<They are not nations but part of the United Kingdom>
Franco
Ok Mr Smartass tell me what are they considered to be?
Franco
Ok Mr Smartass tell me what are they considered to be?
European language?
England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland all comprise the UK. They may have some degree of internal autonomy and may have historical divisions between them, but for practical international purposes, they are not discrete political entities unto themselves. The Republic of Ireland is a separate country NOT politically bound to the UK. So by my count, that really does add up to two (2) English-speaking European nations.
Explain to me why anyone really thinks Europe NEEDS just one (or two, or three) "official" languages? Sure, having a bunch of different languages to deal with is messy and time-consuming, but that's what makes Europe Europe! It's the reality of the place. Why mess with it?
Explain to me why anyone really thinks Europe NEEDS just one (or two, or three) "official" languages? Sure, having a bunch of different languages to deal with is messy and time-consuming, but that's what makes Europe Europe! It's the reality of the place. Why mess with it?
Good point Uriel...that's what makes every nation special...it'd be better that everyone learnt one ore two foreign languages (besides English) which would develop their mental capacities, therefore helping them right?
Cowardly 'Guest' ,
=>you said : "English? Maybe, but it is not usefull when considering it's possition in Europe only 2 nations speak English and both of them are Islands"
your knowledge about Europe is amazing!
England
Scotland
Wales
Ireland <=
Yes, and yours is dreadful.
The United Kingdom, is a country as is Ireland. England,Scotland,Wales and Northern Island (which you forgot to mention) are 'nations'.
=>you said : "English? Maybe, but it is not usefull when considering it's possition in Europe only 2 nations speak English and both of them are Islands"
your knowledge about Europe is amazing!
England
Scotland
Wales
Ireland <=
Yes, and yours is dreadful.
The United Kingdom, is a country as is Ireland. England,Scotland,Wales and Northern Island (which you forgot to mention) are 'nations'.
mb English language has lesser amount of native speakers, than German. But it's being learned as non-native tongue by more ppl than other languages.
And what about Spanish... In my scariest sleeps, I saw Spanish in role of primary tongue. :) It's studied in linguistic and philological universities only (I'm speaking about R.F.). It can't be learned in another universities at all.
So, majority of my countrymen learn English (about 90-95%).
And what about Spanish... In my scariest sleeps, I saw Spanish in role of primary tongue. :) It's studied in linguistic and philological universities only (I'm speaking about R.F.). It can't be learned in another universities at all.
So, majority of my countrymen learn English (about 90-95%).
Interesting topic
With my lack of knowledge of the EU representive system. Are Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England represented as the 'United Kingdom' or as separate nations?
With my lack of knowledge of the EU representive system. Are Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England represented as the 'United Kingdom' or as separate nations?
So the Union Kingdom could be considered an 'United States of Britain' or the European Union.
<<Good point Uriel...that's what makes every nation special...it'd be better that everyone learnt one ore two foreign languages (besides English) which would develop their mental capacities, therefore helping them right? >>
It probably would be. I'm all for learning more about anything, and gaining a little insight into other cultures and peoples through their language can only be a good thing.
It probably would be. I'm all for learning more about anything, and gaining a little insight into other cultures and peoples through their language can only be a good thing.
"They are not nations but part of the United Kingdom"
That's partly true. They are "nations", but they are NOT countries. They almost like our equivalent of American states, except that the UK is not a federal country. Despite not being actual countries in the sense that France, Holland or Italy are, they have their own teams in sport, such as football. But many people think they shouldn't have. Sepp Blatter, the President of FIFA, believes there should be a UK football team, rather than 4 different teams playing for each region of the UK, because he feels as though it means that Britain has 4 chances of winning the World Cup! But, in most sports, we do have Great Britain as a team rather than England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland.
That's partly true. They are "nations", but they are NOT countries. They almost like our equivalent of American states, except that the UK is not a federal country. Despite not being actual countries in the sense that France, Holland or Italy are, they have their own teams in sport, such as football. But many people think they shouldn't have. Sepp Blatter, the President of FIFA, believes there should be a UK football team, rather than 4 different teams playing for each region of the UK, because he feels as though it means that Britain has 4 chances of winning the World Cup! But, in most sports, we do have Great Britain as a team rather than England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland.
"With my lack of knowledge of the EU representive system. Are Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England represented as the 'United Kingdom' or as separate nations? "
The UK (England, Scotland, Wales, NI) is an EU state. Counting each as separate would be silly.
The UK (England, Scotland, Wales, NI) is an EU state. Counting each as separate would be silly.
>>Il devrait y avoir trois langues internationales en Europe :
- Une langue germanique pour les Européens du nord ; ce serait l'Allemand parceque c'est la langue germanique la plus parlée en Europe.
- Une langue Latine : le Français, pour les mêmes raisons.
- Une langue Slave : Le Russe pour les mêmes raisons.
