With regard to semantics, it's not so clear that non-native speakers
have the upper hand. English is not a static, fixed thing that can be
mastered once and for all (like C90, say). It is rather living,
changing; its structure and semantics are determined by the community
in which it is used.
Yes, but not by individuals, and over significant lengths of time. At
a given moment in time, there is usage of the language which is widely
accepted as "correct." A century later, or even a few decades later,
different words, structure, and semantics may be accepted as correct.
The programmer who mastered C90 "once and for all" may have some
difficulties with C99. That is not an argument for introducing slang
such as d00dsp33k into a technical newsgroup with an international
following, most of whom expect to see English used here.
It's conceivable that these "lookalike" renditions of common words and
the phonetic spellings we're discussing will become standard English
at some future time, but at this moment in history, they are not.
Further, such changes are driven by characteristics which are
perceived by users as advantageous in some respect. For that reason, I
don't believe that the "d00dsp33k 4u" movement will ever become
standard English, but abbreviations like "u" for "you" could - that
kind of change has happened in the past.
It's not even necessary to look further than this august forum for
examples. What associations do the words "Rule", "confused",
"engage", "nasal", "chapter", etc. carry? Use of these, and other,
words in this newsgroup will evoke certain associations in regular
readers ("native speakers", if you like) that are not apparent to
those outside the community.
I don't think that most participants in the newsgroup would even try
to use this dialect (to give it an undeserved label) outside the
group, and it's even less likely that they would try to persuade the
rest of the world that it's proper and correct and should be generally
accepted just because some small group of people use it. That way lies
chaos.
Similarly, members of the
English-speaking community share a subtle understanding, perhaps
largely unconscious, of words and phrases in current use that is not
available to outsiders.
Non-native speakers are able to acquire knowledge of English as it is
actually used only to the extent to which they participate in the
English-speaking community - that is, only to the degree to which they
become "native".
You forget that we have a "standard written English" which with only
minor variations (English vs. American spellings, for example) can be
used to communicate successfully with both native and non-native
speakers. In fact, that's the point of this discussion. Standard
language provides the widest basis for communication, just as standard
C provides the most portable code. Using local dialects in a general
context weakens communication, and is a disservice to the reader.
We can use a local dialect in this newsgroup successfully when the
dialect is common to its participants. In fact, we must - the use of
technical terminology is necessary when discussing technical matters
in a precise way, which is the main purpose of the newsgroup. We
occasionally indulge in aberrations such as "DS9000" or "nasal
demons", but those are known to be aberrations, and are not likely to
affect any technical discussions. In the same vein, we have the
occasional short thread in a language other than English, and the
occasional long thread on subjects which are mostly off-topic, such as
this one.
A non-native speaker may bring to the language an understanding of why
things are structured as they are. He may be able to express himself
with greater ease, elegance and even precision. However, if he claims
a different knowledge of the meaning of certain words than that of
(the mass of) native speakers in general then his understanding is
simply wrong. His semantics may coincide with those of a dictionary,
they may be etymologically justifiable, but (if they differ from those
generally understood by native speakers) then they are not the
semantics of English.
Well said.
Jeremy.
[0] The language spoken by Americans and others bears only a
superficial resemblance to English, so they're excluded from these
comments.
But see your remarks above regarding language evolution. We shall
prevail!
[1] Marketing is essentially an attempt to abuse and control these
changing meanings, to forcibly associate certain words and phrases
with particular products in the minds of the public.
