# Things that the English language desperately needs **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 21, 2011, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508 "2011-01-21T22:53:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/41 "2011-01-23T20:59:37Z")
> [@norinew](#): > > It’s not that it’s anyone else’s ‘business’, it’s just a matter of degrees, for those who I wish to forward the information to. > > For instance, before my hubby and I got married, we had been together, as a couple, for four years, and had a daughter, who was almost a year and a half old. Once, before the marriage, we were planning a long weekend getaway. The person at the hotel we wanted said to him “So, it’s just you?” > He said “No, it’s me and my wife” (we were leaving our daughter with my mother) > > Well, I _wasn’t_ his wife. But ‘girlfriend’ sounds awfully juvenile, as I’ve previously stated. What else is he going to say? “Baby-Mama”? I suppose he could’ve gone with “No, I’ll be staying with Ms. Norinew.” If the hotel person demands to know anything further about your relationship, he could reply, “That just cut your tip by 25%. Each additional nosy question will be an additional 25% off.” ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/42 "2011-01-23T21:24:02Z")
Boyfriend and girlfriend sound ageless to me. I see no reason to come up with a new word when they’re sitting there begging to be lifted out of high school and into the realm of adulthood. I, personally, am working on making -sexual happen. Boysexual is so much less wordage than gay men and straight women and the reverse is true for girlsexual. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/43 "2011-01-23T21:38:03Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > If it matters, and it rarely does, I ask. Yeah, it’s a super-no-big-deal, barely enough even to, y’know, discuss on a messageboard. I tend not to ask because I’m socially awkward and get paranoid about being perceived as clueless, so I remain clueless instead. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/44 "2011-01-23T21:52:00Z")
Dude, just ask and if they get weird or snippy, blame it on ‘pregnancy brain’ and walk away. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/45 "2011-01-23T22:01:25Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Yeah, it’s a super-no-big-deal, barely enough even to, y’know, discuss on a messageboard. I tend not to ask because I’m socially awkward and get paranoid about being perceived as clueless, so I remain clueless instead. Ah. Well, if it helps, phrase the question to acknowledge your cluelessness. Just say something like, “Oh, you probably said and I’ve forgotten already, is John your business partner?” Actually, the “You’ve probably said and I’ve forgotten already” gambit is an excellent one for asking all sorts of questions. I’m always ready to admit to cluelessness. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Mops](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mops/32/16494_2.png) [@Mops](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mops)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2011, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/46 "2011-01-23T22:37:07Z")
As a user of English as a foreign language one thing that has sometimes had me raise my hackles by mistake is the use of ‘you’ not only in a personal but also in an impersonal sense. Personal ‘you’: referring to the person you are adressing e.g. ‘If you come tomorrow, be sure to bring pie’. Impersonal ‘you’: speaking in the abstract e.g. ‘If you commit _(heinous crime)_ chances are you won’t get way with it’. Whether the personal or the impersonal ‘you’ is meant seems to be entirely depending on context, so there are bound to be misunderstandings, particularly with people whose first language does not use the impersonal ‘you’. For example, if you spoke to me using a literal translation of my second example above into German, I’d take it as a personal attack. Curiously enough English does have a perfectly serviceable impersonal construction equivalent to e.g. German _man_ or French _on_: ‘If one commits _(heinous crime)_ chances are one won’t get way with it’. Only, its use seems to be confined to a certain kind of pretentious (mostly, ficticious) persona. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2011, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/47 "2011-01-24T03:49:25Z")
> [@Mops](#): > > Curiously enough English does have a perfectly serviceable impersonal construction equivalent to e.g. German _man_ or French _on_: ‘If one commits _(heinous crime)_ chances are one won’t get way with it’. Only, its use seems to be confined to a certain kind of pretentious (mostly, ficticious) persona. I hope I’m not regarded as pretentious. It was actually my study of German those many years ago that encouraged me to use the “one” construct much more than the average American. Not in casual, conversational speech, though. \<- In informal situations I even use sentence fragments. ---
**Author:** ![Snickers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@Snickers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snickers)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/48 "2011-01-24T17:42:05Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > You’d prefer us having to say thinks like “I will wheaton tomorrow”? You spelled it wrong. Should be “I wil wheaton tomorrow.” ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2011, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/49 "2011-01-24T20:07:48Z")
I think the English language needs counting words, like what Chinese uses. Specifically, English should use a separate counting word for each variety of object (flat round things, cylindrical things, animals, bottles, people, etc.) ---
