Why I am Afraid for America

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:43 pm

spot;1050285 wrote: What benefit is there, in your opinion, for the world to have more than a single language?

Put my post back spot.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:47 pm

wildhorses;1050281 wrote: Yes it is difficult to develop relationships with someone if you dont have a common language.

And there are starting to be other problems as well. For instance, here in California some nurses do not speak much english. So you go to the emgergency room and they cant really understand what your symtoms are. And its not even one language. One nurse speaks one language and another speaks another language....and so on. Thankfully the doctors all speak pretty good english.

I went to the emergency room with an ear infection a few months ago. The nurse gave the doctor the wrong info because she did not really understand me. She told the doctor that I was having pain in my head, instead of in my ear. This is because I had to communicate with her mostly by holding my hand to my ear, which she misconstrued. We have to have a common language. I know that people cant speak english the very first day they get here, but at some point it gets ridiculous.

Speaking all different languages separates people, it does not unite people. Especially when there are large populations that dont have any idea how to communicate with each other.

I rest my case...:yh_bigsmi...

Thank you, you may step down...:wah:...

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:02 am

wildhorses;1050284 wrote: I cant really respond to this until you retrieve my post. No fair removing posts Spot.

There, I got it eventually. It's back in place. I'm sorry I overwrote it rather than replied to it, it takes a while sometimes to clean up after a spill like that.

What benefit is there, in your opinion, for the world to have more than a single language?

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:06 am

spot;1050286 wrote: An inadvertent use of Edit instead of Quote, completely unintended. It's taking me a while to retrieve your text. I've not done that before, it was very slack of me.

OK. So I see you have retrieved my other post. Thank you Spot.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:10 am

spot;1050285 wrote: What benefit is there, in your opinion, for the world to have more than a single language?

There is no benefit in the world speaking more than one language. It would be so much easier if we all spoke the same language. Certainly immigrants would have it much easier, wouldnt they? The only problem with the whole world speaking the same language is that initially we would fight about which one it should be. So I say leave it alone. It is enough for people within each country to speak a common language. Whichever language the country speaks, newcomers should speak.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:24 am

Put her post back spot! She is going to smack you a good one!

:wah:...

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:29 am

K.Snyder;1050301 wrote: Put her post back spot! She is going to smack you a good one!

:wah:...

LOL...he got that post back just in time. :wah:

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:43 am

wildhorses;1050304 wrote: LOL...he got that post back just in time. :wah:

You would have drove all of the way from San Fransisco! to New York, hopped on a boat, and cruised the Atlantic ocean to smack spot a good one!

:wah:...

I kid, I kid...

:wah:...

:yh_wink...

:yh_kiss...

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:52 am

K.Snyder;1050307 wrote: You would have drove all of the way from San Fransisco! to New York, hoped on a boat, and cruised the Atlantic ocean to smack spot a good one!

:wah:...

I kid, I kid...

:wah:...

:yh_wink...

:yh_kiss...

:wah::wah::wah::wah:

a "smack" smilie would work so much better.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 1:52 am

spot;1050226 wrote: We Brits tend to go abroad to live in other countries, not learn the local language and retain our UK citizenship. I'm sure if we were to actually take up citizenship in another country we'd quite likely learn the languages spoken there but we'd be very unusual examples of British expatriates.

Yes, we have some here. Generally not a bad bunch. They tend to try and use sterling though in shops and get annoyed when its pointed out to them that Sterling is a not the world currency and only legal tender in the UK.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 1:57 am

wildhorses;1050219 wrote: We do this too. Depending on the area...voting materials can be in several languages. But you have to be a citizen to vote here, and it takes five years at least to become a citizen. So it is very difficult for us to think that these new citizens are serious about being part of our country when they dont even bother to learn english. Lately though I notice that they have stopped....or mostly cut back on doing this. For awhile the voting materials looked like a telephone book...it was so thick to include all the languages. It was getting hard to even find the english section. In years past, this was no problem. Immigrants always learned to speak english as soon as possible. I have some family members who learned pretty good english in less than a year. If they can do it anyone can do it. If someone wants to become a citizen in any country then I think they should at least learn the language of that country. And if they dont like the country they are in enough to even do that, then they should go to another country that they like better.

