ruskivyetr Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5500 days ago 769 posts - 962 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish, Russian, Polish, Modern Hebrew
| Message 1 of 69 28 February 2010 at 9:18pm | IP Logged |
I'm sorry if this has been discussed before, but why not just unify the Scandi three create
a pan Scandi language? To me, it seems that the three countries, although with different
culture, don't really have all the much of a problem with the language "differences". The
three are already mutually intelligible, so it wouldn't create a huge problem. All it would
take is a uniform spelling rule and a uniform lexicon. Not only would it unite the three
Nordic countries a little more, it would create a more powerful language since it would
have a higher amount of speakers than just Danish, Norwegian, or Swedish. I'm not
Scandinavian, so maybe it's not my place to say this because maybe I don't know the
whole story, but it doesn't seem like a bad idea.
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
Paskwc Pentaglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5696 days ago 450 posts - 624 votes Speaks: Hindi, Urdu*, Arabic (Levantine), French, English Studies: Persian, Spanish
| Message 2 of 69 28 February 2010 at 9:22pm | IP Logged |
I'm guessing there's too much at stake in terms of national pride, heritage, and so on.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
tractor Tetraglot Senior Member Norway Joined 5472 days ago 1349 posts - 2292 votes Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan Studies: French, German, Latin
| Message 3 of 69 28 February 2010 at 10:08pm | IP Logged |
Paskwc wrote:
I'm guessing there's too much at stake in terms of national pride, heritage, and so on. |
|
|
Yes, and in Norway we can't even agree on one written standard language, so we've got two: Norwegian Nynorsk
and Norwegian Bokmål.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
canada38 Tetraglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5514 days ago 304 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, Italian, Spanish, French Studies: Portuguese, Japanese
| Message 4 of 69 01 March 2010 at 2:25am | IP Logged |
Don't forget the old saying, "A language is a dialect with an army."
I do agree with you though, that it would likely benefit those countries to amalgamate
their languages.
On the other hand, if Scandinavians can already easily communicate with each other, it
may not be necessary. I know I wouldn't be too happy if tomorrow I was told I had to
start using American spellings!
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
ruskivyetr Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5500 days ago 769 posts - 962 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Spanish, Russian, Polish, Modern Hebrew
| Message 5 of 69 01 March 2010 at 2:50am | IP Logged |
canada38 wrote:
On the other hand, if Scandinavians can already easily communicate with each other, it
may not be necessary. I know I wouldn't be too happy if tomorrow I was told I had to
start using American spellings! |
|
|
The difference between American English, British English, Canadian English, and
Aussie/New Zealand English is that they are considered English, and regardless of a few
minor differences in spelling and vocabulary, they are pretty much the same. Their
numbers of speakers are also counted as one, making it a stronger force than if you
counted the amount of speakers among the different ones. Making the Scandinavian
language as a whole language would create a good solid language with about 30
million speakers. This creates a world language that is considered a lot stronger than a
language with 10 million speakers.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
elvisrules Tetraglot Senior Member BelgiumRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5488 days ago 286 posts - 390 votes Speaks: French, English*, Dutch, Flemish Studies: Lowland Scots, Japanese, German
| Message 6 of 69 01 March 2010 at 3:16am | IP Logged |
Maybe they could reform the standard spelling and pronounciation of each language so that thet match the others' as closely as possible (without conseding too much), rename them Danish Scandinavian, Norwegian Scandinavian and Swedish Scandinavian, and set aside a small part of class time in the school curriculum for learning a bit of the other languages. Anything more than that would be too much of a concession I think.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Paskwc Pentaglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5696 days ago 450 posts - 624 votes Speaks: Hindi, Urdu*, Arabic (Levantine), French, English Studies: Persian, Spanish
| Message 7 of 69 01 March 2010 at 3:41am | IP Logged |
Without going too far off-topic, I've always found the expression "a language is a
dialect with an army" a bit strange. It might have been relevant in the contexts of early
nationalism in a European surrounding but maybe not today. Looking at the likes of
Morocco and Jamaica may illustrate this.
Edited by Paskwc on 01 March 2010 at 3:42am
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
canada38 Tetraglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5514 days ago 304 posts - 417 votes Speaks: English*, Italian, Spanish, French Studies: Portuguese, Japanese
| Message 8 of 69 01 March 2010 at 5:52am | IP Logged |
Paskwc wrote:
Without going too far off-topic, I've always found the expression "a
language is a
dialect with an army" a bit strange. It might have been relevant in the contexts of early
nationalism in a European surrounding but maybe not today. Looking at the likes of
Morocco and Jamaica may illustrate this. |
|
|
Can you explain your reference to Morocco and Jamaica. I know there is a Jamaican-Creole
language, but I don't see what you mean. :P
1 person has voted this message useful
|