Sunday, November 01, 2009

Don't Send a Lit Prof to Do a Scholar's Job

I just read by one an article arguing that the rise of English as a singular world language would be, on the whole not such a bad thing, and really more convenient for everyone because English is so easy to learn. The article was written by John McWhorter, an English literature professor ostensibly trained as a linguist, but his arguments are not those made by any linguist I've ever heard. He argues that the idea of cultures and/or ways of thinking being embedded is weakly if at all supported by simplifying the notion to homophones and phonology. He argues that black English is more quantifiably more different from standard English than any other variety. He argues that English doesn't have hard sounds for learners to get a handle on.

None of these are tenable arguments in the slightest but the last is the easiest to refute:

2 Comments:

Anonymous Bill Chapman said...

The case for Esperanto (mentioned by the Lit Prof in passing) is that it does not have native speakers (or at least has only very few) and was designed, unlike English, for international communication.

I’ve used it for many years with people from all over the world. I recommend its wider use.

English does indeed have hard sounds for non-native speakers. I spent a year teaching English in Bordeaux, and failed to gt intelligent and well-motivated people there to say 'th' as in 'the' or 'th' as in 'teeth' correctly.

3:01 AM  
Blogger Mike said...

Indeed, I'm personally a believer in Esperanto as an auxiliary language. I have no problem in general with a widely bilingual world. I'm even aware of the positive arguments against active language preservation in general. I just couldn't see the value of what this particular writer was saying.

9:43 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home