Whether or not English has close neighbours is IMHO irrelevant, I’ve had far more difficult to learn Norwegian than I had learning English, this was because there’s lots of words that are similar in Swedish and Norwegian so it isn’t always obvious which words to use. I can’t give you any clear pointers as my linguistic perspective is different from yours, but when looking for easy you need to look at gramatical structure and proununciation rules. For someone who’s fluent in Swedish, English is probably the easiest language to learn, though I’m not going to claim that the opposite applies.
Shoot. I had hoped that some of you who have been educated, more or less, in the last twenty years, would have put aside your silly egos and then contributed to a packaged , worn, but high sounding, original thought. A simple but orginal thought that might have have advanced this discussion.
In vain.
Life goes on…and on…and on…and then stops.
Merry Christmas to you who have dreams and aspirations.
Poor, poor original thinker. How do you get through your days?
In my experience Swedish is one of the easiest languages for a native English speaker. I have also studied some French, Spanish, and a little bit of Latin. Swedish seems easy to me mainly because words, and their order within a sentence, are (is?) much more like english than words in French etc. Swedish is also easy because it has such a simple grammar, particularly verbs. I think the same would also apply to Norwegian or Danish. I only know a little Swedish though, so there may be more complicated elements to the grammar that I just haven’t come accross yet.
In my view the optimal language would have the Italian resonance, but improve it by adding the German transparent grammatical rules, Icelandic number of characters (10 extra) and closeness to written word and and Spanish simplicity.
Too bad you cant stop Italians from speaking it, because they emphasise their speech in a way that makes them sound like they are arguing all the time. Gets tired quickly.
French and German have too many guttural sounds to sound good and the French spit also when speaking. English never sounds good except when sexy young French girls speak it. Icelandic is superior when describing bad wheather 
No, Swedish grammar is fairly simple all the way. From what I’ve been told (no cites), what is really bothersome about Swedish is pronounciations and getting to understand the Swedish way of thinking, since we’re all more or less completely nuts.
I’ve found Chinese grammar to be hella simple. No verb tense to speak of, no gender-specifics.
Its hell to learn to read and write the language though.
Drat. I would have gotten away with my appeal to authority if it wasn’t for you meddling kids.
Your devastating rebuttal to all of the aforementioned posts has been reviewed and noted.
In any case, is your “objection” (if one may call it that) simply that you believe that a language can be superior to another? Or, rather, that you feel that academics are so spineless that they secretly know which languages are superior but refuse to tell anyone for fear of reprisal from the members of the Committee for Language Equality?
The problem isn’t the construction of this, but its unambiguous application due to the intricacies of human communication. If we borrow from Wittgenstein and suggest that the meaning of words are their use then we gain a different perspective than one where words simply signify. We have symbolic logic for expressing relationships without signifying anything.
What you seem to suggest is the acceptance of a meta-language that would allow us to indicate whether what we are about to say should be interpreted in one sense or another, with varying levels of ambiguity. But we already have this simply by referring to a context. Pigdins, colloquial speech, formal speech, mathematics, logic, philosophy, poetry, and so on. To a large extent, spoken English can indicate contexts as I dare say all languages can.
Then, I suppose, the question becomes whether we can lump them all together somehow to create a master language. And I guess my question is: suppose so—how would this make it a superior language? Doesn’t it do the same things we can already do?
IOW: there is no lack to fill, so there is no way to be superior.
I find it sadly amusing that someone who seems to believe that English is the supreme tool for clear and concise communication has so little skill in writing it either clearly or concisely… .
In plain language, please: What is your thesis, and how do you support it?
I’m going to take a stab at it…
What you seem to be trying to say, in your ham-fisted way, is that the proper measure of whether a language is “superior” or not is whether or not it gives a competitive advantage to those who speak it.
If I’ve guessed correctly, please elaborate: What evidence do you have that language is a significant factor in disparities of power between different cultures? And what specific features of a lauguage make it more competitive?
