posts: 2,103
|
|
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 18:24 | #84 | |
blah
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,246
|
Quote:
|
|
Last edited by KillaQueen; 29-01-2006 at 18:37. |
||
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 18:38 | #85 | ||
iMod
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Normandie
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,839
|
Quote:
Things like 'woddya' for 'what do you' are the result of lack of education, no educated person would merge an interrogative pronoun with an auxiliary verb and a personal pronoun because that makes absolutely no grammatical sense. Words with different grammatical functions have to remain seperate for a sentence to keep its grammatical coherence, you can't go merging things anyway you want just because in speech it sounds that way, people who do that were never taught proper grammar. I could also give a French example of butchered grammar: 'oukilé ?' for 'où est-ce qu'il est ?' in correct French (or 'où est-il ?' in formal French), 'where is he?' in English. The slang form 'oukilé' is a grammatical abomination. Quote:
Ok, the thread title has been changed to 'Slang, result of ignorance or acceptable dialect?', i hope the topic will now be clear enough for everybody. |
||
~~~~~~~~~~~
Patrick | TatySite.net t.E.A.m. [ shortdickman@free.fr ] Last edited by haku; 29-01-2006 at 19:08. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 19:12 | #86 |
blah
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,246
|
let it be noted that people working in more educated areas (medicine, aviation etc) use their jargon. an example of such slang would be the terms "roger" instead of "i understand what you said/i received your message" (the latter being too long and often misleading in low quality transmissions) and "negative" instead of the simple "no" which was too short and could have easily not been heard or distinguished in bad transmissions.
yet this is not a form of ignorance or a result of poor education. such slangs were used so as to make life easier and more efficient, more productive for people working in the respective fields. which is more than i can say for ebonics or gypsy butchered language. |
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 21:58 | #87 |
kis$ it
|
well then again, you have to define what you mean by "education." some people who go to higher institutions aren't necessarily educated.
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Complete™ forever I never thought it would be this clear | Lux [ light-ness@hotmail.com ] |
|
Reply With Quote |
29-01-2006, 23:50 | #88 | |
Sad Little Monkey
|
Quote:
Given a natural development (which in this day and age is impossible, since languages are pretty much cemented in their formal form, due to modern advances) dialects and even slang would develop into a proper language of it's own in a few centuries, given the right conditions (political, geographic, social). A language with it's own grammar rules and nothing would seem odd anymore. |
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
freddie | TatySite.net t.E.A.m. [ multyman@hotmail.com ] Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. |
||
Reply With Quote |
30-01-2006, 20:55 | #89 |
Участник
|
the way that people talk isn't on a lack of education... i talk like that all the time if im talking to my friends or if im at home with my family i would never talk that way to a teacher or my boss ... i think that most americans (like myself) who talk like that just do it because you can relax and me lazy when your talking to your friends unless the conversation is a dire one. i only talk my "gangster" talk if i ever get harassed by them because they have an issue on how i dress.. to them im a "goth'...that pisses me off so whenever they say sh*t to me i flip out right back at them in teir own slang so they step off... so basically that story was a point of if you ever get in a tight situation like that its good to know how to talk like that....
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
you are responsible for what you tame, and the pain |
|
Reply With Quote |
30-01-2006, 21:06 | #90 |
Ice_Cream
|
You think the way you talk is your self defence?!
That pretty much proves it isn't a dialect...it's just people trying to sound "hard" |
~~~~~~~~~~~
Tatutaty: "Horny Rachel is her name. Masturbating is her game. Fucking, sucking, licking too. Wouldn't you like some Rachel screw? *batteries not included*" PuddleQueen | Rachel | TatySite.net t.E.A.m. [ rm6405@hotmail.com ] My music playlist on Last.fm |
|
Reply With Quote |
31-01-2006, 00:34 | #91 |
kis$ it
|
i disagree. when it is collective and very much part of a group culture as defensive to outside attacks, it is a dialect. speaking in a such a way also distinguishes the group from other groups.
