English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2018)

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by e12e on Sunday March 28, 2021 @07:36AM (#26609474)

> In English why do you need to say “exacerbate” when you can say “make worse”? Or “defenestrate” when you mean “toss out the window”? The usual answer I hear is that it’s because it makes the language more beautiful and precise.

That's... Not how vocabulary develops. English is a rich language in large part due to the conquest by the French - much like Norwegian is a rich language due to conquest by the Danish.

Although "defenestrate" is probably more like "tweet" than "computer" - I believe it was a bit of a "fashion statement" at the time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by williamdclt on Sunday March 28, 2021 @08:22AM (#26609728)

> Although "defenestrate" is probably more like "tweet" than "computer"

Not sure I understand your point, but "defenestrate" -> "de-fenestrate" which literally translates (via old French) as "un-window"!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by e12e on Sunday March 28, 2021 @01:50PM (#26612451)

It's from an event I Praha - I mean that there's very little use for the word (as opposed to "kill" or "throw out a window". It's not like sheep and mutton.

Ed: see first part, and the section https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defenestration#Origin_of_the...

It's not from old Latin, but rather from "new Latin".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by Jiocus on Sunday March 28, 2021 @09:17AM (#26610087)

Window is also from Old Norse (meaning "wind-eye") which has replaced fenester in English.

Meanwhile in Swedish, the French origin "Fönster" is preferred.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by veqz on Sunday March 28, 2021 @08:23AM (#26609737)

Wait, what? Norwegian is richer because of Danish?? (Also, what conquest?) I'd say it's the same language, just with lots of different dialects anyway.

What has enriched the Norwegian (and Danish and Swedish) language beyond the Germanic Scandinavian would be the importation of words from Latin, German, French, and English. All happening through trade and cultural influence, in roughly that order.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by Jiocus on Sunday March 28, 2021 @09:08AM (#26610019)

And vice versa. What has enriched English is much of Scandinavian origin[1][2].

An recent example in Sweden involved a politician protesting about anglicanisation of the Swedish language. He wanted to replace some widely used English term with a Swedish equivalent. Tracing the origin easily revealed it was instead the English who are using a Scandinavian expression. Which Swedes are now finding convenient.

[1] English is a Scandinavian language (https://partner.sciencenorway.no/forskningno-history-languag...)

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Old...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:English is relatively easy to learn, but not to master (2... by e12e on Sunday March 28, 2021 @01:54PM (#26612491)

Conquest might indeed be too strong - occupation might fit better. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark%E2%80%93Norway#Langu...

[ Parent | on HN ]