Yes, you need to be a citizen to vote here as well. Other EU nationals have rights and entitlements here (including Brits, with whom, we also have some bilateral agreements such as not needing a passport to travel between Britain and Ireland), though they are not automatically Irish citizens, but if they stay long enough they get that entitlement. Everyone else needs a visa to come to Ireland, and obtaining Irish citizenship is quite a difficult process; though the EU are talking about introducing a "Blue Card" system for people who want to come to Europe and obtain citizenship, just like the Green Card system they have in the States.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:03 am

wildhorses;1050308 wrote: :wah::wah::wah::wah:

a "smack" smilie would work so much better.

Aaaaaaaaa...

Cut out the middle man!

Go ahead and drive from San Fransisco to New york, Hop on a boat, and cruise the Atlantic Ocean to smack spot a good one!

:wah:...

:yh_wink...

:wah:...

:yh_kiss...

:yh_wink...

:yh_kiss...

:wah:...

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:10 am

wildhorses;1050296 wrote: There is no benefit in the world speaking more than one language. It would be so much easier if we all spoke the same language. Certainly immigrants would have it much easier, wouldnt they? The only problem with the whole world speaking the same language is that initially we would fight about which one it should be. So I say leave it alone. It is enough for people within each country to speak a common language. Whichever language the country speaks, newcomers should speak.

English is the global lingua franca (ironic non english term there) of science, business, and popular music at present. Also in Europe, English is becoming the generally used medium of communication; though its not a common language by any means, and I wouldn't want that.

I think in the world, you already see a coalescing of the diversity of cultures as globalization makes everything more interconnected. In the future you will see probably English, Spanish, Mandarin, and Arabic as the languages that most of the planets population will have some ability in. There are some other major languages around the world as well of course, like French and Portuguese, but they will remain regional I think.

Interestingly, German was used by Chemists previously, as that country is so predominant in Chemistry and a lot of the reference works are in german, I can speak some German, (similar to English, but a lot more rules, like you would expect). French was once the language of high culture, and diplomacy in Europe until fairly recent times, and remains a superior medium for communication to English in my opinion, certainly more beautiful to listen to, though English is a very dynamic and robust language, which is one of the reasons its so successful.

My own native language is Gaelic or just "Irish" as we called it, its a very ancient Celtic language, spoken for thousands of years, absolutely unrelated to English in any way, and it far predates it in this part of the world, as the populations of Britain and Ireland were predominantly ones with a celtic culture before the Roman invasion of Britain which introduced latin, and then the invasion of the English-speaking Germanics in the dark ages, so English is a relative newcomer, (and I mean relative, as we are going back 1,400 years).

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:23 am

Galbally;1050322 wrote: English is the global lingua franca (ironic non english term there) of science, business, and popular music at present. Also in Europe, English is becoming the generally used medium of communication; though its not a common language by any means, and I wouldn't want that.

I think in the world, you already see a coalescing of the diversity of cultures as globalization makes everything more interconnected. In the future you will see probably English, Spanish, Mandarin, and Arabic as the languages that most of the planets population will have some ability in. There are some other major languages around the world as well of course, like French and Portuguese, but they will remain regional I think.

Interestingly, German was used by Chemists previously, as that country is so predominant in Chemistry and a lot of the reference works are in german, I can speak some German, (similar to English, but a lot more rules, like you would expect). French was once the language of high culture, and diplomacy in Europe until fairly recent times, and remains a superior medium for communication to English in my opinion, certainly more beautiful to listen to, though English is a very dynamic and robust language, which is one of the reasons its so successful.