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Complete™ forever I never thought it would be this clear | Lux [ light-ness@hotmail.com ] |
|
Reply With Quote |
31-01-2006, 15:35 | #92 |
Участник
|
its not my self defence and im not trying to sound "hard" or tough its just the way we talk its is concidered around here a dialect its like a second language...but not, because at sertain times people have to speak it just like if ...lets say you went to mexico... wouldnt it be helpful if you knew spanish? im not really trying to be like "no your wrong and you dont know anything blahh blahh blahh" i really dont care, if people are really bent out of shape about this because they have enough time to sit here and make it a bigger deal than it really is then.. i think you should step out into the world and see that a lot of people from different cultures do it as well and that we dont live in a world that is extremely forcful about how someone talks, the way someone talks expresses who they are and how they feel but if they talked all the same it would be boring and all the same,and no indifference from everyone
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
you are responsible for what you tame, and the pain |
|
Reply With Quote |
31-01-2006, 16:54 | #93 | ||
iMod
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Normandie
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,839
|
Quote:
You see, this is where the problem lies, people always compare Ebonics to the official languages of other countries, they are putting a vulgar slang on the same level as litterary languages. The American obssession with the rap 'culture' has transformed a slang into the 'pinnacle of mainstream society' like someone here said, not being able to make a single correct sentence and departing as far as possible from standard English has become the goal to achieve, ignorance is validated and even glorified. Quote:
However, nowhere else have i seen a vulgar slang being considered the *pinnacle* of society and the finest form of a language, everywhere else a popular slang is just that, a popular slang, an incorrect form of the language that you use in limited circumstances and would never be taught in schools as a valid 'dialect'. |
||
~~~~~~~~~~~
Patrick | TatySite.net t.E.A.m. [ shortdickman@free.fr ] |
|||
Reply With Quote |
01-02-2006, 12:46 | #94 | ||
kis$ it
|
oh please. that is a load of shit. the US is far more diverse than europe. in terms of different races and cultures. most of the people in europe are WHITE and while they speak different languages, they mostly derivefrom the latin alphabet. eastern europe languages are more similar to each other, and then romance languages on the western side of europe are similar to each other. yes there are more languages and people live close together, but the US is far more diverse. only when it comes to different RACES. chinese culture is very different from latino culture, which is very different from creole culture. they are more different from each other than french is to british or german.
at least, germans, french, and british are all "white." that is, the same race. their cultures are different YES, i'm not saying they're not, but the difference is BIGGER when it comes to non white races. and yes, europe isn't the world. it is the western world. try an underdeveloped country sometime. or come to brooklyn sometime. or harlem. try it out. it'd make a good case study. Quote:
Quote:
it's not some glorified aspect of american culture. i think one state or a group of people tried to get Eminem censored or banned and many were furious when certain "rap" albums came out. how can it be when most of the people who speak that way, aren't middle class. they're not upper class either so how can that be an ideal? most of america is middle class. both upper and middle class americans look down on that kind of culture, much less way of speaking. let's see. is it not an ideal when most of the people who speak that way come from lower class or poor backgrounds. i think new york city is a great example [and no, this isn't some half assed point of pride. this city is very diverse and that is a fact. it is by no means original insight, before someone out there decides to piss on how much i like it] of this, as it is a very diverse city. the differences in status and culture are glaringly apparent on a day to day basis. on the subway, the people who dress neatly and look professionaly stand apart from those who wear caps, baggy jeans, and timbs. also, nobody talks that way professionally. it is a culture, a street phenomenon, and far from ideal. what you're saying is a complete and utter stretch. not to mention blowing the subject out of context and out of proportion. most of american is conservative. around 70% of america is white, the rest is minority. and in terms of religion, there is also quite a range. i think this thread is blowing out of proportion what is simply a culture phenomenon. ebonics is not a language, obviously. it is also not a vulgar butchery of proper english. americans don't speak proper english to begin with so if you're going to piss on one particular group, piss on the bigger group, the group that encompasses what a smaller group does. the one that doesn't speak proper english to begin with. so if americans don't speak proper english, and african americans are american, then ebonics is a specific derivative of non-proper american english. singling out a narrower kind of english and labeling it as slang is not fair and certainly not accurate. it is not slang. it is the way a certain group speaks. and it evolves very rapidly, as does american english. in a non biased perspective, ebonics is an evolutionary occurence, that's all. it is closely tied with culture, as language and culture go hand and hand. black people have been here from nearly the beginning of this country's history and from there, a dialect or manner of speaking evolved over the course of a few hundred years. ebonics didn't appear overnight, and it is not something that americans marvel and idealize when african americans in this country are treated unequally and often treated unfairly, despite how american they are. so to state that ebonics is a vulgar distortion is also implying that african american culture is also something not to look up to. if they speak something that is so vulgar? how can their culture be held up high? makes no sense. and it is untrue. further more |
||
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Complete™ forever I never thought it would be this clear | Lux [ light-ness@hotmail.com ] |
|||
Reply With Quote |
01-02-2006, 20:19 | #95 | |
Участник
|
Quote:
so very true. In my school they make kids take off rap singer hoodies because it image thats shown by them |
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
you are responsible for what you tame, and the pain |
||
Reply With Quote |
02-02-2006, 18:57 | #96 |
Sad Little Monkey
|
I fail to see how American English wouldn't be considered "proper" English", since it only really differerntiates from it's british counterparts in dialects and some minor grammatical changes. It's still the same language. And no less proper. If anything American accent is closer to the English the way it was spoken originally in the 17th century in England. So it's more british than british itself, which went through a number of changes later on which weren't followed by the colonies - just like french spoken in Quebec resembles ancient french spoken in villages around big cities. To be honest American english is slowly taking over the mantle of the official english from it's British counterparts - which can clearly be witnessed by such things as British english adopting American words and let it's own fade into obscurity (the word "truck" is a good example, where the british word "lorry" not being used as often, even in British english.)
