Slaying Mother English - The cold blooded parricide of the lingua franca

Had you asked the Duke of Wellington in 1813, who the greatest enemy of the English was, his answer would in all probability have been "I don't care a twopenny damn what becomes of the ashes of Napoleon Bonaparte " [Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Arthur_Wellesley,_1st_Duke_of_Wellington]. Fast forward around 200 years, we now sit at a threshold where English is sitting at the crossroads of change. The new bêtes noires are the internet and the SMS world. Great commanders like Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin have threatened the very existence of England in different phases of her history but none of these challengers, have had the guts to throw the gauntlet, in an attempt to thwart and destroy the English language. This language that has stood the test of time for over close to 6 centuries now, is now undergoing a period of grave crisis from which it may or may not resurrect and what happens only time can say. How is it possible that this language which has spread to faraway lands like USA, Canada, Australia, Newzealand, India, Pakistan so to name a few, is facing extinction? Who is the so redoubtable enemy now? The internet and SMS lingo spawned off by the USA and that is spreading far and wide now - and of course the neti/mobizens, who execute the scheme flawlessly to destroy the last strands of what remains Mother English.

To start off, how many letters comprise the English alphabet? Sitter huh. 26 videlicet from 'A' to 'Z'. If this had been your answer, congratulate yourself for not being a part of the mob that has descended to spell the doom for English. The so called "netizens/mobizens" who are now "revolutionising" the English language claim that there are more than 26 letters to the English alphabet. Like to sample a few of them?? Well - the letter '2' as in '2mrrw' (tomorrow as the puritans call it), the letter '4' as in '4ever' or '4got' or 'b4' etc.

Vowels are a part of almost all the major European languages in the world. And on top of this, vowels are the most natural sounds that a human can vocalise. The new generation killers of English don't feel the need of vowels at all. For is there a need for vowels when 'have' becomes 'hv', 'some' becomes 'sm','to' becomes '2', 'and' becomes 'n' et cetera. No wonder, in the near future, we shall find a lot of text compression algorithms making use of "data compression by vowel obviation" (patented by me :D).

Of all the factions of the mob, the contribution of USA for the slaying of English has been the most impressive. From the widely used "gonna", "wannabe" et cetera to "New World a.k.a. Webster's spelling innovations [sic!]" like "color" (for colour), "story" (for storey) to the abominable misuse of the nominative, accusative case mixups as in "Me thinks that's rite", the Americans have done more than their 2 cents for paving the way for the destruction of the Queen's English. It reminds of how when Winston Churchill went to Canada during WWII and addressed the Parliament there saying "It is me, Winston Churchill" that the puritans in UK were shocked. Though faux pas like these do happen with great orators too, this should not become an excuse for us to start forgetting the basic grammar.

How can the Indians be lagging behind the Americans? The Indian version of "I think we can go to the cinema today. Shan't we?" translates to "Me thinks aaj v cn go 2 d moov. Hai naaa?". This hybrid amalgamation of Hindi and English can hardly be understood by people basically from outside the subcontinent but owing to the geographic diversity of our diaspora, this Hinglish has the potential of entering the mainstream language.

At this point of time, I might seem to be reeking of heavy chauvinism towards the Queen's English to the reader, more so if she/he is a user of Anglish/Hinglish. While we need to appreciate the diversity that gets added to English by means of other language speaking peoples, we need to take note of the deviations that we make in the spelling which can prove disastrous in the future. It is very well possible that an English speaking child born 100 years hence, may not be able to comprehend even a word of some of the greatest classics of the yesteryears. While the French are enriching their language by adding terms like "courier électronique" to signify electronic mail (e-mail), we are destroying our English language by abbreviating to a great extent.

