Are Humans Resources? LO15846

LonBadgett@aol.com
Mon, 17 Nov 1997 11:23:21 -0500 (EST)

Replying to LO15813 --

Richard's comments:

> My concern is not so much what the dictionary says nor which dictionary is
> used (I'm sure there are lots!), as it is the mindset used to determine the
> behavior and attitude toward people...

...made me think about the continual attempts to make English an official
language in the United States. I wonder which "English" we will pick.
Will it be William Shakespeare's, Lord Byron's, William Faulkner's, Snoop
Doggie Dog's, or Crocodile Dundee's? Perhaps we should consider only the
English of Mississippi, Massachusetts, or Minnesota as the "true" language
- somewhat ironic since these place names themselves were borrowed from
the former residents. We would certainly have to eliminate those pesky
Latin phrases from our language as a quid pro quo, and while we're at it,
why not eliminate all those troublesome Welsh and Irish and Scottish
words?

Of course we will have to "freeze" the new official language in place so
that it will never change, grow, or adapt to changing conditions. Heaven
forbid that the language should be made "official" only to change because
someone invented new words. Those who laugh at the French treatment of
the word "hamburger" should pay particular attention to this need.

Yes, that dictionary is certainly important, but only insofar as it reflects
the latest state of the language. For the languages we speak are not idols
which we should worship. They are but transient things, full of history,
rich in diversity, and adaptable to the needs of the most flexible and
creative creature that ever lived.

-- 
Lon Badgett
lonbadgett@aol.com
"Why not make English our official language, after all, we stole it fair and
square."
Emil Gobersneke

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>