The english language.

[dimreepr]

While it's not clear that language plays a role in ones ability to process scientific data, language very much impacts the organization of the brain and how personalities are expressed.

 

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2013/11/multilingualism

 

 

More interesting articles about language here: http://www.economist.com/blogs/Johnson

 

This is a very good point but I am firmly in the camp that it’s culture, not language that has the most fundamental impact on how we think. As touched upon in the first link, I think language would change the way we think only through the exposure to an alternative culture.

Airbrush also makes a good point, in that, the only way to break down cultural conflicts is through education.

[turionx2]

So a large portion of the population understands the supposed enemy, and with understanding comes a chance to avoid economic conflict or even war.

 

The fallacy in your statement is that the large portion of the population doesn't need to understand the supposed enemy because there is no enemy and because the large portion of the population has no control over economic conflict or even war.

[Airbrush]

The fallacy in your statement is that the large portion of the population doesn't need to understand the supposed enemy because there is no enemy and because the large portion of the population has no control over economic conflict or even war.

There will always be "enemies" or at least economic rivals.

 

If there are large numbers of a population that understand the current "enemy" or rival, that nation will have more resources to understand the "enemy" and better co-exist with it. Large numbers can listen to speeches given by the "enemy's" leaders, and read their press, not just a few translators, and they can put pressure on their representatives and leaders to act in a more diplomatic manner.

 

Also, if our president could chat in Persian with the Iranian president, or in Russian with Putin, that would help. They would be impressed.

Edited November 19, 2013 by Airbrush

[imatfaal]

...

 

Also, if our president could chat in Persian with the Iranian president, or in Russian with Putin, that would help. They would be impressed.

 

Hmm but perhaps the voters (or a big enough chunk to be wary of) wouldn't be. Kerry was lambasted for speaking to a foreign dignitary in their own language (was it Japanese?) and even Romney picked up demerits for being fluent in French. It isn't just a USA thing either; Jacques Chirac is completely fluent in English and yet is never known to speak it in any official capacity or publically.

[swansont]

Iranian language

 

I know that US citizens, worthy as they are, have a worldwide reputation for being, how shall one say, self-contained within the USA. That explains why they might think that there's an Iranian language. Or a Brazilian and Argentinian language.

 

But just think - these guys are controlling fleets of nuclear weapons. Should we be scared?

 

Yes, especially if you're in Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan and speak Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stanese.

[danston]

Though culture determines one nation from the next, i.e; Religion, Art, History, Cuisine, Habits etc. Would it not also be fair to catagorize nations by their language?? such that every english speaking country is insolubly english.

 

The language you think in is also the language in which your thoughts will manifest themselves, is it not then the language barrier that distinguishes differences between nations??

 

This means that your ability to communicate would come before your beliefs because with that barrier in place, there is no method inplace for distinguishing the difference.

 

Two nations cannot unite over a belief which they connot express to one another.

Two nations of the same language but different beliefs can unite over language.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Not. Not even the UK has a unified culture.

 

Take these cities/regions:

 

- Glasgow

- Belfast

- Yorkshire

- Liverpool

- Manchester

- The Black Country

- East Anglia

- London

- The West Country

 

All are cities/regions in the UK, all speak Standard British English, yet have different cultures. Many have their own dialects. Scouse (per Liverpool) is not spoken that much in London or East Anglia.

[Airbrush]

Gallup survey of 2012 found that of 640 million people, worldwide, who want to migrate to another country:

 

23% chose USA

7% chose UK

 

That means 30% of people who want to migrate want to go to an English speaking country.

 

Third place is Canada, which has a high proportion English speaking

 

After those comes: France, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Germany, and Spain.

 

That means 58% of all adults on Earth who want to move to another country prefer either North America (USA & Canada) or Europe. 1% want to migrate to Russia. Apparently few takers to 3rd world nations.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration

Edited November 25, 2013 by Airbrush

[John Cuthber]

 

Also, if our president could chat in Persian with the Iranian president, or in Russian with Putin, that would help. They would be impressed.

Putin and his Iranian counterpart have already learned English.

How impressed would they be that another president had also learned a "foreign" language?

Speaking a second language is the norm for most educated people in the world.

The only people who are likely to think it exceptional are those who speak English, and they may not see it as a good thing.

[Airbrush]

Putin and his Iranian counterpart have already learned English.

How impressed would they be that another president had also learned a "foreign" language?

Speaking a second language is the norm for most educated people in the world.

The only people who are likely to think it exceptional are those who speak English, and they may not see it as a good thing.

Good point. In the race for a "world language" Spanish and English are the top 2 finishers. Just learn English and Spanish.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Airbrush