schoolhouse rock

[Alia]

Many things we do in America don't make much sense. I feel proud to have stirred up controversy and friction and perhaps made an enemy or two. Go me.

 

What's that word again? Oh yeah.

 

'Adhesive'.

 

"Adhesive".

 

"Adhesive."

 

'Adhesive.'

 

Or maybe it was "sticky stuff."

[DrMcCoy]

having the '.' in the quotes is just totally illogical... and it looks weird as well...

 

and about the 's and the "s, i think i do it like in c, using ' for single characters and " for strings... and the ' and " characters in 's and "s has to be \ed, like "The sign says \"Abyss\"..."

 

...

[RicardoLuigi...]

Well, it makes sense to have the period inside the quotation marks if it's a direct quote from somebody else. Such as:

 

Alia said, "I feel proud to have stirred up controversy and friction and perhaps made an enemy or two."

 

Because the person obviously had to end their sentence, therefore a period is needed only inside the quote, and not on the outside as well, because that would just look plain stupid. However, if you are using quotation marks to use a certain word as a kind of synonym (in a way), or whatever the reason and it isn't a direct quote, then I'd put the period on the outside. It just makes sense that way.

[DrMcCoy]

Originally posted by Das Mole

Alia said, "I feel proud to have stirred up controversy and friction and perhaps made an enemy or two."

[...]a period is needed only inside the quote, and not on the outside as well, because that would just look plain stupid.

 

but it would be logical to have 2 periods because there are two sentences now (one what alia said and one that stated that alia said something)...

[RicardoLuigi...]

yes, but the period is also ending the sentence not in quotes.

 

think about it. you have two options:

 

1. end the sentence

2. don't end the sentence

 

if you don't end the sentence with the quote, you use a comma to continue into the non-quote part, then use a period at the end of the sentence. right? so no matter what, there's a period. the only other option is to end the sentence in a quote, in which case you're really ending the in-quote sentence as well, and therefore you need a period. and since you did not use a comma, that means the sentence is not continued, and the sentence is ended, so therefore it's already implied that the sentence is finished since there is no comma, and thus you don't really need to add another period.

[Mort-Hog]

American English is really a half-arsed attempt at simplifying the English language. In principle, that isn't a bad idea, but American English does such a bad job of it.

 

Let's take the classic example, colour to color.

 

This makes no sense.

 

Phonetically, the word is pronounced kull-eur. The two vowel sounds are not the same, so they should not use the same vowel. Removing the second o would have made more sense.

The 'colour' sound is not like that in 'flour' or 'hour'.

coleur is the most logical.

 

On the other hand, the z thing makes sense. Like in globalisation. You cannot say '-sation' without it making a 'z' sound. Spelling it 'globalization' is a sensible use of the letter 'z'.

 

 

Also, the word green tends to annoy me. The word does not end suddenly as in run, the long vowel sound means that it sort of flows. I think greene would be a far more appropriate spelling, as would screene or spleene, representing how it is not a sudden consonant ending but the vowel sound rather decellerates to a natural end.

 

On the subject of capitalisation, I think it would make sense if all nouns were capitalised. This might cause confusion between nouns and names, but I don't think that'll be a major problem.

The Advantage to capitalising your Nouns is that Sentences are easier to read, especially if they contain several Clauses or Phrases within the Sentence itself, and it would also help Children tell the Difference between Nouns, Verbs, Adjectives and other Sentence Elements. English-speaking Children are very bad at Grammar compared to Children of the same Age speaking other Languages, and Anything would be helpful in improving English-speakers' Grammar. Additionally, it does make your Sentences look like Newspaper Headlines.

 

Hmm. I may think of other Things later.

[RicardoLuigi...]

Also, the word green tends to annoy me. The word does not end suddenly as in run, the long vowel sound means that it sort of flows. I think greene would be a far more appropriate spelling, as would screene or spleene, representing how it is not a sudden consonant ending but the vowel sound rather decellerates to a natural end.