This whole discussion about what is proper or even what deserves to be proper and what doesn't is skewed imo. We need both: we need formal languages to standardize it into a common form and make it mutually understandable, but at the same time we shouldn't put formal langauges on a piedestal, rating them higher than dialects and slang versions of it. Formal langauges are just a tool to be used, nothing more. A useful tool, of course, but still just a tool. Slang versions and numerous dialects on the other hand are a mark of time, history, cultural and political changes. They give a langauge it's real appeal and staying power. |
~~~~~~~~~~~
freddie | TatySite.net t.E.A.m. [ multyman@hotmail.com ] Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. |
|
Reply With Quote |
03-02-2006, 05:36 | #97 |
kis$ it
|
it's not improper english, it is simply not proper. the phonetics are different. slang is drastically different. even if it's a slight deviation from the original language, it is not proper.
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Complete™ forever I never thought it would be this clear | Lux [ light-ness@hotmail.com ] |
|
Reply With Quote |
03-02-2006, 11:29 | #98 | |||||||
The Dream is Over, :~(
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Age: 41
Posts: 682
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Or the sound of a person who had too much to drink. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
With the level of outrage of the "miseducation" of Black people through Ebonics, I'm surprised nobody has even touched upon segregation. If you guys really did care about the Black people in the States where's your outrage over this? Quote:
Ebonics is a dialect that has a grammatical system based in Creole (which is the fixed hybrid of two or more languages). Furthermore the grammatical stucture is similar to the grammatical stucture found in West African languages (Wolof, Twi, Hausa, Yoruba, Dogon, Akan, Kimbundu, Bambara, etc): 1. Present progressive: He runnin (=Standard English "He is running" or "He's running") 2. Present habitual progressive: He be runnin (=SE "He is usually running") 3. Present intensive habitual progressive: He be steady runnin (=SE"He is usually running in an intensive, sustained manner." 4. Present perfect progressive: He bin runnin (=SE "He has been running") 5. Present perfect progressive with remote inception: He BIN runnin (=SE "He has been running for a long time, and still is") "bogus" from Hausa boko, meaning deceit or fraud. "cat" from the Wolof suffix -kat, which denotes a person. "dig" from Wolof dëgg or dëgga, meaning "to understand/appreciate". "hip" from Wolof hipi, meaning "to be aware of what is going on". "honky", a derogatory term for a white person, may come from Wolof xonq, meaning red or pink. For more examples you can check it out here. PS: Not to be a bother but I really don't like the title of this thread. Though I don't like Ebonics being the centre of attention (because really, it seems that anything Black people do is scandalous) clearly it is but this isn't the issue. Saying "Slang, result of ignorance or dialect" is implying that Ebonics is slang and that to say it is a dialect is to be arguing on the fringe. As well, giving the option of stating it is a result of ignorance grossly tips the balance, giving more credit to the argument that it isn't a dialect. So the people arguing for Ebonics have to argue against two things now. I think we were better off with the first title; "Ebonics: Slang or Dialect." |
|||||||
Last edited by PowerPuff Grrl; 03-02-2006 at 12:06. |
||||||||
Reply With Quote |
03-02-2006, 11:59 | #99 | |
kis$ it
|
yes. applause.
Quote:
the origin of africans in this country is an unnatural one. the first americans brought them over out of desire to make profit. most were brought against their will or tricked to be used as living tools in a foreign land that could be discarded. they weren't treated as human beings (and far from it). the nature of african americans and the way they speak has alot to do wtih slavery because of a few things. the africans who first came over differed in culture and language. there was a diverse range of them, as they came from different tribes and areas in africa. since they did not speak the same language, they had to come up with a common way of speaking so they can communicate. because they spoke different things, they derived a common linguistic medium for communication by deriving it from english, the only thing spoken around them. culturally, what emerged had much influence from the different cultures and peoples speaking it. on a larger spectrum, with language on one end and slang on the other, dialect falls somewhere in the middle. language has an official written form, while dialect is not. neither is slang. but take cantonese for example. it is a dialect, despite its complexities. it is derived from chinese and is spoken by a large group of people. ebonics is similar but not quite as established because people confuse it with slang specific to a culture. also, since is it is looked down on, it lacks legitimacy that would otherwise solidify it as an actual dialect. |
|
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Complete™ forever I never thought it would be this clear | Lux [ light-ness@hotmail.com ] |
||
Reply With Quote |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|