Oddbean new post about login | logout I feel like this is a shortcoming specific to the English language. All the languages I know use a different verb than “plain old” fear. French for example uses “craindre” which is completely different from “avoir peur”. The latter transliterates to “have fear” and is exclusively used in that context of fearing things, like snakes and spiders, or anything in of the world. Same for Arabic and Spanish.
English is so imprecise. It also only has one word for love where most languages have many different words. I'm sure there are lots of other examples.
I like to link the development of a language to the traits of its people. Greeks have 7 words for love, and I like to think it’s because they love thinking, and wisdom, and therefore they need extra words for all types of feelings they articulate. I wonder what made the anglo-saxons have one word for love. It’s a germanic word with indo-european roots signifying deep and intense feelings and affection for another. This makes me think the ancient saxons would not have used it very lightly.
english even only has one form of the word "you" which is ambigous as singular and plural i'm not a fan of english, except for its lack of cases
"Why build our own vocabulary when there is an entire world to plunder?" - Anglo-Saxons, probably
for whatever reason, the damp soggy islands were conquered repeatedly... first the celts, then the romans, then the vikings, then the germans, then the french so i think it's more like the conquerers made them learn new languages over and over again anad english is like a form of pigin, and then after they kicked out the french they went off out into the world and did the same thing to everyone else except south america and northern africa
LOL fair. There are fewer than ten words the English picked up from the indigenous languages of the British Isles. Even indigenous Australian languages contributed more. English has stolen far more vocabulary from cultures they admired - French, Latin, Italian, Greek, Arabic and even a few thousand from Sanskrit-derived languages. They really, really didn't respect the Welsh and Irish...
hah, yeah, and those are the two best cultures on the islands too, all poetry and fine craftsmanship
The french in me is in revelry over the criticism of the english. But the anglophile in me must come to their defense and say that the English language is indeed rich in vocabulary and is incredibly expressive. One must simply be aware of how it developed throughout the years and also never forget that it’s a germanic language. Despite the huge romance influence on it, it remains a germanic language. Tap into the endless sea of archaic yet still valid germanic words, and you shall find your heart’s delight in vocabulary.
haha, yeah... "anglo-saxon" really means nordic-germanic but the grammar is something much older, and the only language i know of in europe that lacks cases in almost the same way is Bulgarian, and bulgarian is quite unique in europe because of this feature also, the biggest distinction from english is the complex verb tenses, there is maybe dozens of different ways to conjugate verbs in bulgarian, and they are extremely concise and subtle, indeed the language seems to have been refined to be extremely compact, short, sharp expression, simple phonetics (only maybe 7 vowels, no th) the commonality of the culture goes a lot deeper too, england and roses and bulgaria and roses, and the bagpipes are also a national instrument, as it is in scotland and ireland, i think part of it has to do with having spent a lot of time as occupied territories, bulgaria was under the greeks, then the serbs, then the turks, then the austro-hungarians, then the russians, i guess i suspect that there may be a migratory link between the cultures as well, but also a general pattern of language development where the natives develop short, clipped expressions in order to covertly organise at the same time as openly feigning submission bulgarians are also seemingly polite, at least relative to all their neighbouring cultures, but also, low key much more stubborn and rebellious
If I was judging English purely based on what I see of the English used in America today and using your theory, I would think it was an intentionally simple language created to mislead people and to limit nuance of thought.
"Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way" https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/politics-and-the-english-language/
That would unfairly reduce english to a variant of “newspeak” like in Orwell’s novel. English is a rich language, it has an endless well of vocabulary, most of which have fallen out of use but they remain valid. And for the lack of anglo-saxon literature, I will forever despise Henry VIII for destroying the english monasteries and all the richness they contained.