Not quite, ** Pochacco**, what I think I seem to be saying in my ham fisted way is that the question - “Is any language supreme?” is illogical in its construct except in casual applications that are not the subject of this thread. Damn it to hell, I curse my ineptness. All I want is to have everyone singing the same tune. I didn’t make up the tune. The tune just is. But it is like pulling hen’s teeth getting anyone here to admit that they sing it. Maybe it is this damn southern english language that I seem doomed to write, and sadly, you people don’t have the southern english eyes to hear.
Bullshit. The question that must first be asked is…** What is Language?**
This question is important to me. It is more important to me than in not being considered a damn fool by other fools , so in my artless, assuming, and ever- hopeful manner, I will once again try to transfer this bit of basic language information by using the english language which is the very language that I think is best.
As follows…
*** Go look in a mirror. See the reflection of ten trillion cells looking back? They are talking to each other chemo-electrically and probably enjoy their chats.
*** You are in the jungle. An ant army of ten million ants is on the march , devouring everything in its path. You are in the path so you don’t stop and count the ants. It is best that you consider the army ant mass as a single entinity, a giant black crawling amoeba with black deadly arms reaching out for food.
*** Bees are dumb. They have no brains and can hardly talk. They do math by way of dances and find their way about by means of visual signals and touch and smell. But the hive is smart, hives have been around since flowers. You don’t study the bee you study the hive.
*** Football players are dumb. They have no brains and can hardly talk. But they have pre-arranged plays and agree to the rules of playing. Most times the team that wins has the best plans. The team is the thing, not the players.
*** France was once infatuated with The United States of America. She gave him a magnificent statue, a symbol of her love. America saved her from the huns in two wars. But France became fickle, then bitter. She proved to be a bitch.
It is the culture that fights wars and wins hearts and establishes the rules of playing. In this context individual human beings are meaningless, except as compotents of the cultural group. And therefore language is only the bee dances and scent trails and agreed upon rules, that unite many animals into one. Language is only a conveyance, a pipeline, and only has use in the facilitation of the the exchage of the ideas that are found to be valuable by the culture.
Language is inextractably bound to the culture that makes use of it. And by itself, language is inert, just a vehicle, and and can’t be considered “supreme” .
But in today’s world western culture is “supreme” and so by extention, the english language is “supreme”, and it should be addressed as such until further notice.
In other words, Milum, “better” as a method of evaluating languages simple means “spoken by more people”?
I must be to dumb to understand Milum’s reasoning. I couldnt even extract Erislovers Summary.
Doesn’t that leave us with Mandarin as top dog?
http://www.soyouwanna.com/site/toptens/languages/languages4.html
There seems to be some confusion here which I would like to address.
The OP asked for linguistic data which would support the notion of a superior (as in “better”) language. As noted by many of the previous posters, there is none. Zip. Zilch. Nada. End of discussion.
Milum, from your posts you appear to be arguing for the superiority of English based on the dominance of “western culture.” This is another question, and thread, entirely from the question raised in the OP. One can argue for the current dominance of English and the rise of western culture and the shift from Latin to French to English (and soon to Mandarin :)) as the lingua franca but this is not an arguement that has any basis, or support, in Linguistics.
My apologies Milum if I have misrepresented your thesis. It seemed like we were talking about apples and oranges and some clarification was in order.
Hi there! I’m completely fluent in Japanese and a native speaker of English. I’ve also dabbled in Spanish, French, German, Vietnamese, and Chinese.
I half-agree with much that has been posted. There is no one language superior to all others, that’s true. That doesn’t mean that one language can’t be superior in many ways to another.
I would say that French just sounds fundamentally prettier than Mandarin Chinese, but I’d also say that Mandarin Chinese is a pretty “cool-sounding” language. Cantonese is even better. The Chinese writing system is the most interesting and lovely that man has ever created, but for practically it’s fucked (and the reformed characters are purely barbaric). Spanish has probably the most rational and easy-to-use writing system.
One big dividing line between languages is whether a language is a literary language or not. Many languages did not have writing systems until the 19th or 20th century–they have no literature, at least no classics. For that reason, I would say that a language like Burmese cannot equal one like English.
