/lit/ - Literature

>>15088347
Devolution

>>15088351
Language can't devolve

>>15088351
This
>>15088354
Other way around, they only ever devolve

>>15088362
Language can't devolve or evolve, it can only change. To call it devolution is meaningless. It's just different.

And to be clear this isn't me being some kind of valueless subjectivist, this is just linguistics. Language inevitably changes and there's no meaningful way to distinguish "devolved" or "evolved".

Language change is constant and social media is merely a catalyst. The largest change we have recently seen is due to the American/British divide being pulled down by media, so would say TV would probably be the main cause, or perhaps cinema. You obviously have the increase of globalisation and, if you go further back, the imperialism wave which lead to thousands of foreign words entering our lexicon.

>>15089602
Not yet

>>15089602
Ebonics is a devolution of higher language, hence wiggers.

>>15089891
you sound like a simp

>>15088347
Imagine not being black in the year 2020

>>15088347
Erm. I think "evolve" should refer to living things, not ideas and systems. Erm.
>>15088362
Devolve is a stupid fucking word that shouldn't exist, shut the fuck up for the rest of your life. It was probably invented by a retard even smarter than you.

Emojis are the future. Im surprised Hiro hasnt implemented emojis here yet.

I think we need to make a distinction between the English language and the American language.

>>15088347
Read Dataclysm.

You might find it's the opposite, particularly with Twitter.

>>15089891
>>15088351
>>15088362
How is Ebonics a devolution of English?

>>15089602
>Language can't devolve
R*ddit opinion. If you genuinely believe that ebonics are not inferior to proper English you're either pretending to be retarded for the sake of appearances or bluepilled as hell.

>>15090183
It is greatly simplified, and thus less able to convey either beauty or information precisely. Could you imagine Shakespeare writing in ebonics? The problem isn't that it's a common dialect, after all, Dante chose the dialect of tuscany instead of latin for the Commedia, but that it's severely dumbed down compared to its origin in every regard.

>>15089902
Yea, because I hate seeing white men talk like chimps.
Sounds like you are a simp to a black bull.

>>15088362
Based, but the word is decompose

bum[p

>>15088347
I think it's more because of the demoralizing of society. It's pushed through social media but I don't think it's a result that's inherent to social media.

>>15089602
yeah dude pidgin english is necessary and makes sense, why make niggers learn the most utilitarian language in the world?

>>15090187
It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of linguistics. There's no objective standard by which you can say that one dialect is superior or inferior to another. There's no clear logical or rational explanation as to why. If you have an argument, please let me know.

Again, I'm not a subjectivist. I do not, for example, think that all cultures or beliefs are equally valid or valuable. But language is too complex and shifting to apply rules of superiority or inferiority to.

>>15090845
there are metrics you can use like information density, complexity, etc. that you can use to measure languages against each other.

>>15090873
Yes, but those still don't buttress judgments about superiority or inferiority, which remain subjective.

>>15089602
>Language can't devolve or evolve
If we all started writing like Chaucer tomorrow I would argue that the english language devolved.

>>15088347
Memes are unironically changing the way we talk and interact

>>15090187
>Ebonics, ideas are able to be spread within their cultural context amongst the fluent users
>proper English, see above

>>15090979
A language that can both convey information more efficiently and express a wider range of concepts is objectively better. You haven't made any argument for why a language that is both less complex and less able to express complex concepts is better. All you can do is sit here and say "DURRR IM RETARDED DURRRR IF I PRETEND THAT BAD THINGS ARE GOOD FOR NO REASON YOU'RE WRONG HURRRR IM RETARDED DUUUUUUR". Well you know what? If you're so retarded why don't you get off my /lit/.

>>15092039
Lmao. This post is a great encapsulation of why it's a shame that no one studies linguistics. You still have completely failed to provide any real evidence for your position and are unable to distinguish your own subjective opinions from objective ones. You're just reeeing.

Ebonics is not less complex than other dialects. It still follows strict internal grammatical rules. Ability to express complex concepts is a consequence of intelligence and language aptitude, not dialect. Ebonics uses more pragmatics (not that your illiterate peabrain is likely to even know what that means) than standard American english and has less formality, but it has essentially identical vocabulary. Its ability to express a wide range of concepts is the same as standard English.

Sorry you're triggered, but maybe you should stick to subjects you actually know something about.

>ebonics has an identical vocabulary to English

As a dialect of english (big word there, try looking it up) it can use every word in the language. Being a dialect doesn't limit the available vocabulary.

>>15092107
Well you have showed yourself as a mid-wit who not only romantically adores the primitive but you have also rationalized yourself into stupidity. You want him to give you evidence? Haha just go to your local KFC and use the word "encapsulation", "linguistic", and "pragmatic". Get some real world experience for once, you badly need it.

>>15092722
>seething this hard at getting btfo

>>15089602
>has the language lost expressive value over time
it has devolved
>has the language gained expressive value
it has evolved

ebonics as an additional component of english is an evolution of english
ebonics as its own language exclusive of previous english vocabulary and grammar is a devolution of english

>>15088347
Niggers and gays, how is this even a question?>>15089798
stfu joyce kys

>>15092039
Ok dumbfuck, therefore agglutinative languages are superior to English

>>15088347
Pidgin languages have existed for a while

>>15090223
>Could you imagine Shakespeare writing in ebonics?

>>15089602
>this isn't me being some kind of valueless subjectivist, this is just linguistics
If beauty isn't subjective, it isn't, then languages do evolve and devolve on the beauty scale. Beauty is correlated with truth and proportion, with true proportion comes harmony and right complexity.
Like the Greek language.

