The concept that could save the English language

Now, being of wog descent, I've taken some sort of interest in the two languages of my heritage - Maltese and Croatian -, espcially since I am studying Italian at Year 11 VCE level, which of course has given a lot of new information on the English language in turn.

Even better, studying Shakespeare in Lit. has given me an idea of what the English language used to be.

I got the main idea for this post a couple of weeks ago on a Sunday when I was randomingly foraging for food in the fridge.

Going to our grandparents the previous day, we naturally received enough food to feed the Bolivian armed forces.

Jump back to the next day.....

I noticed that my Masterchef-grandmother had given us some soup - Fair enough, whatever - but it was really the labelling on the jar that caught my eye. Labelled, "Šugar", I realised that the solution to the conundrum of the English language was the (re?)introduction of accent marks.

(Obviously, the realisation that she had put soup into a no-doubt-cleaned sugar jar didn't bother me at all)!

I'm no scholar - as of yet - but it seems to me when English was still a byword for, I don't know, pehaps backward-Middle French, accent marks abounded and pronunciation would have been way easier.

I could be entirely wrong here so I am perfectly happy to be potentially corrected.

(This is why I made the point about studying Shakespeare. - It is easy to see the influence of Continental languages and their associated idiosyncracies on the well-read Bard).

As the English language becomes more mechanical and scientific in its structure (euphonic??), I wonder where this leaves pronuciation.

(The influence of neo-Marxism on the English language must be left, sadly, for another post).

We all know that words like "sugar" and "sure" are pronounced "shoogar" and "shure", not "soogar" or "soore" - Clearly, the caron that my grandmother had inserted was meant to account for the "sh" sound in her native tongue - Croatian -, leaving the regular "s" for words like "silly" and "see' (obviously these words aren't Croatian but you get my point).

What would be the effect of (re?)introducing accent marks into the English language - beacuse, after all, it would have to be pragmatic, practical and important to (re?)ntroduce such sweeping changes into any language. Government departments would have to be the initiators of these reforms - staff would have to be retrained, software and keyboards would have to be recalibrated and circulars would have to be published on correct use.

Then, the reforms would spiral outwards: the selling of keyboards with accents would become the next big thing, with directors and owners potentially opting to sell their livelihoods because of the costs that would mirror those of the abovementioned-government departments. Then the education system would have to deal with these linguistic changes as well. (ACARA, anyone?)

Then the advertising to the general public. Oh God, the advertising.....

I personally would advocate anything to do with making the English language easier to pronounce. But where would the funding come from? The Department of Linguistics? Not gonna happen, mate.

I think it is important that language is practical and I do want to see the triumph of function over form when it comes to any language. Whether that outcome is decided by the rise of mechanics or the rise of accenting, I do not know, but one thing I can confirm is that gone are the days of pomp and circumstance in any sort of the text in the English language.

World Cup and its sociopolitical thingumabobs

Alright, so the fifth word in the title is a little bit wanky but it's important to recognise that the World Cup emphasises its mishmash of cultures and the joinage of these into a global celebration of footy.

(Sorry, did I mean footy? -I really meant soccer - or even better, association football).

Anywho, what I'm trying to say is that when global events like the World Cup and the Olympics happen, the cosmopolitanism of any given nation is seen naked - where people of mixed heritage make the decision of choosing which of thier parent nations means more to them.

Now, that's not neccessarily a bad thing but...
Some nationalities have more of a rep for...unbridled passion...than others.
Here, when the two teams of a person's heritage face off, (eg. Serbia v. Australia for a Serbian-Australian), racial clashes can ignite and it makes quite a splash in conservative media - the argument being that patriotism should be accepted first and foremost.

Obviously, decreeing which team someone can go for is just idiotic and pointless - sport is the enjoyment of seeing one's chosen team win and win well.

There is no immediate solution to this rampant nationalism that manifests itself in the realms of any sport - the only way forward will be when that old and ancient way of thinking brought over from Europe by migrants ceases to exist and that will only happen when - perhaps I'm being a bit morbid here - the old guard - i.e. first generation migrants but not their descendants - die out.

A footnote: You may not know this but I am of European heritage so I know what I'm talking about. In this matter, my grandparents can actually be quite docile when it comes to this sort of thing - but get them started on Serbia and...

Another footnote: Globalisation has meant that some of my schoolmates actively follow the English Premier League. That's fine, whatever. At the end of the day, one can go for Ghana, even if there is no semi-logical reason why. But, where perception is key, that person is just going to look like a fool.

Exams

Ahh yes that time of the year is once again upon us that respective schools perform the supreme sacrifice of writing up torturous exams and then marking them - mon dieu! how hard! - or, even better, buying them off various random no-name obscure "educational" companies -I mean, what is that meant to mean anyway - it's the free market at work anywho, s'il vous plait. (Blogspot italisication is now starting to shit me).

So yeah, thats all for now