**Author:** ![zamboniracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/50 "2011-01-24T20:47:01Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > You’d prefer us having to say thinks like “I will wheaton tomorrow”? Please, can we live that [punk Wil Wheaton](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wil_Wheaton) from\* Star Trek: The Next Generation\* out of this discussion. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2011, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/51 "2011-01-24T23:29:07Z")
> [@Doctor](#): > > Here is Mark Twain’s take on [spelling reform](http://design.caltech.edu/erik/Misc/Twain_english.html). Funny how nobody has implemented it yet… It’s really not that clever: if we actually did write in that manner, it would eventually seem natural. And, in order to make the point, it had to be decipherable, which means it isn’t that bad. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2011, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/52 "2011-01-24T23:52:55Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I, personally, am working on making -sexual happen. Boysexual is so much less wordage than gay men and straight women and the reverse is true for girlsexual. I appreciate what you’re trying to do functionally, but I don’t see how those can escape connotations of paedophilia. ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/53 "2011-01-25T00:15:08Z")
> [@Raguleader](#): > > I think the English language needs counting words, like what Chinese uses. Specifically, English should use a separate counting word for each variety of object (flat round things, cylindrical things, animals, bottles, people, etc.) Or [sheep](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yan_Tan_Tethera)? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/54 "2011-01-25T01:58:26Z")
> [@Kaio](#): > > Technically we already have them, it’s just that humans are funny about calling themselves “it.” > > It might make more sense to revamp the attitude than the language; what exactly do we need two gender-neutral pronouns for? Shakespeare used the singular “they”. Spanish technically has gender neutral third person singular pronouns, but it is normally not used. The language structure, though, is heavily gendered so it feels normal to address almost anyone and anything as having an inherent gender. “¿Ha visto Ud. mi camisa?” “Ella es en el suelo.” “Have you seen my shirt?” “She is on the floor.” ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/55 "2011-01-25T02:00:50Z")
> [@Dervorin](#): > > Please see Resolution 4, above. This is already being dealt with as we speak. An obvious problem with fixing spelling is how to decide whose accent to spell. Do we bow to the Bostonians and Londoners and start Paking a ka? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/56 "2011-01-25T02:09:37Z")
> [@Raguleader](#): > > I think the English language needs counting words, like what Chinese uses. Specifically, English should use a separate counting word for each variety of object (flat round things, cylindrical things, animals, bottles, people, etc.) English originally did have this. But eventually the counting adjectives developed distinct identities from the objects they were describing. You can still see remnants of this in words like pair, couple, duo, dyad, and brace which can all describe two objects. ---
**Author:** ![Zamander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/2acd7d/32.png) [@Zamander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zamander)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/57 "2011-01-25T14:29:20Z")
Quote: Originally Posted by Inner Stickler I, personally, am working on making -sexual happen. Boysexual is so much less wordage than gay men and straight women and the reverse is true for girlsexual. > [@spark240](#): > > I appreciate what you’re trying to do functionally, but I don’t see how those can escape connotations of paedophilia. How about just swiping the words from greek for philandrist and philogynist. Althought the first is perhaps too near to philanthrope. virsexual and gynosexual, to combine latin and greek? ---
**Author:** ![bluecanary](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bluecanary/32/3614_2.png) [@bluecanary](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bluecanary)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/58 "2011-01-25T15:07:39Z")
> [@NetTrekker](#): > > A second-person plural. Y’all is too regional and doesn’t lend itself to more formal use. This was my immediate thought as well. I have to stop myself from saying “yous” sometimes. ---
**Author:** ![bluecanary](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bluecanary/32/3614_2.png) [@bluecanary](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bluecanary)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/59 "2011-01-25T15:10:37Z")
> [@Zamander](#): > > How about just swiping the words from greek for philandrist and philogynist. Althought the first is perhaps too near to philanthrope. virsexual and gynosexual, to combine latin and greek? Philandrist sounds like someone who [philanders](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/philander). ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2011, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508/60 "2011-01-25T17:12:15Z")
> [@norinew](#): > > Well, I _wasn’t_ his wife. But ‘girlfriend’ sounds awfully juvenile, as I’ve previously stated. Well, you’ve just shown that English actually _has_ such a word that everyone immediately understands. You just have a prejudice against it. I hear it every day, and people never misunderstand it or think people who use it are juvenile when they’re clearly not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/things-that-the-english-language-desperately-needs/568508.md?page=4)