 

i disagree. the point of the two e's in a row is simply to show that it should be a long vowel sound, not necessarily to make it flow. the only case in which you really need a silent e at the end is to make a long vowel sound, and since there is already one due to the two e's, there isn't a need for another e.

 

Phonetically, the word is pronounced kull-eur. The two vowel sounds are not the same, so they should not use the same vowel. Removing the second o would have made more sense.

The 'colour' sound is not like that in 'flour' or 'hour'.

coleur is the most logical.

 

well. i think that the o-u idea is more ridiculous, because think about it. "o-u" makes an "oo" sound, or an "ow", or an "uh" sound. i'm not sure how using an "o-u" can make an "euh" sound, otherwise known as a schwa when writing. i think that using only an "o" makes more sense...but that's just me.

 

and it's fine to have the same vowel make two different sounds in the same word. take, for example, the word:

 

different. the first e makes an "euh" sound, while the second e make an "eh" or an "ih" sound. so? what's the big deal? it makes sense to use the same vowel. they can make different sounds in different words, so why not the same word as well?

[DrMcCoy]

Originally posted by Mort-Hog

Also, the word green tends to annoy me.

 

*shrug* i like green... (but the german wort "grün" look better...)

 

Originally posted by Mort-Hog

On the subject of capitalisation, I think it would make sense if all nouns were capitalised. This might cause confusion between nouns and names, but I don't think that'll be a major problem.

[/b]

 

well, it works in the german language...

 

and about the periods-thing, it still would make more sense to end each sentences with a period...

and das, your post is somewhat confusing this all...

[Mort-Hog]

i disagree. the point of the two e's in a row is simply to show that it should be a long vowel sound, not necessarily to make it flow. the only case in which you really need a silent e at the end is to make a long vowel sound, and since there is already one due to the two e's, there isn't a need for another e.

 

But the word 'green' does flow, that's the point. You don't say "green" and then end it suddenly, like you would "grin", you say "greene" sort of breathing after the n.

There's a difference in the n sound.

Hmm.

This doesn't really transpose well into writing, I don't think there's even a character in the phonetic alphabet to demonstrate this. Perhaps I'll record it sometime.

 

well. i think that the o-u idea is more ridiculous, because think about it. "o-u" makes an "oo" sound, or an "ow", or an "uh" sound. i'm not sure how using an "o-u" can make an "euh" sound, otherwise known as a schwa when writing. i think that using only an "o" makes more sense...but that's just me.

 

and it's fine to have the same vowel make two different sounds in the same word. take, for example, the word:

 

different. the first e makes an "euh" sound, while the second e make an "eh" or an "ih" sound. so? what's the big deal? it makes sense to use the same vowel. they can make different sounds in different words, so why not the same word as well?

 

No, I did say that the second vowel sound in colour really isn't a ou sound, but the two are certainly not the same sound so should not have the same vowel.

Imagine how you'd say or or door and try saying color with the same sound.

It sounds stupid.

colur or coleur make much more sense than either color or colour.

 

As for different. This the real problem this particular word faces is that it's fairly long, and so is prone to colloquial abbreviation and general corruption. Saying diff-rent is quite normal. Even among those that do pronouce the three syllables, it is often diff-uh-rent. It only really modern laziness that has made the second syllable a different sound, as the uh sound is very easy to make.

I think that diff-eh-rent is almost certainly the original correct way of pronouncing this word, although perhaps considered archaic or extraordinarily RP. This pronunciation would have the two e's as the same sound.

 

I think you'll find this effect on many English words, but you probably will find one or two where the same character has been used in a word to represent two different vowel sounds. This is probably because the word has been heavily changed from its etymological root, or might even be a compound of Greek and Latin and morphemes.

 

One thing that does complicate the English language is vowel sounds being made up by adding two vowels together. The ou sound in hour really has nothing to do with either the o or the u sounds individually. The English language really does need to add some new characters to represent these sounds.

