Which language do you like most/is the most fascinating?

Post Reply New Topic

However -and this ties into what you touched upon earlier, how English has become the sole leading language of both international trade and the academia- nowadays, interest in German and French has begun to wane among Dutch students, as they see more benefits in just learning English. I went to a secondary school that had stopped French lessons altogether, so I've had to teach myself French at a later age.

Librarian, one thing you have to consider is that Europe has never truly been a political or cultural unit, and that it's had a long history of states merging and splitting up again. To name a recent example, you were last in Europe in the 1980s; the map of Europe looked a lot different back then from what it looks like today. There was Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and the Soviet Union on one hand, on the other hand Germany was split down the middle into the Bundesrepublik and the DDR. The aforementioned Eastern European former states had arguably all been conceived as umbrella states encompassing several peoples, though each for different reasons/motivations (though the Soviet Union was the heir to the legacy of the Russian Empire's territorial policies).

I think the situation really does vary by country here in Europe, though, and within those countries it varies by region. To take another example that's close to home for me, in the Netherlands, learning languages had traditionally been an important part of the students' curriculum. Especially the languages spoken by our neighbours, namely English, German, and French, had always been a staple of Dutch education. Why? Because the Netherlands are a small nation of traders, so it would be useful to us if we speak a mouthful of English, German, and French, which would potentially grant access to the markets of France, the UK, and the German-speaking nations, aside from giving our graduating scientists and researchers the opportunity to branch out beyond the area of the Dutch academic world.
However -and this ties into what you touched upon earlier, how English has become the sole leading language of both international trade and the academia- nowadays, interest in German and French has begun to wane among Dutch students, as they see more benefits in just learning English. I went to a secondary school that had stopped French lessons altogether, so I've had to teach myself French at a later age.

Tourists, foreign students, and expats are often pleased that many Dutch people can communicate fairly well in English, but I believe that Dutch proficiency in English is at its highest in the larger cities, while the smaller towns have a smaller amount of people who are comfortable speaking English. When I lived in Amsterdam, I had interactions with tourists every week (simply because there are always tourists asking for directions) and I worked at a factory where the lingua franca was English because many of my co-workers were Nigerian, Ghanaian, or Filipino (who were all Anglophones). On the streets of Amsterdam, similar to what Raziel said about Germany, you will hear Papiamento, Sranan, Arabic, and Turkish. At work, I've heard Filipino, Akan, Farsi, Urdu, Polish, and Czech. But now that I've moved to a smaller town in the south of the Netherlands, I'm one of few 'exotic' residents in town, and I mostly hear Dutch.

I also imagine that it differs per country in Europe: in Holland, Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, and Scandinavia, it seems that the larger cities have a relatively high percentage of exotic immigrants; partly because of colonial history, partly because of economic and political migration. Eastern European states, like the Slavic and Baltic countries, although culturally very diverse, seem to be a lot more monolithic in the ethnic make-up of their respective populations, even in the capital cities. I don't think Ljubljana, Riga, or Bucarest can be likened to Brussels or Stockholm, in that regard.

Tying into this on the other hand, is that in Western Europe there does seem to be a certain negative stereotype that's prevalent in the general consensus of the people when it comes to Eastern European countries, except when someone either personally knows someone from Eastern Europe, or has visited one or more Eastern countries. The ignorance displayed when it comes to Eastern Europe is quite baffling when you consider that Western Europeans supposedly have easier access to a thorough education. It's rare that you'll come across a Dutchman who knows that Croatia is mostly Catholic and Serbia Eastern Orthodox. Most do not know, and they do not care.

Having said this, what hasn't changed is that, as you noted, Europe is composed of many nations, and sometimes these nations are located within other nations. This is why I personally don't care for transnational bodies such as the EU, and why I hope that these captive nations are given the opportunity for self-determination, even if I don't care to become involved in internal European politics.

I don't think that the EU sees itself as a nation, but more as a "loose Union". The expression "Union" might be confusing since the USA uses a very similar expression, but there are many differences and how this is ment. Also in the EU nations can be added and also leave. That a nation left just happened once with Greenland.
I still think that the EU is for high importance for the nations within the EU, but I agree that it isn't really for high importance outside of the EU. Since the EU it is much more easyer to move from one country in the EU to another and also work there. I still remember the time were I had to show my passport every time I went to France. Now I usually don't have to when I'm comming from a country within the EU. Living in the EU is more flexible than it has been befor what is important, because all European countries are small compared to the USA, Russia or China for example. Also the countries within the EU are trying to come along with each other.

Nations within nations...
This is rare in Europe, but there are some examples: Greenland and the Faroe Islands are both officially part of Danmark, eventhough both have nowadays the right to govern themselfs.
Also the Vatican who is part of Rome, but offically it's kind of it's own nation.

Raziel, my thesis is that any government that is granted both the power to tax and the power to raise an army will eventually seize all meaningful power. I know of no exceptions The US actually began as thirteen confederated states--independent powers--that formed a common federal government with explicitly prescribed, limited powers. Since that Constitution was written, that federal government has seized all meaningful power, with the states now serving as little more than conduits for federal power. We actually have our own cultural diversity over here, as evidenced by the so-called red state/blue state divide, which is becoming more divisive all the time. We now have a federal government that is in paralysis since both sides in this conflict are at cross-purposes. FWIW, taking advantage of this divide is how fascists have historically seized power, at least in the three cases where it has been successful.

The same thing has happened with the EU. Remember, it started out as BENELUX, then the European Coal and Steel Community. Since the creation of the EU proper, it has written a constitution of its own, subject to much controversy, that is ever amassing more power to itself. It's a very dangerous road to go down.

As far as nations within nations that are at least somewhat unhappy with current political arrangements, I am referring to the Flemish, Scots, Welsh, Bretons, Corsicans, northern Italians, Catalonians, Basques--and I could go on.....

The moral is that the closer government is to those it represents, the better it will work, as it is more likely to represent the interests of those it governs. This is just as true in Europe as it is in the US, as evidenced by an increasing disdain and mistrust of the EU by Europeans, especially the French and Germans, its erstwhile biggest supporters.

And now?
Split up and just being tiny subgroups that are in constant conflict with each other?
*slightly rethorical question*
You could also call that a very dangerous road to go down...
I don't believe that Europe will ever be one country one day.

Also not all Unions led to Nations. The Skandinavian countries even had hundrets of years ago their first unions and still managed to keep their independence.

I love the Chinese language. It's so musical and with funny whines in it. I love it.

Do you speak Chinese?
I would be interested in how much the Chinese languages can understand each other?
I'm a bit interested especially in Cantonese. But it's just an interest.

For me it's, honestly, a tie between German and Japanese. Both of these languages have a very amazing yet interesting history that draws me to it. They both sound great and are a joy to learn. German, for some reason though, reminds me of technology and science and scifi type of stuff.. which are one of my favorite things in the world.

It's a very logical language, it's highly structured, and any exceptions to grammatical rules are fairly easy to figure out.

It's curious that the most closely related official language, Dutch, is a lot more difficult to learn.