Let us finally look at if we can do something to stop the further molestation and further denigration of the English language. It is never too late to go back to basics and brush up our English. Let us try to ditch frenz and make friends, let us do things the right way rather than the rite way. Introspection of the most frequently used words by every person and correction of the same would be the quickest way to fix our usage of the language. It shall not take a great effort to do all this. Just typing two more letters in our mail/scrap/chat will not take the life out of us. I don't expect all the readers to suddenly get up, take notice and change the way they use their English. At least those who feel that English should be a living language for centuries to come, should take note of this and do the needful. Each of us should be committed to the correct usage of English as that is the only way one can rectify the mistakes that one would have done in his life or les erreurs ont fait dans une vie as the French say.

"Vive la langue anglaise et les haut-parleurs anglais"
Long live the English language and its speakers

God - More capitalist than most capitalists?





It struck me yesterday, whether God wished to create all men to be equal (at least in course of time) in the first place. For those atheistic readers, as Voltaire said, "Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer" or anglicising the same "If God did not exist, he would have to be invented" and hence this discussion assumes the existence of God/Nature/Providence whatever be her/his appellation. This blog shall dwell on why God injects inequality among men and what are its benefits.

Firstly no rational (or super-rational) entity irrespective of how great it might be, shall thwart the very basis of its own existence except in dire life threatening circumstances. Argued from a system based on incentives, there is no incentive for someone rational to undermine his own authority. A few examples for the above would include

1) Dictators not organising genuine polls since it might overthrow their authority.
2) The general secretary of a political party stifling the growth of those who might pose a challenge to her at a later date.

Also if equality is ensured among all men always, there would be no reason for men to genuflect before an authority like God. If all men are created and made to live equal i.e. assuming that there is no "first among equals", ceteris paribus, men don't have an incentive to compete against one another, no differences shall develop or exist among men and God cannot play her/his role of a referee or "natural selection". In simple words, no controversies would mean no referees/umpires. In the light of the above arguments, God shall not try to unsettle the equilibrium of "inequality among creatures". By this simple rational act he has succeeded in preserving his raison d'être.

What does God finally try to achieve by creating inequalities? One thing that we must accept is that if all men were identical and equal in all respects, there is no need for the existence of so many men. It is just that variety adds spice to life and breaks the monotony in life. Morever there should be some incentive for every man to live on earth. If he is going to be treated at par with everyone else, he has no incentive to outperform others. So God unleashes a wave of free market capitalism (FMC from nowon), this time, God's FMC is stronger than that of USA, UK et al. This FMC quickly weeds out the grossly unsuccessful ones thus trying to improve the quality of mankind or so He claims. Periodically the so called superpowers are defeated and God establishes his supremacy. Isn't this "If someone who challenges me, I will rout him" attitude again a characterestic of someone who wants to hold on to power? So when Napoleon challenged the Pope and thereby God, he was brought down by a peg or two. Ditto with Stalin too. So though inherently evil, there is this certain selfish motive for God to assert his authority and save his position too. And anyway these great lessons of history teach men more than what a thousand sages can.

The FMC of God is so ruthless that there is no way one can escape from it unscathed and inefficient. This form of FMC may not be the best for the world but it is the best one available. Here I would like to quote the iron man of England (Churchill). He once described the difference between capitalism and socialism as the difference between the ladder and the queue. "We are for the ladder," Churchill said. "Let all try their best to climb. They [the socialists] are for the queue. Let each wait his place until his turn comes." (Source: www.winstonchurchill.org) It is better for us to be proactive and climb the ladder rather than stand in the queue awaiting our turn. So the ultimatum from Providence is "Perform or perish". There are the leftists who try to create a "mediocrocracy". But as have seen in different times in history, communism has almost failed everywhere. Of course, we have the still Left veering Latin America, "Cuba de Castro" and the neo-India that intends to impart social justice (by Govt policy recently) but still even there the people in the gubernatorial ranks have realised that the natural instinct of humans is to compete rather than to remain tied to "egalité" forever. Time to put an end to my jabberings ; The crux is that

Aeroplanes are safer in the hangar but they are not meant for that purpose. Hence my fellow humans, in this FMC system devised by God, the best system till date, you have to keep fighting in order to live. As Adolf Hitler said

Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live

Bouquets and brickbats welcome
Arvind