I’ve had lots of students groan when I give them a song in German, because “German is ugly”. I’m pretty convinced that most Americans get their sense of German from Nazi movies.
I also had one student who outright refused to sing in German because Nazis.
I think girls speaking French are sexy. I realize I’m guilty of something for feeling that way, but what the hell, it’s sexy.
These must be the same people who learn a foreign language in high school, visit a country where that language is spoken, and complain that they can’t understand the locals because “everyone talks SOOOO FAST!”
You’re guilty of being Gomez Addams. 
A Nazi language? You mean there are others?
I’ve told people that Portuguese is like slightly drunken Spanish. Is that derogatory? Coincidentally, I speak it better when I’ve had a couple.
Wow, that latter, I have never heard… but I would translate that Spanish phrase as ‘‘The window was broken.’’ I don’t really think reflexive verbs are meant to eschew personal responsibility.
“I put myself into anger!” snarled the irate Frenchman.
Blame Charles V:
“I speak Spanish to God, Italian to Women, French to Men, and German to my Horse.”
You must find Russell Peters on Youtube talking about Spanish versus Portuguese.
My son watched this routine at a friend’s house. The dad is from Venezuela and just about died laughing. I’d provide a link, but can’t from here. I’m sure it’s there though.
I recall a linguistics course I took, there is research that suggests that the way of phrasing cause/effect in a language can affect how people think about them. However, IIRC, the verdict actually came down that languages that by their nature don’t rely on a causative object like a person tend to influence people to be more diplomatic and less prone to scapegoating.
People who speak English are more like to want to know what was the cause of the window breaking, and then assign blame and punishment. People who speak languages where the phrasing is closer to “The window broke” tend to simply want it fixed, without really caring about culpability.
The research isn’t conclusive, of course, and the degree to which language affects thoughts is very contentious (especially because it’s been used for discrimination in the past!), but some research suggests in this case it can. Another case is directions, some languages don’t have relative directions, only words for things like N S E W. People who speak these languages tend to have preternatural senses of cardinal directions. You can lead them into a dark room and they can tell you if they’re facing North with reasonable certainty.
That’s pretty awesome** Jragon**.
[QUOTE=Jragon]
I recall a linguistics course I took, there is research that suggests that the way of phrasing cause/effect in a language can affect how people think about them. However, IIRC, the verdict actually came down that languages that by their nature don’t rely on a causative object like a person tend to influence people to be more diplomatic and less prone to scapegoating.
[/QUOTE]
So I’m wondering honestly if Spanish would apply in this case, because while you can say
La ventana se rompió.
‘‘The window broke.’’
You can also say
Mi madre rompió la ventana.
‘‘My mother broke the window.’’
These are arguably both constructions in English and Spanish. I’m not sure how something would need to linguistically differ to qualify as ‘’‘not relying on a causative object.’’
Curious.
So do boy scouts. The question is are speakers of Guugu Yimithirr good at directions because language shapes thought or are they good at directions because they had to practice knowing where north was all the time.
This seems like hair splitting to me. Their language directly put them in a situation where they could not reasonably function if they didn’t learn how to easily tell cardinal directions. Of course the sounds of the language percolating in their heads didn’t voodoo their brains so they magically knew cardinal directions. That sort of linguistic impetus seems to be effectively equivalent to “shaping their thoughts”.
E: I suppose the difference is. If you want to explain where something is to them, they consider a cardinal direction to be necessary information, whereas I don’t. I’d say changing the relative value of a given piece of information is “shaping thoughts”.
German can be poetic. I like how they make words. A made up example: Damn washbears* got into the doublemanufacturedcontainersbox again. I shootsprayed them away with a handenblastenwaterrifle.
*That one’s real.
Meanwhile “sexy” French is all nasals and phlegmy "R"s.
I have heard more than once that Danish is drunken Norwegian.
I think it’s simply which is the default. All languages are going to have some way of describing something that’s functionally equivalent to a transitive construction.
Sorry. All the rape stuff has just burned right through my backup stores of outrage. I don’t have any left for language prejudice. Maybe next week.
No.
That’s nice.
Meh. It’s all Darmoks and Jalads to me.