I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing. Because of our extensive borrowing of foreign vocabulary we have perhaps one of the best languages on earth with which to express our ideas. Many words in this language have for instance two other counterparts one of French or latin origin, and the other derived from another germanic language. These words might be very similar in meaning but each one perhaps has a different nuance with which to use. So, i don't see any reason why this would be a bad thing.
However, I understand that if you are of Anglo-saxon origin, there might be a bit of nostalgia in regards to linguistical purism .
On the other hand, I think English might be one of the most unique languages in the world in this respect, because most of our vocabulary is derived from non-native sources like latin via french and greek and so on.
The only other language that i am aware of that has this amount of insertions from other languages is Maltese. Maltese is in essence a semitic language with its origin in maghrebi arabic. Nonetheless, most of its vocabulary is Italian and English in origin. Thus it is a Semitic language with a mostly latin derived vocabulary.
Also i have heard claims from North Africans who say that their national languages have mostly non-arab vocabulary, largely from french and spanish. This would not be surprising considering these people are not arabs in an ethnic sense .




LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks






Reply With Quote
I wasn't aware of the extent to which non-native English 

Bookmarks