He Carlos?! Why did you imitate my name?!
forum franco-hispanique / foro hispano-frances
>>English is the language of domination! 1 language = 1 way of thinking = latin civilizations deleted. It is not possible!<<
/me rolls eyes.
/me rolls eyes.
Another prove of how "germanics" cannot live without English emperialism in their lives>>
Can everyone just calm down a bit here?
Can everyone just calm down a bit here?
Carlos,
=>Ja!!! I didn't "imitate" your name. <=
Besides the incorect use of 'ja' , I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me ... if you're suggesting that I wrote "imitate" incorectly , you are wrong.
=>Ja!!! I didn't "imitate" your name. <=
Besides the incorect use of 'ja' , I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me ... if you're suggesting that I wrote "imitate" incorectly , you are wrong.
Besides the incorect use of 'ja' >
In fact no "ja" in Spanish means "ha" then: jajajaja = hahahaha, because he's Peruvian he used the word "ja"in the Spanish sense not in the German sense "ja" in which means "yes".
In fact no "ja" in Spanish means "ha" then: jajajaja = hahahaha, because he's Peruvian he used the word "ja"in the Spanish sense not in the German sense "ja" in which means "yes".
No probs, Sander!!
Just, you know, with the standard of your English sometimes...I thought it wouldn't hurt to confirm your spelling! ;)
Just, you know, with the standard of your English sometimes...I thought it wouldn't hurt to confirm your spelling! ;)
I'm not talking about the German sense, Why would he 'laugh' in Spanish and then speak in English?!
'laugh' in Spanish and then speak in English?! >
Well sometimes you can mix 2 languages by accident.
Well sometimes you can mix 2 languages by accident.
>English is the language of domination! 1 language = 1 way of thinking = latin civilizations deleted. [Nico]
Like Travis I was amazed that you would write such a sentence. No one culture can claim sole credit for promoting tolerance of diversity, but historically the English-speaking countries have played a great role in doing so. The Frenchman Voltaire recognized this in comparing the modern English government with that of ancient Rome:
"Voici une différence plus essentielle entre Rome et l'Angleterre, qui met tout l'avantage du côté de la dernière: c'est que le fruit des guerres civiles de Rome a été l'esclavage, et celui des troubles d'Angleterre, la liberté. La nation anglaise est la seule de la terre qui soit parvenue à régler le pouvoir des rois en leur résistant, et qui d'efforts en efforts ait enfin établi ce gouvernement sage où le prince, tout-puissant pour faire du bien, a les mains liées pour faire du mal; où les Seigneurs sont grands sans insolence et sans vassaux, et où le peuple partage le gouvernement sans confusions." Lettres philosophiques (VIII)
[Rough translation] "Here is a more essential difference between Rome and England, which shows that the advantage lies entirely on the side of the latter: the civil wars of Rome ended in slavery, and those of the England in liberty. The English nation is the only one on earth that has succeeded in setting limits to the power of kings by resisting them, and that through struggle has at last established that wise Government where the Prince is all powerful to do good, but has his hands tied when he tries to do evil, where the nobles are great without insolence and without vassals; and where the people share in the government without turmoil."
Voltaire exaggerates greatly, of course, and it's not fair to compare the English of 1734 (whose values would be expected to be closer to ours) with the ancient Romans. His remarks show, though, that he valued the progress that the English had made in promoting freedom. In this area he contrasted them favorably not only with the ancient Romans but with his Latin contemporaries (by 'Latin' I mean people living in countries that spoke Romance languages). On the whole there was more freedom in England than in the Latin countries.
When a bit later the French Revolution took place, once again there was little tolerance for those who were out of power. One kind of oppressive regime was quickly replaced by another. Also if we compare the results of the wars of independence in the Americas, we'll see that in the English-speaking United States a republic was established that took steps to protect individual rights and that allowed the opposition to campaign freely, thus allowing peaceful transitions from one administration to another. In contrast nearly all the Latin American countries quickly established some kind of dictatorship. Dictatorships continued to prevail there until recent decades.
The struggle for freedom has transcended national boundaries. Its roots can be found in many countries, and it's now part of the universal human heritage. The important role of the English-speaking countries in this endeavor, though, is undeniable. They have been among the leaders. You can equate English with "1 way of thinking" only if you ignore a great part of the history of the last few centuries.
Like Travis I was amazed that you would write such a sentence. No one culture can claim sole credit for promoting tolerance of diversity, but historically the English-speaking countries have played a great role in doing so. The Frenchman Voltaire recognized this in comparing the modern English government with that of ancient Rome:
"Voici une différence plus essentielle entre Rome et l'Angleterre, qui met tout l'avantage du côté de la dernière: c'est que le fruit des guerres civiles de Rome a été l'esclavage, et celui des troubles d'Angleterre, la liberté. La nation anglaise est la seule de la terre qui soit parvenue à régler le pouvoir des rois en leur résistant, et qui d'efforts en efforts ait enfin établi ce gouvernement sage où le prince, tout-puissant pour faire du bien, a les mains liées pour faire du mal; où les Seigneurs sont grands sans insolence et sans vassaux, et où le peuple partage le gouvernement sans confusions." Lettres philosophiques (VIII)
[Rough translation] "Here is a more essential difference between Rome and England, which shows that the advantage lies entirely on the side of the latter: the civil wars of Rome ended in slavery, and those of the England in liberty. The English nation is the only one on earth that has succeeded in setting limits to the power of kings by resisting them, and that through struggle has at last established that wise Government where the Prince is all powerful to do good, but has his hands tied when he tries to do evil, where the nobles are great without insolence and without vassals; and where the people share in the government without turmoil."
Voltaire exaggerates greatly, of course, and it's not fair to compare the English of 1734 (whose values would be expected to be closer to ours) with the ancient Romans. His remarks show, though, that he valued the progress that the English had made in promoting freedom. In this area he contrasted them favorably not only with the ancient Romans but with his Latin contemporaries (by 'Latin' I mean people living in countries that spoke Romance languages). On the whole there was more freedom in England than in the Latin countries.
When a bit later the French Revolution took place, once again there was little tolerance for those who were out of power. One kind of oppressive regime was quickly replaced by another. Also if we compare the results of the wars of independence in the Americas, we'll see that in the English-speaking United States a republic was established that took steps to protect individual rights and that allowed the opposition to campaign freely, thus allowing peaceful transitions from one administration to another. In contrast nearly all the Latin American countries quickly established some kind of dictatorship. Dictatorships continued to prevail there until recent decades.
The struggle for freedom has transcended national boundaries. Its roots can be found in many countries, and it's now part of the universal human heritage. The important role of the English-speaking countries in this endeavor, though, is undeniable. They have been among the leaders. You can equate English with "1 way of thinking" only if you ignore a great part of the history of the last few centuries.
Some corrections: Instead of 'those of the England in liberty' I should have written 'those of England in liberty'. Also 'Government' doesn't need to be capitalized.