Rationalize English language

As more of the world are teaching English as a second language, English speakers should make some concessions.

I have heard an Indonesian English teacher comment that there are many anomalies in the english language that are not present in other languages. More people would keep learning English through school if it wasn't so hard.

I propose a committee of experts be convened to simplify English language in those areas where it can be simplified without losing meaning.

Their recommendations should be adopted by the Queen of England, and published widely to denote the acceptability of the new changes.

There will be objectors, but as with all things, that should not be a reason for common sense not to prevail.



  • I think that might be a wonderful idea, however, these experts would have to make sure the beauty of the language is not lost. Also, it has to make sense to native English speakers.

  • Thanks. The kinds of changes I am thinking about are to do with allowing simpler grammar to be acceptable. Eg, Just as it could be allowable to say, 'Wouldn't they have been easier expressions to learn?', it should also be allowable tio say 'them easier expressions to learn?'. Maybe not preferred. But allowable. As a compromise by English speakers, for having their language accepted as the global language to be learned as a second language by others. Make it allowable, and there will be less giving up by those wanting to learn English as a second or third language.

  • I think that the concept of the idea has merit, but in studying some University Linguistics right now, we've been told to think about why English is a world language, and if it deserves that status. I think rather than reforming English, which itself has countless dialects, a simple "international english" should be created. This should not replace actual english.

  • I disagree with the idea.Although the idea has many good qualities -like-it would make it easier for people in non English speaking countries to learn the language, spread English even wider all over the globe and promote worldwide communication, it has also many not so good qualities, such as - the people learning the 'simple' English would miss out on the elaborate patterns (that every language has) , the special phrases, and the concept of the culture all together . It would also eventually degrade English for all it's speakers (like the "internet English" for example) and everyone will end up speaking a simple, poor , unimaginative and not rich with wit language which will make the human experience of communication , far less deep.

    Every language has it's ups and downs but even if it's hard to learn, it's worth it because the 'hard to understand' expressions and dialects in it have a history of a whole rich culture behind them ,with different ideas and communication standards. And learning that is the whole point of learning a new language.To communicate better with others.

  • Great thigiknn! That really breaks the mold!

  • I think you hit a blulseye there fellas!

  • I object because English is an evolving language and when you study its history, you can see that different (geographic) areas and cultures have adopted English for specific purposes and then modified it to suit their needs. It would be impossible to create one standard English and this would encourage linguistic imperialism (search it on Google before commenting unless you have an academic background) and cultural superiority. It will also cause a greater divide between countries, cultures, and society, as well as the "haves" and "have nots". Look at the history of the English language and see how it has never been consistent or stable - English is a mongrel language because it actually combines many different languages from Norse, Vikings, Romans, French, Italian, and more - not to mention that Shakespeare invented more than 1700 words (that I know of) in his plays. These words are now considered "real" and "proper" English (e.g. amazement, luggage, label, compromise, exposure, eyeball, hint, invulnerable, unreal, variable, and more); who is to say that a word that is used now is not going to be accepted as "real" English in the next few years? Languages evolve, as do people, and it cannot be stopped. Of course, there can be a regulatory body to assist (a la the French language), but it just creates a divide.

  • I object because levelling down is never a good idea.

Similar Ideas: