←back to thread

231 points rntn | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.404s | source
Show context
alex_suzuki ◴[] No.35413018[source]
Italy really knows how to focus on what’s really important to address challenges like high unemployment and weak economy.
replies(6): >>35413031 #>>35413085 #>>35413140 #>>35413154 #>>35413217 #>>35413493 #
borroka ◴[] No.35413140[source]
It is a very poor argument and ignores the fact that the lives of people, institutions and countries are not just about (the very important) jobs and economics.

I, who have lived in the United States for decades, cringe when English words are used instead of those of my native language to give a sense of respectability to those words.

A global culture and a world homogenized in ways of living is a much less interesting world.

replies(4): >>35413212 #>>35413223 #>>35413279 #>>35413950 #
1. dehrmann ◴[] No.35413950[source]
In college, I took an English/linguistics class called "History of the English Language." One big takeaway from it was that prescriptive languages never work, and pragmatism always wins over purity. You say you "cringe" when hearing English words in the context of your native language. English, too, is packed with loanwords. Espresso (I see you, Italian), taco, kimchi, sauna, schadenfreude, not to mention phrases lifted directly from other languages like "c'est la vie" or "et cetera."

I don't disagree that a homogeneous world is less interesting, but in a world where you can travel between every major city in less than 24 hours, and communication is unified and instantaneous, this is the natural outcome, and government word policing is a losing fight.

replies(1): >>35415141 #
2. borroka ◴[] No.35415141[source]
I don't see any inevitability in the development of human culture (and technology), which is instead often perceived as such when looking backwards and not forward.

History could have been taken a million different trajectories and we, looking back at its course, would always be tempted to say that what's going on today was, overall, inevitable. If not for a very harsh winter decades ago, maybe German would be the lingua franca of today's Europe: "it was inevitable", many would say, "it all started with Bismarck".

And I don't see why the fact that we use the word "espresso" (or expresso :)) in the US should mean that, in the US, Italian, Greek, or French words should be used in official documents as liberally as English words are in other non-English speaking countries' official documents. Why should it be acceptable to use "governance" instead of the Italian words "governo" or "amministrazione"? Why "fiscal compact" instead of "patto di bilancio" where both combinations of words express the same concept but one in a foreign language and the other in the official language of the country?

Using "espresso" and not another (equivalent) English word makes sense, because the Italian word also denotes the origin of the product. Using "hip hop" makes sense in non-English speaking countries, like "rock" for the music (but not the stone). "Schadenfreude", on the other hand, still sounds quite ridiculous when said by non-German speaking people, a bit like using "I went to the Ville Lumière" instead of "I went to Paris, oh those croissants, mon dieu!". That language should not be regulated by any government, the ridiculousness of its use should just be common sense, which is unfortunately as scarce today as it was in the past. But a woman can dream.

Which brings me to the another component: concepts expressed in English tend to appear, in non-English speaking countries, as more respectable, more serious. "That's how they do in the US, the wealthiest countries in the world!".

But this is just smoke thrown into people's eyes.