 

Changing a language is not impossible to do.

The Chinese government throughout the 60s worked on reforming the Chinese writing system, to make Chinese characters quicker and easier to write, making the character set much more useful for modern purposes.

 

The same could and should be done for the English language, especially if it is to become the official language of the EU. I'm not sure if it will, mind you.

[RicardoLuigi...]

hm. i really can't say anything back to that.

 

i hate you people that can support your facts

 

anyway...i'd have to say i think the only reason that english is so choppy and nonsensical is b/c there aren't really any truly english words invented by the people that speak english (except "quiz"), and other than that it's just a big stew of modified words from lots of other languages. although i must say i love english (not the class) b/c it's so easy to speak and you can talk very fast.

 

however, i'm sure english isn't so easy for people that were raised speaking other languages, because it's the structure doesn't make any sense...

[Joshi]

Originally posted by Das Mole

i hate you people that can support your facts

 

How ironic, I hate people who can't.

[RicardoLuigi...]

how is that ironic at all?

[Mort-Hog]

It would be ironic if he were you.

 

As you are two quite separate people, to my knowledge, it really isn't "ironic" at all. It's just an amusing difference in personality traits.

 

 

Also, what other languages do you speak? I speak Norwegian and German, and I don't really find English any 'faster' than either. Both languages tend to have 'less' words in that many many words are made up by sticking two or three other words together so it is easy to tell what big words actually mean. English is like that but with Latin instead.

 

I think Norwegian is a much 'friendlier' language and English far more 'formal', but I'm not really sure why. I do like æ å ø but I don't think English actually has those sounds anyway.

[Alien426]

English Is A Crazy Language

 

People drive in a parkway and park in a driveway.

 

People recite at a play and play at a recital.

 

Privates eat in the general mess and generals eat in the private mess.

 

A nose runs and feet smell.

 

Reasons To Hate English

[RicardoLuigi...]

Also, what other languages do you speak? I speak Norwegian and German, and I don't really find English any 'faster' than either. Both languages tend to have 'less' words in that many many words are made up by sticking two or three other words together so it is easy to tell what big words actually mean. English is like that but with Latin instead.

 

well, the only other language i know well is french. i can speak it fluently...i mean, i have a great accent. i don't have too broad of a vocabulary, though, so i'll have to study up on some words that i don't know.

 

i tried to begin teaching myself spanish, but lost the will to learn it after about two weeks. i want to learn it, though. finnish as well. maybe chinese. i love speaking in other languages.

 

and as for me saying english is fast...it's really only b/c if i tried to speak another language (besides french), i'd probably speak it slowly, which isn't too big of a surprise. but if you think about it, i've never really heard anyone speak german very quickly or in a hurry. oh. i've got it. what i meant to say was that (i think) english kind of just rolls off your tongue, whereas some languages are a bit choppier. although english is rather choppy. i dunno what i meant. whatever.

 

----

"A nose runs and feet smell."

 

there are multiple meanings for the words "run" and "smell". would it make more sense if i said feet "stink", and your nose "drips"?

 

"People drive in a parkway and park in a driveway."

 

you park in a driveway, b/c there's where you start or stop driving. and you drive in a parkway b/c...parkway is just a word. and you don't drive in a parkway. the last time i checked, isn't a parkway that little bit of lawn past the sidewalk that the village owns?

 

"People recite at a play and play at a recital."

 

okay. so? i quote the merriam-webster dictionary: "1: to repeat verbatim (as something memorized)". so you repeat your memorized lines at a play, and you repeat music you've memorized at a recital, hence the name "recital". i don't see what's so goofy about this one.

 

"Privates eat in the general mess and generals eat in the private mess."

 

don't know anything about the military, nor do i care to know, so i don't have anything to say about this one, cause i don't know about it. although i'm sure there's some common sense to it.