Originally posted by shavixmirAgreed on every point except language. My Favorite example is yer good ol' Shakespeare. You see the ditionary was not invented back then, so Bill could spell a word any way he wanted, have it be accepted and have 2-5 different meanings at the same time. Language changes, if you are botherd about that you might as well start voiting conservative and lameting how good life was back in the 1950's. Now I'm not saying the next budding Bill is composing thier next sonnet via text on the iPhone, but the beauty of language is in the ear of the listener. Go with it.
While I was talking to a friend the other day, I realised what one of the major problems facing civilization is.
Yes, Iraq's a bit of a bummer, yes the media bombarding us with fear-mongering articles about terrorists on camels is brain-rapingly painful and yes, witnessing the most powerful man in the world unable to pronounce "nuclear" is like having yo ...[text shortened]... off my shoulders.
Now I'm off to the pub to weep.
Originally posted by shavixmirPersonally, my cell phone allows me to have the most comfortable, non-intimate communication with the people I love. It's great, almost as good as email.
While I was talking to a friend the other day, I realised what one of the major problems facing civilization is.
Yes, Iraq's a bit of a bummer, yes the media bombarding us with fear-mongering articles about terrorists on camels is brain-rapingly painful and yes, witnessing the most powerful man in the world unable to pronounce "nuclear" is like having yo ...[text shortened]... off my shoulders.
Now I'm off to the pub to weep.
I have no problem with it.
The post that was quoted here has been removedI would say many of those are unaccountable and even if any figures are provided, they are therefore the product of estimations and guesswork. So my answer to your first question is: Perhaps.
Yes. Like in all languages.
Edit: Buy this English superiority propaganda at your own risk. The reality remains that there is no way to objectively evaluate the "richness" of a language, so it's ridiculous to elevate one to the status of "the most expressive".