Philosophy Now Forum

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Said by a person who knows nothing about English, history, and language evolution. You should stick to maths.

Not relevant (ad hominems), I'm on point. (btw we've never met so you know next to nothing about me and I'll post what I like as you're no moderator).

PhilX

Just being helpful. Maths is the only time you don't look like a complete moron. I don't join in maths discussions because it's generally not something I feel confident enough to discuss or argue. I don't understand why some people insist on arguing about things they know nothing about. Is it an ego thing?

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:31 am Just being helpful. Maths is the only time you don't look like a complete moron. I don't join in maths discussions because it's generally not something I feel confident enough to discuss or argue. I don't understand why some people insist on arguing about things they know nothing about. Is it an ego thing?

I don't believe you. And you're no judge as to who's a moron and who isn't.

PhilX

Evidence.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:40 am Evidence.

The evidence is all over this forum with your posts.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:50 am It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

What about dropping the silent 'h', why don't US people just spell it..'oner'?

Color? would sound like kolaw...why don't US people use culla?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 12:38 pm

Philosophy Explorer wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:50 am It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

What about dropping the silent 'h', why don't US people just spell it..'oner'?

Color? would sound like kolaw...why don't US people use culla?

I don't speak for the Americans. I merely describe.

PhilX

Just so I don't seem picky, here's another example:

"aluminum (n.)
1812, coined by English chemist Sir Humphry Davy, from alumina, alumine, name given by French chemists late 18c. to aluminum oxide, from Latin alumen "alum" (see alum). Davy originally called it alumium (1808), then amended this to aluminum, which remains the U.S. word, but British editors in 1812 further amended it to aluminium, the modern preferred British form, to better harmonize with other metallic element names (sodium, potassium, etc.)."

The British seem to love those extra letters to waste their ink on. If you think it's worth it to have extra letters to harmonize or whatever your reason is, by all means do so, but it doesn't sound too logical to me.

PhilX

It's called history. It makes language so much more interesting. And what about the stupid extra words yanks add--like 'of'? 'Off of'. Or the extra letters in the hideous 'gotten'? Dumbing down has only served to make it uglier and more confusing.
By the way, it's called aluminium. There was no reason to drop the 'i'. 'ium' was the logical choice. You are just being arrogant wankers.
As for 'harmonize', why not 'wize', or 'exercize'? 'Exursiz'? 'Wizdim' anyone? I hav too 'ize'?

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:18 pm It's called history. It makes language so much more interesting. And what about the stupid extra words yanks add--like 'of'? 'Off of'. Or the extra letters in the hideous 'gotten'? Dumbing down has only served to make it uglier and more confusing.
By the way, it's called aluminium. There was no reason to drop the 'i'. 'ium' was the logical choice. You are just being arrogant wankers.
As for 'harmonize', why not 'wize', or 'exercize'? 'Exursiz'? 'Wizdim' anyone? I hav too 'ize'?

You haven't read the article about aluminium and the British. It was Americans who called the metal aluminum
and some fool British who decided to add the i to harmonize it with potassium so you got your history backwards. And if I do enough research with the British, I'm sure I'll find plenty of other illogical examples.

PhilX

Of course it wouldn't be from a yank website then.

And what about the digital date format and the way the US refuses to conform to the rest of the planet, causing mass confusion and even dangerous errors? Of course, the rest of the planet is expected to change and cow-tow to the big arrogant bully on the block. Imagine if the incompetents in your secret services had received information that there was definitely going to be an attack on those two buildings on 11/9/2000 (or whenever it was). The fools would have been a couple of months too late. Hmm. Perhaps that's exactly what happened.......
Btw, who else but an American would post their flag on every comment? What a brain-washed dipshit. It's a piece of cloth. Do you think it has magical powers or something? You are every politician's dream. As malleable as dog droppings.

Just think how dumb the people in New Zealand are? They say "yank this and yank that" without even knowing that Americans are not yanks, as many southern Americans would beat the snot out of some Kiwi mouthing off about Americans being "yanks." I would love to see a Kiwi last even a weekend in the American south with their "yank" bullshit.

It sounds a lot like 'wank', which is appropriate.