'My argument' was not that there are roughly almost equivalent words in English. There are multiple things:
- the case of linguistic relativity is largely resolved contrary to your view, but you don't appear interested in talking on the level of the informed intellectual debate
- I cited a vertical example of culture shaping language, rather than some other direction. However, the death of English would not mean the death of misogyny.
- Native Americans speak English, but retain a much different and largely unchanged culture, but you didn't see fit to address it. This point alone contradicts your claim of the "completely intertwined" nature of culture and language. Note also that America dwelling English speaking Asians retain a respect for elders and dutiful study habits, all while speaking not a jot of their culture's original language (in the crude sense you'd want us to believe it- no one's stuck on proto-Indo-European anymore). Various Amish communities preserve entire eras while speaking more and more English.
Could you elaborate on how 'usted', '-san', or 'Mr.' are necessary to a specific culture, no substitutions?
Most have accepted a version of American culture and are completely ingrained with American mainstream life.
> speaking African-American culture and
African American culture emerged in the USA. Not much of their pre-slavery culture remains – they lost most (if not everything) of their pre-slavery culture.
> you fail to acknowledge any of the presented arguments
The argument you mentioned (that there are roughly almost equivalent words in English) does not hold water.
> If all you'd like is a soapbox, please just go write a blog.
You are turning nasty. I did not expect you to understand – but you could at least have respectfully disagreed.