There are about 6 more weeks before the end of the semester at AIU. I'm teaching two history classes this semester. One class with the word 'history' in it, while the other has an indirect historical reference in the course title. Nevertheless, two history classes. Fun much? You tell me.
My class just finished talking about the Renaissance. Really, we have the Renaissance because of the rise of the middle class. The bubonic plague literally wiped out all the laborers, and those who survived ascended the social ladder. Yay? Then, we have the explosion of knowledge, thanks to Caxton who introduced the printing press. Before long, everyone had a copy of something. Everyone was translating something into English. Everyone then realized that everyone was borrowing words from everywhere else. Everyone, and I mean the English people, began to complain. "Why do we have to borrow from Latin/French? Ain't our English good enough." Apparently not. I mean come on, how can we ever thank these lexical borrowers. Because of them we have so many synonyms to choose from! Yay? Well, everyone complaining about borrowing words is a little far-fetched, these people were just out-of-job lazy purists who couldn't find a niche to fit their nose. The desire to maintain the preexisting pool of words faded away and everyone embraced new words with open arms and open mouths. A century later, the English were writing prolifically in the Sciences. Then LIGHTBULB! They realized something. They've been so anal in the past about borrowing words, and they completely forgot about syntax! Perhaps one reason for this forgetfulness was that English was a synthetic language-high inflectional, with the spotlight on what fixes a morpheme gets. Then all of a sudden these words a bare-naked, literally! These linguist kids have a game to play! Let's play arrange the words to form a 'correct' sentence. Whose definition of 'correct' should we use? Who knows? Who cares! The linguist kids (p.s. the Royal Society) claim that they never imposed their desire for scientists to write in an dispassionate manner and for language to lack emotive qualities since good science REALLY calls for objectivity (total nonsense). Some people picked their vibe like Swift, who was like totally against hipster's use of language like shortening words, e.g. totally = totes, or even getting rid of the 'e' in wick'd. :P I think English seemed to go downhill after this, or is it just exhaustion affecting my sanity?
Regardless, with the establishment of the middle class, more people could afford what was once exclusive only to the rich-school became 'normalized' during this period. Further, since this was the age of 'reason,' people saw it necessary that the language they spoke reflect the almost perfect lives they live. Now now girls, make sure your pinky does not stick out while you sip your herbal tea from your English China. Ha!
My class just finished talking about the Renaissance. Really, we have the Renaissance because of the rise of the middle class. The bubonic plague literally wiped out all the laborers, and those who survived ascended the social ladder. Yay? Then, we have the explosion of knowledge, thanks to Caxton who introduced the printing press. Before long, everyone had a copy of something. Everyone was translating something into English. Everyone then realized that everyone was borrowing words from everywhere else. Everyone, and I mean the English people, began to complain. "Why do we have to borrow from Latin/French? Ain't our English good enough." Apparently not. I mean come on, how can we ever thank these lexical borrowers. Because of them we have so many synonyms to choose from! Yay? Well, everyone complaining about borrowing words is a little far-fetched, these people were just out-of-job lazy purists who couldn't find a niche to fit their nose. The desire to maintain the preexisting pool of words faded away and everyone embraced new words with open arms and open mouths. A century later, the English were writing prolifically in the Sciences. Then LIGHTBULB! They realized something. They've been so anal in the past about borrowing words, and they completely forgot about syntax! Perhaps one reason for this forgetfulness was that English was a synthetic language-high inflectional, with the spotlight on what fixes a morpheme gets. Then all of a sudden these words a bare-naked, literally! These linguist kids have a game to play! Let's play arrange the words to form a 'correct' sentence. Whose definition of 'correct' should we use? Who knows? Who cares! The linguist kids (p.s. the Royal Society) claim that they never imposed their desire for scientists to write in an dispassionate manner and for language to lack emotive qualities since good science REALLY calls for objectivity (total nonsense). Some people picked their vibe like Swift, who was like totally against hipster's use of language like shortening words, e.g. totally = totes, or even getting rid of the 'e' in wick'd. :P I think English seemed to go downhill after this, or is it just exhaustion affecting my sanity?
Regardless, with the establishment of the middle class, more people could afford what was once exclusive only to the rich-school became 'normalized' during this period. Further, since this was the age of 'reason,' people saw it necessary that the language they spoke reflect the almost perfect lives they live. Now now girls, make sure your pinky does not stick out while you sip your herbal tea from your English China. Ha!
 |
| AWWWWWW!!!!!!!! |
Comments