Further, some languages, again like Burmese, are not used for higher education or for technical work.
So you see, as many posters have pointed out, you can compare parts and pieces, and sometimes one language is better than another. But what about one whole language compared to another?
Let’s compare English and Japanese, the two I know best. I can say with a high degree of confidence that English is superior in almost every way, and I’m prepared to demonstrate my case with examples.
Historical integrity
Shakespeare, even with the original spelling, is comprehensible to the average educated adult–writing that’s over 400 years old. Heck, even Chaucer isn’t too bad. But a Swift essay, still about 400 years old, is as good as modern English, pretty much.
The point being that the average literate person has easy access to the classics of the language. The biggest change was a unification/rationalization of spelling that occurred in the 17th century.
Further, English is spoken in many countries, and aside from the accents in the movie Trainspotting is readily comprehensible to all.
Japanese is far from having the same integrity over time. The writing system changed after WWII, so any pre-war book document is a little a funky to read. (For those curious, certain kanji [Chinese characters] were simplified or substituted, and the way kana [more like an alphabet] were used was changed.)
There were many upheavels in the use of Japanese in the 19th century. Basically, the literary form of the language–a very beautiful and efficient way of writing–was thrown in the trash can. So anything written in that form is pretty much out of bounds for the average Japanese person. (Add to that the fact that much Japanese lit in the Edo period [1603 to 1867] was written in kanbun, a kind of imitation Chinese–it’s written like Chinese but deciphered and read like Chinese. The number of Japanese who can read this fluently probably numbers only in the hundreds).
As one goes back in time, the literature actually becomes easier to read, due to the fact that very little Chinese vocabulary is used. But unless the modern writing system is used, it is pretty much unreadable for anyone but a scholar.
Consistency in the modern form
English within a country and around the world tends to be quite consistent. Certainly, different styles are used–a medical text does not read like a fashion mag–but it’s all pretty much together.
OK, there are some difficulties, owing the wide variety of places in which English is spoken. The aforementioned Scottish slang or Ebonics would be tough for a foreigner. But there is a good consistency in the literary form.
Japanese is a rough road in this regard. The slang used in manga is not how people really talk. The Japanese of song lyrics is different from the spoken language. The Japanese of newspapers is much different from that of the weekly magazines. Further, there is another big difference with English, one that requires especial emphasis here. It is a kind of “rule” in English, one that is sometimes taken to extremes, that any word can be used in conversation; moreover, one should speak “correctly,” almost as one would write. Not so in Japanese! There is a wide divide between the spoken and written languages, and this is consciously acknowledged. One frustrating thing about learning Japanese, is that you learn all these words but are not “allowed” to use them in conversation.
Another important point. Japanese slang changes at a rate nearly incomprehensible to an English speaker. Further, slang is built in tiny pockets all over the country: gangster slang, schoolgirl slang, manga slang, etc. For this reason, any pop culture product is dated within years, if not months.
Writing system
The English writing system is rightly criticized for inconsistency in spelling. Further, you pretty much have to memorize the accent of every word (since there are no accent marks). Even so, it is not too terrible to learn. Further, one of the virtues of the system is its clean look: like Dutch, English uses almost no accent marks or other doodads.
Of course, the Japanese writing system is a nightmare to learn. There are many less characters to learn than in Chinese, but the burden of memorization is nearly as great, since one character can have several Japanese and Chinese readings. For example, the character “to live” (¶) can be read (Japanese) ikiru (you may know a movie of this title), ikeru, nama, ki, and (Chinese) shou, sei, probably more. In Chinese itself, a character usually has at most two readings, often just one.
Certainly, this system has some appeal to it. It is a genuinely satisfying accomplishment to learn it. But the lack of historical integrity (simplified characters, etc.) takes some of the shine off the apple. How often I wish I’d applied those years of study to learning Chinese instead–in terms of writing system, it is the “real deal.”
My conclusion here is that neato-ness of the Japanese writing system is outweighed by the burden of memorization. English wins again.
Sound system
English has one of the richest sound systems in the world. The number of vowels is especially high. I would say that English is both beautiful and cool-sounding, which is a nice combo.
