Talk:English language/Archive 5

message: The dialect box is out of control. Part of it has to do with the fact that the word "dialect" invites a free-for-all. Plus, not only is it open to "vanity"-dialect pages but its format takes up too much space. For example, how many times must "English" be repeated?
I would love to work with someone more familiar with the code/tech aspect of the box. I'm already working on a re-classification of the dialects into varieties. Also, the French dialect box works very well and can be used for inspiration.
There will be discussion needed to decide whether some varieties are national or regional varieties, but I'll bring that up on the dialects page.
CJ Withers 22:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dialects 

message: I the first paragraph, it is written quite clearly that "English is currently the most widely spoken and written language worldwide", however, in the Geographic Distribution Paragraph, the article states that "English is the third most widely spoken language in the world today". Please correct accordingly.
:English is apparently 3rd on the list after Mandarin and Spanish. However, this is entirely dependent on how that figure is measured, since many people "speak" english (read, or write) and "speak" one of the other top 3 languages, as well. According to the Global Language Monitor , English ranks second to Mandarin (Chinese). Mandarin has around 1.5Bil. speakers, english has about 1/2 that or less. I'm going to cut the mention of "the most widely spoken language in the world" in the first paragraph.--Caspiankilkelly 17:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urgent! Contradictions 

message: Pagingmrherman asked "What's a cribhouse?" and red-linked the word in the James Nicoll quote. I removed the link as the word will probably never need an encyclopedia article, but it's still a fair question. Apparently it's an ill-attested word, but a discussion at the LINGUIST list got this answer:
:"Cribhouse", says J L Speranza, is based on "crib", an old word for brothel. I don't see this def. in the OED entry for "crib", but the attested senses of 'narrow wooden bed'; 'small habitation, cabin, hovel; narrow room; confined space'; and (thieves' slang) 'a dwelling house, shop, public house' could easily lead to a meaning extension to 'whorehouse'.
Further discussion of the quote, including James Nicoll pointing out it was an off-the-cuff remark, never intended to become widely read, is found here. Angr (talk • contribs) 14:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's a cribhouse? 

message: There is very little mention of English English; English that developed in England, hence the name English!
For instance, the phonetics table talks about North American English primarily but that is not the actual English Language; some call it American English etc.
*Don't get too bent out of shape over what is "the actual English Language."  It's all English.  By your logic, English English isn't "the actual English Language" either because that distinction would be given only to Old English.  Language always has and always will change and develop into different dialects.  The articles American English and English English exist, so link to them if you feel this article lacks balance. Don't whine.  Be proactive. -- Hraefen 18:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  English English 

message: What's the difference between "and other former British colonies" and "formerly under British rule", which are used in adjacent sentences in the first paragraph?  Don't these phrases mean the same thing? Stifynsemons 07:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundancies in the British Empire?

message: I replaced the unsourced statistic on English language teaching (32.6% English followed by French, German, Spanish in that order) with statistics from the EU statistics website. These statistics state what exactly the number means (proportion of schoolchildren being taught) and give statistics for the other languages. I think the old statistics were probably accurate though (whatever they actually meant), as they had the languages in the correct order.
I also removed this external link: www.lonympics.co.uk/top10englishspeakingcountriesinpopulation.htm The 10 largest countries in the world that in the main speak English as their main tongue]. Not only is the page badly written and full of annoying ads, the figures are pretty vague and inaccurate. Hairy Dude 00:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  English language teaching statistics and poor source 

message: Shouldnt Namibia be on there? It's the only official language, although only 7% of the population speaks it.
Other missing countries where English has official status, if only spoken by some of the population, include Ghana, Malta, Seychelles, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Singapore, Mauritius, Fiji, Tanzania, Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Samoa and also sub-country areas such as Hong Kong, South Sudan and Puerto Rico where English is an official language?
Could we have a second colour for Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Malaysia and maybe Myanmar where English is widley spoken (see British Council - The Future of English (pdf)) but not an official language?  (Sorry I dont know how to do this myself)
Nickhk
Paupa New Guinea should also be on there.   CharlesMartel 17:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Map

message: In the map showing the distribution of English speakers, the British Overseas Territories of the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, as well as the Pitcairn Islands should also be counted, as the English language prevails over these territories.
14:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Overseas Territories should not be ignored! 

