The reason Borges considers English a "finer" language than Spanish is because of English' mutt status. As Borges puts it, English gets to draw on the Anglo-Germanic language tradition as well as the French-Latinate tradition. It has words from each and structures of grammar from both, including multiple words that technically mean the same thing, but have different aesthetic senses. Borges famously used the example of "Holy Spirit" versus "Holy Ghost." Same expression, in theory, but both give off different vibes.So: is he right?
>>24918920yes
english is really closer to french than german
>>24919218 grammar & structure is germanic.
>mutts coping this hardEnglish will always be an inferior barbarous tongue. I resent having to type it here. It makes me feel unclean.
>>24918939i wouldnt say unsuited, but its definitely far from ideal compared to something like arabic or russian
>>24919247then don't. gaywad.
>>24919246it variesrural English is near pure anglo-saxon while 'sophisticated' speech draws from Norman grammar a lotThough the latter is almost exclusively laughing stock nowadays
>>24920739not really. english never adopted norman grammar, only the vocabulary. i think what you mean is everyday english uses more germanic words and formal eng uses more norman-french.
>>24920739>>24920745assuming you’re not talking about milton using latinate word order for stylistic effect. which isn’t to do with the language in general.
>>24918920And Italian is superior to both.
>>24918939>”hurr durr English bad”>he wrote in English
>>24921067>
>>24921067did you read past the first sentence? he said english is good
Of course he's right, but I think he means finer in the sense of more precise, and not just overall better. To be honest though all the criticism of English comes from seething brownoids and ESLs acting like our language ought to behave like their language, because their stunted fetal alcohol syndrome brains can't comprehend difference. Any non-Anglo country that has actually accomplished anything is simply neutral on the matter.
>>24918920Borges is retarded.English is incapable of good metaphysics. It lacks a native vocabulary to express metaphysical truths clearly. English-speakers qua monolingual English-speakers cannot grasp metaphysical truths without etymological knowledge of the vast quantity of English's Greek and Latin loanwords. In other words, English metaphysics is pointless since its metaphysical vocabulary is so steeped in Greek and Latin that the etymological knowledge necessary to understand the metaphysical vocabulary in English metaphysics makes it so that you might as well just learn Greek and Latin and read the metaphysical classics instead.
>>24922010If you think greek metaphysics still holds serious sway you're a pseud who has never studied philosophy. Go back to posting marble statues on twitter.
>>24919247me siento de manera similar a ti cuando necesito hablar con mis sirvientes de la casa en español.
>>24922010he'll never be as retarded as you
I'm reading his book Ficciones.How many of these stories are just going to be reviews or critiques of fake stories?
>>24918920The language, that is to say the particular tongue, in which Shakspeare wrote, cannot be left out of consideration. It will not be disputed, that one language may possess advantages which another does not enjoy; and we may state with confidence, that English excels all other languages in the number of its practical words. The French may bear the palm in the names of trades, and in military and diplomatic terms. Of the German it may be said, that, exclusive of many mineralogical words, it is incomparable in its metaphysical and psychological force: in another respect it nearly rivals the Greek:The learned Greek, rich in fit epithets,Blest in the lovely marriage of pure wordsI mean in its capability of composition—of forming compound words. Italian is the sweetest and softest language; Spanish the most majestic. All these have their peculiar faults; but I never can agree that any language is unfit for poetry, although different languages, from the condition and circumstances of the people, may certainly be adapted to one species of poetry more than to another.Take the French as an example. It is, perhaps, the most perspicuous and pointed language in the world, and therefore best fitted for conversation, for the expression of light and airy passion, attaining its object by peculiar and felicitous turns of phrase, which are evanescent, and, like the beautifully coloured dust on the wings of a butterfly, must not be judged by the test of touch. It appears as if it were all surface and had no substratum, and it constantly most dangerously tampers with morals, without positively offending decency. As the language for what is called modern genteel comedy all others must yield to French. Italian can only be deemed second to Spanish, and Spanish to Greek, which contains all the excellences of all languages. Italian, though sweet and soft, is not deficient in force and dignity; and I may appeal to Ariosto, as a poet who displays to the utmost advantage the use of his native tongue for all purposes, whether of passion, sentiment, humour, or description.
>>24922151But in English I find that which is possessed by no other modern language, and which, as it were, appropriates it to the drama. It is a language made out of many, and it has consequently many words, which originally had the same meaning; but in the progress of society those words have gradually assumed different shades of meaning. Take any homogeneous language, such as German, and try to translate into it the following lines:But not to one, in this benighted age,Is that diviner inspiration given.That burns in Shakspeare's or in Milton's page.The pomp and prodigality of heaven.(Gray's Stanzas to Bentley)In German it would be necessary to say 'the pomp and spendthriftness of heaven,' because the German has not, as we have, one word with two such distinct meanings, one expressing the nobler, the other the baser idea of the same action.The monosyllabic character of English enables us, besides, to express more meaning in a shorter compass than can be done in any other language. In truth, English may be called the harvest of the unconscious wisdom of various nations, and was not the formation of any particular time, or assemblage of individuals. Hence the number of its passionate phrases—its metaphorical terms, not borrowed from poets, but adopted by them. Our commonest people, when excited by passion, constantly employ them: if a mother lose her child she is full of the wildest fancies, and the words she uses assume a tone of dignity; for the constant hearing and reading of the Bible and Liturgy clothes her thoughts not only in the most natural, but in the most beautiful forms of language.
>>24918939I've seen this view repeated ad nauseam in various forms: the less coherent the language is, the more it is poetic. Languages with uniform, clear, simple rules might be easy to learn and allow you to concisely transmit your thoughts, but what good they are for art? Oh no, in your language all verbs have the same ending so you wouldn't mix them up with other parts of speech? This means you can't rhyme them together because it would be lame. What you really want is a language with horrendously complicated rules riddled with exceptions and traps, where you can't even tell apart a question from a statement, a noun from a verb, a statement from a command. Oh wow, in English language the imperative mood appears exactly identical as the indicative mood? This is such a wonderfully poetic language! The only thing that could've improved it is an addition of grammatical genders. Yeah, sometimes you can't even tell how to pronounce a word you're looking at (let alone guess what part of speech it is and what form it is in), but just imagine how many wonderful possibilities for a clever wordplay it gives to you!
