Bilingual in Europe versus USA

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:03:20 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

writes:

It's confused. Someone brought in "black
english or jive" to which you suggested that such
dialects were "substandard". You were asked about
what substandard was and you suggested the
ability to get a job. Someone questioned whether
that was a useful definition and you suggested it
was unless one wanted to be a welfare receipient
or a drug dealer.

In other words, I didn't say anything about race.

You don't recognise the common mean of the word 'race'.

So whether you intended it or not, you jumped
from speaking a "black" dialect to being a drug
dealer which would tend to suggest a certain
bias on the subject. Not clear cut however.

The "black" dialect is spoken by some whites, too. And anyone who
speaks it is going to spend his life as a loser, no matter what the
color of his skin. Being black or white has nothing to do with it.

And I do find myself wondering about people who read race into every
conversation in this way.

Did you mention Bill Cosby because of the way he speaks, or because
he's black?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:52:46 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:13:45 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Dave Frightens Me writes:

You are of course aware that that's derogatory.

I'm aware that it's true, too.

Why do you always delete the material that tells us what you're
talking about?

Nevermind the reason. It's right, coz Mixi does it.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

On 29 Aug 2006 19:22:23 +0100, des small
wrote:

B writes:

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:57:04 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

Old languages are generally much more complex that modern
languages. Certainly, Old English is more complex than Modern
English.

Most languages tend to get simplified over time. Both Chinese and
English illustrate this pattern, as do other Germanic languages and
Romance languages.

No they don't and no they don't. Chinese is arguably acquiring some
morphology and English phrasal verbs are notoriously confusing to
non-native speakers.

Chinese is simple in that it doesn't rely on case endings and
declensions and such.

It once had a much more complicated grammar.

Inflectional morphology isn't all of grammar,

Please note that although you claim above that you have quoted
me, you haven't.

Did so. Begins with "Old languages..."

-- Larry

Dave Frightens Me writes:

You don't recognise the common mean of the word 'race'.

I don't share the preoccupation with race that afflicts many people,
particularly in the USA.

Did you mention Bill Cosby because of the way he speaks, or because
he's black?

Because of the speeches he has made on the topic.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

wrote:

It's confused. Someone brought in "black
english or jive" to which you suggested that such
dialects were "substandard". You were asked about
what substandard was and you suggested the
ability to get a job. Someone questioned whether
that was a useful definition and you suggested it
was unless one wanted to be a welfare receipient
or a drug dealer.

Has Mixi rejoined the ranks of the employed?

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:41:25 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Dave Frightens Me writes:

You don't recognise the common mean of the word 'race'.

I don't share the preoccupation with race that afflicts many people,
particularly in the USA.

For what meaning of 'race'? It's used nowadays to suggest skin colour,
although you undoubtedly wouldn't want to make it as clear as that.

Did you mention Bill Cosby because of the way he speaks, or because
he's black?

Because of the speeches he has made on the topic.

Why didn't you mention this until now?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

It's confused. Someone brought in "black
english or jive" to which you suggested that such
dialects were "substandard". You were asked about
what substandard was and you suggested the
ability to get a job. Someone questioned whether
that was a useful definition and you suggested it
was unless one wanted to be a welfare receipient
or a drug dealer.

In other words, I didn't say anything about race.

So whether you intended it or not, you jumped
from speaking a "black" dialect to being a drug
dealer which would tend to suggest a certain
bias on the subject. Not clear cut however.

The "black" dialect is spoken by some whites, too. And anyone who
speaks it is going to spend his life as a loser, no matter what the
color of his skin. Being black or white has nothing to do with it.

Wow. So you're saying that anyone who speaks the "black" dialect is not
capable of learning to speak proper English (or German, or Arabic, or
whatever) for use in the general population? Plenty of people speak their
dialect at home and use proper English on their jobs.





And I do find myself wondering about people who read race into every
conversation in this way.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:41:25 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:


Dave Frightens Me writes:


You don't recognise the common mean of the word 'race'.

I don't share the preoccupation with race that afflicts many people,
particularly in the USA.


For what meaning of 'race'? It's used nowadays to suggest skin colour,
although you undoubtedly wouldn't want to make it as clear as that.

Even in its technical sense (i. e. "human race") are we sure
Mixi qualifies? ;-)

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:34:53 +0100, Padraig Breathnach
wrote:

Hatunen wrote:

On 29 Aug 2006 19:22:23 +0100, des small
wrote:

B writes:

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:57:04 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

Old languages are generally much more complex that modern
languages. Certainly, Old English is more complex than Modern
English.

Most languages tend to get simplified over time. Both Chinese and
English illustrate this pattern, as do other Germanic languages and
Romance languages.

No they don't and no they don't. Chinese is arguably acquiring some
morphology and English phrasal verbs are notoriously confusing to
non-native speakers.

Chinese is simple in that it doesn't rely on case endings and
declensions and such.

It once had a much more complicated grammar.

Inflectional morphology isn't all of grammar,

Please note that although you claim above that you have quoted
me, you haven't.

Whose words are these, then?
Old languages are generally much more complex that modern
languages. Certainly, Old English is more complex than Modern
English.

I take it back. I did say that.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" wrote in message
...


Dave Frightens Me wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:41:25 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:


Dave Frightens Me writes:


You don't recognise the common mean of the word 'race'.

I don't share the preoccupation with race that afflicts many people,
particularly in the USA.


For what meaning of 'race'? It's used nowadays to suggest skin colour,
although you undoubtedly wouldn't want to make it as clear as that.

Even in its technical sense (i. e. "human race") are we sure Mixi
qualifies? ;-)


Very droll. American humour!

JohnT