message: About 300 million and 758 times, this article says "English is the most commonly learned second language" or a variation thereof. Haggard. <<<<<DR. SHIO>>>>> 66.82.9.31 17:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes well, that's what happens when you have about 300 million and 758 different authors of an article! Still, point taken... Angr (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repetition Ad Infinitum 

message: First, my apologies for not looking back far enough in the edit history. I thought I was simply reverting an unmotivated change. (However, comments by the 82.x.x.x person would have helped....) Secondly, I actually no see reason why having the U.K. first is more sensible; i.e., the very use of the relevance of your claim that it's a "historically more sensible order" needs to be established. Why not: "more sensible order by number of native speakers"? It is biased to assume that that which comes first is primary. Cultural Freedom talk 16:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The other citeria is the order of the sentence, which mentions the UK, then the US, then other former parts of the British Empire. By putting the US first, someone who didn't know might assume that the British Empire was primarily a US insitution. TharkunColl 16:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "someone who didn't know might assume that the the British Empire was primarily a US institution" ... I'm sorry to be a nuisance, but that's incredibly funny~kappisto 02:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: This article is not about British colonialism, it's about the English language, which has more native speakers in the U.S. than anywhere else. Putting the UK first is questionable enough, but your rewrite has no justification. --Cultural Freedom talk 18:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I just made it alphabetical; that seems the best compromise. --Cultural Freedom talk 18:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed that alphabetization is perhaps the best option. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 18:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The English language (from the word England, United Kingdom) originated in the UK, meaning that it should definitely be mentioned first. And the only reason the USA has the most native English speakers is because its population is higher than, say, Australia or Canada. Also, most importantly, all countries with English as their national language were formerly under British power, thus have no place over the United Kingdom. The USA, Canada, and Australia alike are all former British colonies. Don't complain too much though, the USA is still placed first in the list of corresponding former colonies. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 18:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't answer my question, which was: Why "originated" ==> "meaning...first"? Repeating the claim isn't answering the Q about the claim's justifiability. But I hope my switch to an alphabetical order pleases everyone! Let's get back to more important issues! Cultural Freedom talk 18:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now, for anyone who sees this, here is a serious question:
*Is there anything besides a chiefly American encyclopedia and a dictionary that people complain about Wikipedia looking too much like?? Georgia guy 18:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: What? I don't understand the question, and am doubtful about its grammaticality. Angr (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of countries in first sentence 

message: I restored my text after User:Patbaseball2221 reverted it and proceeded to tell me to suck his balls.  --VKokielov 23:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is hopeless.  --VKokielov 15:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restoring text 

message: I think this article seriously understates the global penetration of English and the very rapid increase in the number of people with some proficiency in English, especially in China, India and SE Asia. I have read a recent prediction (I can't find it now) that within 10-20 years 50% of the world's adult population will have a basic proficiency in English, which will of course mean that for the first time in history the majority of the human race will have a common language. English is already far and away the world's most widely understood language, and the most widely understood language in history. Ethnologue's figure of 500 million first and second-language English speakers is a bare minimum, and probably an underestimate, but much more important is the number with basic proficiency, which must already be around 2 billion if the above prediction is correct. This includes, for example, most of the urban adult population of western Europe, none of whom would class themselves as "English speakers", but the great majority of whom have learned English at school and have at least some proficiency. The opening section of this article is a serious understatement of the increasing world dominance of English, doubtless a result of Wikipedia editors' well-known political and cultural bias against the dominant culture. Adam 11:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that the statistics here probably understate the penetration and spread of English, I think the reason is more likely to Wikipedia's concern with verifiability combined with the patchy statistics available on non-native English speakers/users. If you agree, please help, e.g. by filling in some of the numerous gaps in our List of countries by English speaking population.  -- Avenue 12:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a Times article claiming there are 1.9 billion competent speakers of English. -- Avenue 04:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Overall comment