L'Anglais ne devrait être utilisé que pour communiquer avec les Britaniques.<<
I wouldn't support this grouping for several reasons:
- In Scandinavian countries, the natural second language for basically everybody in English, as is, for the most part, in The Netherlands. German is learnt in these countries too, but to a lesser extent. English is still an European language, mind you, even if I am aware that the culture of the UK is in many ways different from that of Continental Europe, and the UK somewhat stands aloof from the rest of Europe politically as well, but in spite of that, it is still an European country.
- In case of French, I definitely agree. French has a considerable influence in Europe, and it is actually still used for communication in other Romance countries as well. With regard to the EU institutions, it is still probably the most widely used language. I'd really like to see it as a common European language, but its direct influence is still confined to francophone countries and some other Latin ones. This may have something to do with the fact that France expanded its sphere of influence over the rest of the world rather than Europe in the past, and sad to say, the era when it took the lead in Europe in cultural matters is also over for the most part (because of the increasing Americanisation). French has no real chance of becoming a widely learnt foreign language in Eastern Europe, because except for Romania, its influence has not really strong historical roots there.
- As for the Slavic countries, it is true that those with an Eastern Orthodox cultural legacy often use Russian as a common tongue, but the true lingua franca for Slavic peoples is really German (it is interesting to note that a large bulk of literature on Slavic Studies was written in German, besides Russian). The other thing is that some Slavic countries have a rather negative attitude towards Russia and hence Russian as well. There are definitely very strong anti-Russian sentiments in Poland and parts of The Ukraine, for example, although the Russian influence is still rather strong in Bulgaria, and to a somewhat lesser extent, in Serbia. However, not all of the Slavic-speaking countries are uniform in this respect, and Russian now doesn't play a strong role in most of them, especially in those traditionally belonging to Western Christianity. So I would better go for German as a common lingua franca for Slavic peoples (partly because most of the Slavic countries had all or part of their territory under German or Austrian rule in the 19th century, except perhaps for Russia). But needless to say, German is rather quickly losing ground before English in these countries as well, although the older population still seems to speak German better, partly out of necessity triggered by the historical realities in the past. And the German influence is also still rather strong in Hungary, too, which is not a Slavic country, but has especially strong hitorical ties with both Austria and Germany (especially Bavaria within the latter country).
Summing up, besides English, the most regionally important languages within that part of Europe which is now part of the EU are French and German. With the collapse of Communism, the influence of Russian has been restricted to the ex-Soviet countries, but even there, the influence of Russian is in slow decline in some areas (see the western parts of The Ukraine, for example). The only Slavic language that has some chance of becoming regionally important is Polish, but this remains to be seen (the recent extremist political tendencies in this country will definitely do this process no good). I tend to think that for the most part countires in Europe will end up using some combination of their own language plus two of the most widely spoken languages in the future. For Latin countries, the latter two may be French and English (or French and German in some of them), and for the rest, mostly English and German. Add to this Spanish with regard to the Iberian Peninsula (which is actually more heterogenous than it may actually seem, given the strong regionalist tendencies within Spain among the Catalans, Basques and perhaps also the Galicians).
- Une langue germanique pour les Européens du nord ; ce serait l'Allemand parceque c'est la langue germanique la plus parlée en Europe.
- Une langue Latine : le Français, pour les mêmes raisons.
- Une langue Slave : Le Russe pour les mêmes raisons.
L'Anglais ne devrait être utilisé que pour communiquer avec les Britaniques.<<
I wouldn't support this grouping for several reasons:
- In Scandinavian countries, the natural second language for basically everybody in English, as is, for the most part, in The Netherlands. German is learnt in these countries too, but to a lesser extent. English is still an European language, mind you, even if I am aware that the culture of the UK is in many ways different from that of Continental Europe, and the UK somewhat stands aloof from the rest of Europe politically as well, but in spite of that, it is still an European country.
- In case of French, I definitely agree. French has a considerable influence in Europe, and it is actually still used for communication in other Romance countries as well. With regard to the EU institutions, it is still probably the most widely used language. I'd really like to see it as a common European language, but its direct influence is still confined to francophone countries and some other Latin ones. This may have something to do with the fact that France expanded its sphere of influence over the rest of the world rather than Europe in the past, and sad to say, the era when it took the lead in Europe in cultural matters is also over for the most part (because of the increasing Americanisation). French has no real chance of becoming a widely learnt foreign language in Eastern Europe, because except for Romania, its influence has not really strong historical roots there.
- As for the Slavic countries, it is true that those with an Eastern Orthodox cultural legacy often use Russian as a common tongue, but the true lingua franca for Slavic peoples is really German (it is interesting to note that a large bulk of literature on Slavic Studies was written in German, besides Russian). The other thing is that some Slavic countries have a rather negative attitude towards Russia and hence Russian as well. There are definitely very strong anti-Russian sentiments in Poland and parts of The Ukraine, for example, although the Russian influence is still rather strong in Bulgaria, and to a somewhat lesser extent, in Serbia. However, not all of the Slavic-speaking countries are uniform in this respect, and Russian now doesn't play a strong role in most of them, especially in those traditionally belonging to Western Christianity. So I would better go for German as a common lingua franca for Slavic peoples (partly because most of the Slavic countries had all or part of their territory under German or Austrian rule in the 19th century, except perhaps for Russia). But needless to say, German is rather quickly losing ground before English in these countries as well, although the older population still seems to speak German better, partly out of necessity triggered by the historical realities in the past. And the German influence is also still rather strong in Hungary, too, which is not a Slavic country, but has especially strong hitorical ties with both Austria and Germany (especially Bavaria within the latter country).
