>His country is so utterly cucked that he sometimes speaks his own native language, forgets a word, and can only remember the equivalent in English
I guess so in France
there is an institute that makes french words for english ones like disc-jockey or podcast, but in reality no one says platiniste or balladodiffusion
I don't think even Québec does it
I never understood how this doesn't work.
I see a lot of loan words in other languages and don't understand why they never simply made up a word for it. But even when done, people won't adopt it.
Why is that? Is it just because English is cool and French isn't?
>english is such a simple language that it doesn't even have words for simple things like the day after tomorrow
as most technology/internet things, by the time they officially figure out how to translate the word, everyone is already using the english one. that, and also the translations are ugly as shit and/or twice as long as the english word
the only successful one I can think of is logiciel, this one mysteriously caught on
>I see a lot of loan words in other languages and don't understand why they never simply made up a word for it.
Why should they make up a word when there's already a perfectly good one?
>his language doesn't have different words for maternal and paternal grandparents
Like it's awkward to use the loan word.
Like Japanese for example.
The way they pronounce things is completely different to English, yet they still use English words in day to day speech by bastardizing it with their own pronunciations. They could make up a word for it to make it more natural yet they still use shitty English.
I can understand technology related words and brands in general. But why not preserve the French way of speaking to these words instead of breaking up the flow to match English pronunciation?
I don't know about Japanese, but for germanic languages borrowing left right and center is the norm. It doesn't really sound strange using a loan word in most cases either. Though I wish certain new trendy imported words would go and die (and they probably will).
oh, don't worry, we just take the words but in no way pronounce them the english way. we just take the word and adapt it. the only one that kept its english pronounciation is Nike, but it's only because said the french way it would be homonymous of nique (wich means fuck)
More than that. If you just try to get them to mimic the pronunciation by sound alone, they're incapable of doing so without adding or subtracting certain parts.
Like how they stereotypical can't pronounce an L sound without it sounding like an R. It takes practice before they can say Hello properly and not Herro.
But there's no need for you to loan a word like Disc Jockey when you can make/already have an equivalent for each word that makes up the acronym DJ.
That's dumb. Just spell it as it would be in Swedish.
And there isn't already an equivalent word for Chip? Like a chip of wood?
Why not adapt the spelling to meet pronunciation if you're already going to change the pronunciation and not stay true to the English way?
There's way more than 2 cities. And there is no equivalent to Taco. It would be something like corn meal flat bread sandwich. Plus Latin and native American culture is part of our culture so there's not need to make up a word for Taco. That's for the British to do.
>And there isn't already an equivalent word for Chip? Like a chip of wood?
There are several, depending on the type of "chip" you mean.
Chip a tooth is not the same as a chip of wood etc.
And some words get swedified and have their spelling changed, others have their pronunciation changed. I think it sort of depends how it enters the language.
Queue, as in a line you wait in is spelt kö, making it very similar to the french pronunciation of queue, I think.
>But there's no need for you to loan a word like Disc Jockey when you can make/already have an equivalent for each word that makes up the acronym DJ.
Words like disc jockey and stuff enter the language through exposure to the concept that currently has no name. What makes sense is to refer to it by the foreign word, since no native word yet exists.
You don't see swedes saying ansiktsboken instead of facebook, except occasionally for humour value.
>up until this point people mixed both romanian and russian words
>now they've started using romanian, russian and english
We make up new words in Icelandic instead of loaning them to maintain linguistic purity.
For example, for computer we say "Tölva" which comes from the words "Völva" meaning Seeress and "Tölur" which means numbers.
>Why not adapt the spelling to meet pronunciation if you're already going to change the pronunciation and not stay true to the English way?
why bother ? these words are not the most used, and that would only result in confusion when talking english
it's more of a pronounciation thing really : since french doens't use stretches, it would be hard and awkward to switch to "english mode" for just one word. I guess we could resume the process as the few english loanwords being crushed by both the rest of the french sentence and the renoknowed french inability to pronouce english correctly
> Just spell it as it would be in Swedish.
You are the second last person I want to hear that from. Why do anglos spell some words completetly differently than they are pronounced?
Well, using a calque would sound really fucking weird.
>Disc horse riding person? ?!?!?!
WHAT IS THIS.
That said, apparently the swedish for it is skrivpratare ( write-talker, what )
Life is confuse.
Jokes on you, tj in swedish is pronounced like sh in english so I still read that as "Sheeps".
Language evolution and lack of an educated population using things properly for hundreds of years without constant reform to check it.
Most languages have this and if they don't it's because reform was recent.
If not we would still be speaking Old or Middle English and you would be speaking whatever Finnish people spoke like at the time.
Let's all stop asking questions and talking about shit on 4chan because reading a book about it is better. Let's have every thread just be shitposting with no form or gaining knowledge being present.
Literally everything you've asked about in this thread has comparable situations in English that you could have looked at to realize that all of this shit happens naturally everywhere.
French and Latin through French make up a significant portion of upper register modern English vocabulary. We pronounce literally none of these words correctly, in some cases we already had words for concepts yet adopted the loan anyway (animals have germanic/old english names, but the proper term for the meat we get from them is from French)
What I just said. When a word enters a language from a foreign one the native speakers adopting the word also fit it into their own phonetic inventory. We don't pronounce "justice" "joostees," do we?
>Why not adapt the spelling to meet pronunciation if you're already going to change the pronunciation
Orthography and spoken language are only very loosely connected and often don't match up at all. English is a great example of this.
Justice is pronounces like Just. A u doesn't automatically mean oo.
Bad example and bad logic.
I've stated before it's not needed in modern times. In the past there were circumstances that made it so, like invading forces and massive cultural shifts. Especially English, I never stated or implied the opposite and you take a possession that I'm somehow unaware of loanwords in English, when it's you taking my posts out of contest and misapplying them.
There's no one forcing the people to change their language at gun point yet they're okay with adopting new words left and write with no thought about the effect it has on the collective body of the language. So I'm curious about the mindset of people in foreign countries that do this. You can't find that in a linguistics book so why not ask the people themselves? Honestly I don't see much of a problem of it in other European languages, which already have many similarities, but more about people outside of the language families of English or have completely different systems to the language. French people adopting English to me is more like re adopting/learning of forgotten/alternate forms of the French language and Swedish with English is like a lost Germanic cousin with a new spin. It's not a big shock to their body of language and loanwords are fine. I;m most stumped about East Asians taking in English like crazy with not a lot of care about reform or purity.
>bad example and bad logic
What I wrote was the french pronunciation, our way of saying it is a ways off, and I could come up with even better examples.
>you taking my posts out of contest
They teach yall English out there? given the other suspicious typos in your post though maybe I should throw in an
>inb4 pretending to be retarded
>with no thought about the effect it has on the collective body of the language
your average person gives little though to this.
>I;m most stumped about East Asians taking in English like crazy with not a lot of care about reform or purity
For some its a desire to fit in more with the west, other countries just don't put all that much effort into policing the official forms of their language (or even establishing one). Loan words are hardly going to turn Japanese into English though. It wasn't borrowing words from the Normans that made English lose its formerly complex morphology, but contact with speakers of old norse.