Language is a tool for us to express ourselves to others, and also to express our own thoughts to ourselves. It serves for communication, entertainment and philosophy (which includes science). Its important role in society suggests that by improving language, we could perhaps bring significant changes to the whole of society. The differences may be subtle, but if language is the frameworks of our minds, then an improvement in language will be an improvement in how we perceive ourselves, society and the natural world.

And how could we improve language? I perceive several fronts:

* Vocabulary: Being able to describe a greater variety of nuances (differences) between similar things (helped with a language that is structured in a way that is more in-line with how our memory functions; a different organization would allow us to retain more words with as much effort)..
* Efficiency: Being able to describe the same things in less time (tone language achieve this to some degree; it is possible to make more uses of small words, or remove, like in Hebrew, vowels frm wrttn lngg; we can also rely more on homophones that can be interpreted based on context).
* Aesthetics: Being able to stylize, or personalize, our choice of words, the order we put them in, the way we pronounce them etc so as to distinguish ourselves from others, to add a certain voice or emotion to something such as “This is a beautiful bicycle”, to inspire emotions in others based on our use of words (fear, laughter etc).
* Clarity: Being free of those moments of confusion, such as when we use homophones (the meaning should always be recognized), new words (a logical etymology which allows us to construct new words while still being understood) etc etc.
* Simplicity: Being able to learn and master the language with ease both as a child (being raised with the language) and an adult (being introduced to this new language). This includes similarity between written and oral language, a short alphabet etc.

These categories are somewhat arbitrary and will contain many sub-categories that will certainly overlap. However, the fact remains that we language can be improved on several fonts. But as anyone can guess, it is not possible for a language to have everything in every way. For example, homophones can be put to use in amusing others, but it is also a source of confusion. Is the pleasure gained from the entertainment homophones provide better than pain caused by the confusion that homophones cause? Eye dew knot no.

What about simplicity? If the language is, beyond a doubt, an advancement, then it could be taught in school. However, older generations may never learn it, as it is much more difficult to learn languages as an adult (save for those with practice or/and an innate aptitude for languages). Still, it is good to keep in mind that, though it is easier to learn a language as a child and quite easy to master it for general use, it is not so easy to master the language if one is to put it to creative ends, or even write while (almost) never making any mistakes.

I speak French and English at native-level. French derives from Latin, while English from Germanic; English has, however, incorporated much of French due to the influence of the Normans (if I recall, French has like 4% English words, while English has 24% French words). These two languages are similar enough to compare, yet different enough to distinguish. What differences do I perceive in terms of better/worst?

There’s no absolutely clear difference for me. Well, French is quite clearly more difficult to learn, particular due to the differences between how words are said and how they are pronounced, as well as how in French there is a greater difference in style between oral and written language (my autistic cousin, interestingly, speaks in a way that is more similar to the way we write than normal people do).

In French, due to the differences in verbs, there are more ways for me to say the same thing. Wait, I don’t mean say: I mean write. When speaking, the options are pretty limited, but when writing, the same book can be written in different style and there are more options than in English.

Another difference is the number of words it takes to say the same thing. Though on the lower-scale of things it is not always obvious and in some respects French is more concise (such as when describing actions with verbs), overall I am quite sure that a French language book would be thicker than the English translation.

Though French exceeds in terms of its system of verbs, English has a larger base of vocabulary since it has been quite open to new words. This is not an inherent flaw with French, but one that has been imposed by culture.

Some people say that French is more complex (profound or capricious), while English is more simple (shallow or malleable). Is one better than the other? Impossible to say. I prefer English, but this is perhaps because, due to the internet and some other external factors, I am only comfortable when writing in English. With French, I worry far too much about making mistakes and I am unable to put the language’s assets to much use. Though I could, in theory, have learned to better master French, the simple fact of the matter is that, even though teachers have tried hard, I am not good at French and I suspect that, though I’m low in terms of average, the average is low in terms of what is ideal. Thus, if we are to have a new, constructed language, it would ideally have to be mastered by all children who are taught it: this alone would be quite an advancement even if the language is no better in other respects, since very few people master their language. A brief look around the internet will reveal that, at best, most people find that writing even the simplest things takes too much effort. They know how to write it, but they find it too hard.

Now, to return to the idea of forming a new language. I believe that there are two ways to advance language: to create new ones or to implement radical changes within existing languages. Created languages can come from nothing (the most “perfect”), or old languages (the easiest to design as well as to teach). I am not sure if I rather see a new language, superior to all others, or if I rather see English (and other languages) improved. Since many have an emotional tie to their language — which is one of the defining factors in nationalism –, I suspect that few will like like the idea of their language being rendered obsolete, and even fewer will like the idea of a world with only one language (unless it’s their own language).

-Dussault

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Name

Mail (will not be published)

Website