Summing up, besides English, the most regionally important languages within that part of Europe which is now part of the EU are French and German. With the collapse of Communism, the influence of Russian has been restricted to the ex-Soviet countries, but even there, the influence of Russian is in slow decline in some areas (see the western parts of The Ukraine, for example). The only Slavic language that has some chance of becoming regionally important is Polish, but this remains to be seen (the recent extremist political tendencies in this country will definitely do this process no good). I tend to think that for the most part countires in Europe will end up using some combination of their own language plus two of the most widely spoken languages in the future. For Latin countries, the latter two may be French and English (or French and German in some of them), and for the rest, mostly English and German. Add to this Spanish with regard to the Iberian Peninsula (which is actually more heterogenous than it may actually seem, given the strong regionalist tendencies within Spain among the Catalans, Basques and perhaps also the Galicians).
>>even if I am aware that the culture of the UK is in many ways different from that of Continental Europe<<
I don't agree with this at all. Do you really think that the Netherlands has more in common with Portugal than with the UK? I don't. (I live in the UK, by the way).
I don't agree with this at all. Do you really think that the Netherlands has more in common with Portugal than with the UK? I don't. (I live in the UK, by the way).
But even then, one is considering a country (the Netherlands) where an actual political union with England was once considered, even though in practice such took just the form of a temporary personal union, so it would not be surprising that such would be rather close culturally to the UK, especially considering that both are West Germanic-speaking countries largely bordering the North Sea. However, if you compare the Netherlands with, say, Belgium, northern Germany, Denmark, or northeastern France, and contrast with the comparison of the Netherlands with the UK, then it is likely far harder to say that the Netherlands has any particularly strong ties to the UK compared to other countries in continental Europe in the same general region as it.
I didn't deliberately choose the Netherlands to suggest that it was in some way very similar to Britain. The implicit point was: Do other North-Western European countries really have more in common with the likes of Spain and Portugal than with Britain? Yes, it is understandable that the Netherlands has closer links with, say, Belgium, than with Britain. In the same way that Britain and Ireland probably have closer links with each-other than with other European countries (it's probably the same for Germany and Austria, for example, as well).
I've never been able to understand the attitude that some people have where they think that there is a unified 'Continental European' culture, and that British culture is in someway unique or distinct from this. Although I accept that there are some cultural differences between specific European countries (e.g. Britain, France, Germany — although I do feel that the differences are becoming less significant), I think that it would be very hard to sustain an argument that Britain is in some way unique compared to 'Continental Europe' as a whole. Compare, for example, Denmark and Portugal, or Lithuania and Italy, or Bulgaria and Luxembourg — is it really possible to claim that Britain is distinct from 'the continent', and that 'Continental Europeans' in general share a large amount of culture and values which the British do not have?
I've never been able to understand the attitude that some people have where they think that there is a unified 'Continental European' culture, and that British culture is in someway unique or distinct from this. Although I accept that there are some cultural differences between specific European countries (e.g. Britain, France, Germany — although I do feel that the differences are becoming less significant), I think that it would be very hard to sustain an argument that Britain is in some way unique compared to 'Continental Europe' as a whole. Compare, for example, Denmark and Portugal, or Lithuania and Italy, or Bulgaria and Luxembourg — is it really possible to claim that Britain is distinct from 'the continent', and that 'Continental Europeans' in general share a large amount of culture and values which the British do not have?
As I see it, cultures do not stop at borders.Neither do, in most cases, languages ...
Being an Island, means cultural interation is limited.When you speak of the Netherlands, you probably figured; 'well,it's one of the closest countries in continental Europe which doesn't speak French'. But that North Sea is quite a barrier.
I think that of all cultural exchange, invasions have made the biggest marks on English culture.Both ways.
The Viking and Normand (*french*) invasion were of a huge impact on early Anglo-Saxon culture.Both also the other way around, like the Napoleontic wars whihc took Brittain to the continent....
But who defines culture anyway ...
The Dutch eat raw fish, the English don't and the French don't as well, but does this mean English and French culture are closer together ....
Being an Island, means cultural interation is limited.When you speak of the Netherlands, you probably figured; 'well,it's one of the closest countries in continental Europe which doesn't speak French'. But that North Sea is quite a barrier.
I think that of all cultural exchange, invasions have made the biggest marks on English culture.Both ways.
The Viking and Normand (*french*) invasion were of a huge impact on early Anglo-Saxon culture.Both also the other way around, like the Napoleontic wars whihc took Brittain to the continent....
But who defines culture anyway ...
The Dutch eat raw fish, the English don't and the French don't as well, but does this mean English and French culture are closer together ....