Japanese has a very simple sound system. Japanese is only moderately beautiful and cool-sounding. It isn’t bad, however. The problem, however, is that the simple sound system makes for lots of homophones, which saps a lot of the sound-variety of the language.
In terms of sound system, few languages are as good as English. It truly is a great language in that regard.
Junkiness
The English of the 21st century is good, solid stuff. Many new words continue to enter the vocabulary, but English almost always does a good job. “Internet” sounds like English. Further, there always seems to be a genuine English word to do the job.
Further, when English borrows a word from a foreign language, its rich, complex sound system does a good job of accomodating that word. For example, “naive” and “role” are French words imported rather recently, but they do not sound out-of-place or particularly foreign.
Japanese must be one of the most junkified languages in the world. Because of its lack of historical integrity, its grammer is a hodgepodge of old and new, truly a Frankenstein’s monster of a language. Further, because the literary language was scrapped over a hundred years ago, Japan has no good form for use in hard, formal writing. Yes, there is a style used in textbooks and quasi-high-lit, but the forms used therein are pretty darn close to an artificial language.
Because of its limited sound system, any European word imported to Japanese sticks out like a sore thumb. Further, many truly junky words are now standard Japanese. E.g., “personal computer” was imported to Japanese and soon shorted to “pasokon.” That’s just ugly. Efficient, yes, but hideous. There is a further problem here. In English, when a word is invented, the parts can be used separately. “Personal” makes sense; “computer” makes sense. But in Japanese, neither “personal” nor “computer” can be used by itself. New words enter the language, but they cannot be used fluidly.
Much more can be said about the junkiness of modern Japanese. For example, it is pretty much impossible to write poetry with it. Haiku and waka depended upon the rich, complex, and compact grammar of the old literary language.
Vocabulary
English is widely said to have the biggest and richest vocabulary in the world. In any event, it has nothing to be ashamed of in that department.
Japanese also has a large vocabulary, but a lot of it is imported from Chinese, thereby skewing the content thereof toward the old and literary. In other words, there are a lot of words to learn, but a lot of them are not for use in conversation.
At the same time, Japanese is lacking in many words an English speaker would consider basic. The word for zero in Japanese is borrowed from English: “zero” (the word “rei” is much less used). English words are quite often used for the colors “pink” and “orange.” I saw a segment on TV once in which hardware store proprietors were asked what an object is called, that object being a toilet plunger. There is no word for this in Japanese! (The hardware guys either used a brand name or their own private colloquialism.) There is no word in Japanese for “drinking fountain”! Etc. etc.
Usability
Little need be said about the usability of English. It is pretty much becoming the lingua franca of the globe.
Because of Japan’s high population (though decreasing!), Japanese is actually a top-ten lanugage in terms of users. One reason to study Japanese is the fact that people here are horrible with languages, and you can actually use it to sell yourself in business. I would advise, however, someone to study Mandarin at this point. Overall, it’s a better language, you get better and easier access to more literature, and it will probably be a better sell in the future.
There’s plenty to bitch about when it comes to Japanese, and for the reasons stated above I think English is superior in nearly every way. Still, I like Japanese. On the modern, literary level it is garbage, but on the colloquial level it is fun and snappy. Since I’m a poet, I have access to Japanese classical poetry in the original, which I allow is the best ever written in any language. So I have few regrets. Still, if I could do it over, I’d go for Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese).
How about difficulty level? I’ll make it simple: Japanese is hard to start but easy enough to master. The grammar isn’t really all that tough, and it isn’t a very nuanced language in terms of expression. English is the opposite: it’s easy to start, almost impossible to master for a non-native.
What other languages do I think are good? Spanish is a great language. I don’t know why it has a rep as an “easy” lanugage. The grammar is tough as hell. But Spanish is a sleek, efficient, and beautiful language. You get access to a fantastic body of literature. And in terms of usability it is 2nd-best in the world, almost an equal of English. My guess is that the US will eventually become a dual-language country. In some parts of the country, you pretty much already have to know Spanish already.
