Talk:English language

External link

Will the following link be accepted: Free English Grammar and Vocabulary Lessons? תיל"ם (talk) 04:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

This is not appropriate to include. This article's main goal is describing English and explaining characteristics about it, not teaching the language. The external links currently on the article are for giving more information describing English that cannot be included in the text of the article (namely, archives of sound recordings). IndigoManedWolf (talk) 05:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

the link that you put in is

reasonable, But i think that you need more information next to it to show what you ment in more detail. 2A00:23C8:9C80:FE01:8E2A:85FF:FEB7:AC4D (talk) 06:09, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Inconsistent figures

The lead section mentions >2 billion total speakers, whereas the infobox states that there are less than 1.5 billion. Sure, there are countless organizations publishing figures, each with their own way of estimating and different definitions of someone being able to speak English. However, I think the figures presented in the lead section and infobox should at least be the same, perhaps - if necessary - with a note or link to a subsection in which it is explained why there are such large ranges in estimates. Maxeto0910 (talk) 23:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

While the scholars with the 2 billion figure are recognizable to me, it's clear they were not really rigorous in the journal cited. I've switched the lead figure to Ethnologue. Remsense ‥ 论 00:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Instrumental case

The reference to the instrumental case being lost in the Middle English period is surely wrong. This case was largely lost already in Old English. Does the author mean the dative? 86.190.145.222 (talk) 20:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2024

Hello. In Quebec, French is the sole official language. English is not official, and has no status in that province. Kindly update the map and shade Quebec a very light blue, and not the current blue it is. Thanks 2605:8D80:502:A954:7880:F88:64E7:930A (talk) 23:47, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done English is an administrative language in Quebec, which is also included in the map. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

It is not true that “the majority of English vocabulary derives from Romance languages”.

Latin is not a Romance language. According to this article, only 28% of English vocabulary is of Romance origin. And I’m very skeptical about that claim as well, considering how much of French is Germanic in origin.

Also, I think much more needs to be done to emphasize how Germanic English is, considering how misleading those statements about the Italic loanwords are. They may be in the dictionary, but they’re not in common use.

To say that “much of English's most basic vocabulary remains identifiably Germanic, as well as aspects of its grammar and phonology” is a huge understatement. As far as I’m aware, absolutely no aspects of its grammar or phonology aren’t Germanic. As a matter of fact, in some aspects of its phonology (like /w/ and /th/), English is much closer to Proto-Germanic than most other Germanic languages.

Really, I think it should say that *all* of the basic and most-used words are Germanic in origin, and that *every* aspect of its grammar and phonology is as well.

The way this article is written gives undue weight to the Italic loanwords and makes it seem like some words that are almost never used but exist in a dictionary that the vast majority of the native speakers of the language will never read and wouldn’t even know how to pronounce, or words that were also loaned into *every* Germanic language, not only English, have made English some kind of hybrid anomaly. And that’s really not the case. It’s very misleading.

Also, you don’t see other non-Italic languages with the majority of their vocabulary made up of Italic loanwords, like Albanian, having undue emphasis given to that fact by having it in the heading of their articles. 2600:100A:B1CD:CDC1:189A:4B36:6A05:2BC9 (talk) 04:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Latin is a romance language. I dont know how you could be so wrong about something so basic 2607:D600:995F:CA00:4D39:A27F:9EAF:6E5B (talk) 09:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

"Latin is a romance language" may astonish some, but it's actually stimulus for an interesting quibble, as can be illustrated by specialists who (try to) prompt students to think and understand with observations such as "Spanish [Picard... Logudorese...] is Latin, only later" or "Latin is a dead language, but it never died". -- As for the main thrust of this section, "I dont know how you could be so wrong about something so basic" makes the point nicely that English lexicon is solidly Germanic at its core, while also lexical grafts of Latin(ate)/Romance origin can be totally nativized. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 19:31, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

That seems like a mystification allowed to prevent a slightly pedantic stumbling block. I've changed this. Remsense ‥ 论 22:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Exactly, as of today it says "While Latin and the Romance languages are thus the source for a majority of its lexicon taken as a whole, English grammar and phonology retain a family resemblance with the Germanic languages, and most of its basic everyday vocabulary remains Germanic in origin." I think this part should say that there is a heavy bias towards the 1/3 Germanic words in English, including a percentage of 75-85% of basic English vocabulary is Germanic in origin, and academic speech is more like 60-75%, some percentages to show that the majority of English words in speech are Germanic and emphasizing this lean towards Germanic words, the current writing is not enough for the facts presenting above this part showing only 1/3rd of the total words in English are Germanic, there needs to be more emphasis on this huge disparity in how common words are relative to their amount in the language. 2601:602:D201:6F90:EC66:4E4F:B119:30C (talk) 00:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

It's worth a reminder that the lead is a summary of the article body; while I agree this is likely a more precise articulation of the facts, we need a cited statement of this in the article body before we then summarize it in the lead. Remsense ‥ 论 00:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I sorted my response into Germanic and Romance words as evidence of this, ridding of the names of languages and groups (such as Germanic, Romance, English as it is normal to loan the names of languages and unfair to count as normal words) and wrote 1/3rd as one third, 75-85 60-75 as words as well as that is how they are spoken.

"as of today it says While and the are thus the for a of its taken as a whole and a with the and most of its everyday in I think this should say that there is a heavy towards the one third words in a seventy fix to eighty five of of is in and speech is more like sixty to seventy five some to show that the of words in speech are and this lean towards words, the writing is not enough for the above this showing only one third of the words in are there needs to be more on this huge in how words are to their in the

Exactly languages source majority lexicon grammar phonology retain family resemblance languages basic vocabulary remains origin part bias including percentage basic vocabulary origin academic percentages majority emphasizing current facts presenting part total emphasis disparity common relative amount language"

there are 150 words in my response, 113 are Germanic, that's 75% Germanic words and we are talking about an advanced subject which isn't basic speech. 2601:602:D201:6F90:EC66:4E4F:B119:30C (talk) 00:43, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

It may also be worth mentioning in the article that function words contribute a huge amount to English speech having a Germanic majority of words as my sorting shows many of those words are function words and not content words while all the romance words are content words. 2601:602:D201:6F90:EC66:4E4F:B119:30C (talk) 00:46, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

There are some basic words but most (90%) is not basic. 2A00:23C8:9C80:FE01:8E2A:85FF:FEB7:AC4D (talk) 06:25, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Indonesia as working language

Despite malaysia and brunei has some sort of english language as usage to working language, then why indonesian not included in the list of working language using english? @Thebiguglyalien 182.253.250.252 (talk) 03:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

If you want to make a change to the article, you'll need a reliable source verifying the change you want to make. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)