>losing complexity isn't devolution
this is just as retarded as the claim that there was never a collapse of civilization in history only "rapid transformation into something less complex"

>Imagine thinking that Ebonics isn't inferior to English

>>15092741
Go outside, you might actually learn something

>>15094077
> rapid transformation into something less complex

Ah, that one, I struggle to conceive of a bigger pile of sophistry.

>mfw non-native english speaker
I thought ebonics was an insult to the language niggers speak, is it actually a formal word for it?

>>15095045
According to the PC thought police, it is now an insult yes. You're "supposed" to use AAVE now (African-American Vernacular English). Obviously the best option is the humble niggerspeak.

Goddamn I hate niggers so fucking much. The collapse of civilization will be worth it when the stinky niggers all starve due to their uselessness. Let's see what their PC gets them when the gibs run out.

>>15095066
So is Uncle Remus racist or not?

>>15092722
Go to any pub in, say, any cultivated city in Germany where you would find only specimen of that supposedly superior “aryan race” and talk the fancy vernacular and see if somebody even gets a gist of what you’re saying. Hint: they don’t.

>>15088347
No capitalism is

>>15089602
Evolved favors precision. Ebonics is is very imprecise.

>>15092107
Linguists assert simultaneously that you cannot measure the complexity of a language but that they are positive all languages have the same degree of complexity. This is obviously ideologically motivated because muh equality

Racists in thread not understanding that their own version of English is inferior to that of the 18th and 19th century

So do linguistics jerk off Newspeak, too?

u just gotta b open minded n shit nigga no thang lik better kultur or sivilizasuun dawg gramer is gey shit fo wyt bois ho tryin a orgenize shit wit gay rools lik a nerds wyt autism fagets yo

>>15090187
I don't know whether ebonics or english is worse but German is better language than both.

>>15092722
>more subjectivism and hypotheticals

Sorry you can't tell the difference between evidence and your personal opinions, friend.

>>15094024
Beauty is subjective.

>>15095157
>Ebonics is very imprecise

Citation needed

>>15095159
No I'm entirely aware of that

based university trained linguistician-kun defending the intellectual rigor of African American Vernacular, thus paving the road for the eventual conquest of the linguisticsphere by the rigidly defined and rigorous 4chanese Vernacular as shown in my image.

Furthermore, all emotion will be conveyed through memespeak. Based and cringe shall be used unironically in scientific journals. A man shall feel an emotion and the only words he'll need will be based or cringe. If you think this is wrong, you are an uneducated simpleton fool. There is no wrong or better. There is only different.

>>15090979
Everything is subjective if you don’t recognize standards things should be judged against. Have to draw the line in the sand somewhere.

>>15095105
Why would you expect Germans to be adept at English?

>>15095159
Are you retarded? That's the entire point everyone's trying to make here, in fact it was already pointed out earlier in the thread to support the argument that nigger speak is in fact inferior to English.

>>15090223
>Could you imagine Shakespeare writing in ebonics?
Nah, but Shakespeare ignored conventional rules himself and made-up language a lot

>>15090845
>There's no objective standard by which you can say that one dialect is superior or inferior to another.
Language was created in order to pass off information. Therefore, the language that passes off information "better" is the superior one. Better is decided by how accessible it is and how complex the information it can represent. English is more accessible and can be more complex than ebonics, so it's a superior language. It's why math is superior to counting with your fingers, retard.

>>15088347
That post is literally just Afro-American Vernacular English.

>>15092722
>>15095158

You guys should go back to bitching about feminists on /v/. You don't belong on the literature board.

>>15096311
>Therefore, the language that passes off information "better" is the superior one. Better is decided by how accessible it is and how complex the information it can represent. English is more accessible and can be more complex than ebonics, so it's a superior language.

What empirical measurements are you taking of "accessibility" and "complexity", other than the inside of your own ass?

>>15096064
Has nothing to do with the fact that is quite literally niggerspeak

>>15089602
Fewer tenses and words can literally only lead to more ambiguity and less freedom in forming sentences or thoughts due to greater constraints. The more words in a language the better, objectively, for both communication and beauty.

>>15096724
at least try to reply to what was said

>>15096793
>The more words in a language the better, objectively, for both communication and beauty.

Holy fuck this is a hilarious take. This board was not always so braindead.

Why not optimize our language so that every sentence uttered contained a neologism? Then we'd *objectively* be the most communicative!

>>15089602
>Everything is relative bro
Wrong, what you are talking about when people say "devolve" is a loss of meaning or resolution.
You're the dumbass who would watch a language devolve back down to grunts and say "it's just different bro" because you're too much of an intellectual coward to take a stand on anything.

nah whites just don't have culture anymore so they leech it off of niggers

>>15096807
>I don't need to know anything about linguistics because people at fast food restaurants have a smaller vocabulary, QED

You are beneath reply

>>15096820
What meaning or resolution is lost in ebonics? No circular logic allowed

>>15096831
How can you assert that all languages have the same amount of complexity while also admitting you can't measure the complexity of a language? All you can say is that you don't know if they are all equally complex.

>>15096868
Linguists can and do measure things like morphological complexity, the time it takes for children to acquire language, etc. What the fully general "complexity" of a language is doesn't seem to be a well-posed question in the first place. The anon claiming that English is both "more accessible" and "more complex" that ebonics is pretty idiotic, considering one of the few measures of complexity that exists is really a measure of inaccessibility, e.g. time to acquisition.

>>15093715
Why are you calling me a dumbfuck, you're not wrong. English would be drastically improved if it was more widely accepted to agglutinate Germanic, Greek, and Latin morphemes