What’s frustrating about certain Euro-tongues is that you get very little payoff for learning the complex grammar–unlike Spanish. For example, in French you can’t even use the plain past tense in daily conversation, but you need to memorize it for literature. Etc. etc.
My 2c!
Merry Christmas Aeschines, excellent post , amazing in it’s brevity and scope. I could have written if myself if I had had your experiences and your ability to think deeply and write clear thoughts. You must be at least ninty years old and in the ninty-fifth grade to be so smart. Thank you for your post.
Uh…Aeshines, may I ask you a little favor? There are three things that I’ve always wanted to know concerning comparative languages. Do you mind…???
(1) The French translations of Edgar Allen Poe poems in the early nineteenth century were widely acclaimed in France, in particular, The Raven and The Bells. Yet Poe’s forte was meter, storyline and rhyme.
How could these qualities be transfered to the French from the English to the extent that those who spoke both languages could honestly say that the French translation was best?
(2) How closely do abstract words of social cohesion (thefore values) match in “meaning” in languages that are not closely related?
For example, what word in Japanese has the same meaning as the English denote of "romantic love? Etc.
(3) Does the make-up of the German language force its speakers to grimace when they talk and therefore makes them ill-tempered.
Or are the Germans by nature just mean people who enjoy their guttural grunts? ( I am half, but only half, kidding.)
Thank you.
Dialog with Milum
You must be at least ninty years old and in the ninty-fifth grade to be so smart. Thank you for your post.
Thanks, but I’m just 32, and my highest degree is Master of Science.
(1) The French translations of Edgar Allen Poe poems in the early nineteenth century were widely acclaimed in France, in particular, The Raven and The Bells. Yet Poe’s forte was meter, storyline and rhyme.
How could these qualities be transfered to the French from the English to the extent that those who spoke both languages could honestly say that the French translation was best?
Are you saying that the French readers thought the French translation to be better than the original?
I have never investigated this case, nor do I know much about translating English poetry into French. However, meter, I should think, would not be much of an issue, since French metter is pretty much syllabic, owing to the lack of distinct accents in words (last syllable, right?). I would further speculate that the euphony of the French language would well accomodate Poe’s particular style.
(2) How closely do abstract words of social cohesion (thefore values) match in “meaning” in languages that are not closely related?
For example, what word in Japanese has the same meaning as the English denote of "romantic love? Etc.
Well, in French and English there are so many cognates, that it’s quite likely to be the same word in many cases: civiliazation, civilization, society, societie, etc. Or something we would recognize easily: love, amour, etc.
Japanese is a totally different language without any cognates whatsoever. Love is “ai,” romantic love is matched pretty well by “koi,” “sexual love” by “iro,” etc.
But there has been so much culturual influence on Japan, and many words have been borrowed directly, or words invented with the express purpose of serving as translations of European words. So now in Japan you have words like “rabu,” “rabu-rabu” (indicating a kind of puppy-love/new love state), “romansu.” Further, the concepts of Western-style “romantic love” are understood from movies and whatnot, and these concepts can be expressed in Japanese terms that might not have originally served that purpose. It’s impossible to sort out what is what.
(3) Does the make-up of the German language force its speakers to grimace when they talk and therefore makes them ill-tempered.
Or are the Germans by nature just mean people who enjoy their guttural grunts? ( I am half, but only half, kidding.)
Language abosolutely, absolutely has a big influence on facial expressions and the facial muscles that get developed. That’s one reason, I think, that white foreigners rarely look like white Americans (even when clothing and hairstyle is the same). But there’s a big cultural component, too. Again, how do you sort it all out?
Thank you.
“I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men, and German to my horses.”
–Charles V
I actually think German is the coolest sounding language I speak. Italian is prettier (I cant speak Italian though). Russian beats them both and that is the language Im going for. To bad my ex Russian girlfriend ditched me for a 50 year old millionaire (half true) or I would be speaking it fluently by now.
OT: My grandfather was visited by the Icelandic national museum. They talked to him for days trying to record his dialect which is almost extinct. Really made his day