My own native language is Gaelic or just "Irish" as we called it, its a very ancient Celtic language, spoken for thousands of years, absolutely unrelated to English in any way, and it far predates it in this part of the world, as the populations of Britain and Ireland were predominantly ones with a celtic culture before the Roman invasion of Britain which introduced latin, and then the invasion of the English-speaking Germanics in the dark ages, so English is a relative newcomer, (and I mean relative, as we are going back 1,400 years).

Yes english is the language used many times for business. I did not want to suggest that if we had a global language that it should be english. It could be any language as long as everyone spoke the same language. But I think the way it is, is fine. Within countries people should have a common language that everyone can speak.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:27 am

K.Snyder;1050321 wrote: Aaaaaaaaa...

Cut out the middle man!

Go ahead and drive from San Fransisco to New york, Hop on a boat, and cruise the Atlantic Ocean to smack spot a good one!

:wah:...

:yh_wink...

:wah:...

:yh_kiss...

:yh_wink...

:yh_kiss...

:wah:...

I will fly there. Otherwise if it takes me too long to get there I would no longer be pssd off....and that would be anti climactic.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:39 am

wildhorses;1050323 wrote: Yes english is the language used many times for business. I did not want to suggest that if we had a global language that it should be english. It could be any language as long as everyone spoke the same language. But I think the way it is, is fine. Within countries people should have a common language that everyone can speak.

Your points are not unreasonable at all. I would think that English would be a main contender for a global language, it already is the main candidate, as its so widely spoken and used in various technical fields, so its a practical choice; though there will probably be more than one as I have said. It would be unrealistic to expect there to be a global language until some point in the distant future, if at all. I think what you will see, is that major countries will keep there own languages, but that languages such as Spanish, English, Arabic, etc, will become even more prevalent as "second" or even "third" languages used for communication across borders, English is already very widely used in this way, as are several other languages.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:57 am

wildhorses;1050323 wrote: Yes english is the language used many times for business. I did not want to suggest that if we had a global language that it should be english. It could be any language as long as everyone spoke the same language. But I think the way it is, is fine. Within countries people should have a common language that everyone can speak.

If that is the case, then it would make sense that we all learn to speak Chinese as there are over 1.4 Billion Chinese in China alone, never mind out side their country. I hope you are OK about that.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:51 am

mikeinie;1050370 wrote: If that is the case, then it would make sense that we all learn to speak Chinese as there are over 1.4 Billion Chinese in China alone, never mind out side their country. I hope you are OK about that.
But almost all of them are concentrated in China. English, Spanish, Portugese, and French are all more widespread. I tried to find which is most common, but most lists only refer to native speakers and ignore those who speak a second or third language. Anyway, I'd go with the language spoken in the most countries, rather than the one with the most people that speak it.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:37 am

You're all seemingly oblivious to the cultural history tied into each language. I don't just mean the written or even oral literature handed from one generation to another that would be destroyed by this one-language planet you're eagerly advocating, I'm talking about the different ways of thinking which the language structures themselves facilitate. It wouldn't be too much to say that most of human investment to date which still has value to future generations has gone into the creation and evolution of languages. Destroying them like this is barbaric.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:12 am

K.Snyder;1050321 wrote: Aaaaaaaaa...

Cut out the middle man!

Go ahead and drive from San Fransisco to New york, Hop on a boat, and cruise the Atlantic Ocean to smack spot a good one!

:wah:...

:yh_wink...

:wah:...

:yh_kiss...

:yh_wink...

:yh_kiss...

:wah:...

Are you suggesting a touch of 'bitch-slapping' for Spot???? :wah:

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:32 am

spot;1050467 wrote: You're all seemingly oblivious to the cultural history tied into each language. I don't just mean the written or even oral literature handed from one generation to another that would be destroyed by this one-language planet you're eagerly advocating, I'm talking about the different ways of thinking which the language structures themselves facilitate. It wouldn't be too much to say that most of human investment to date which still has value to future generations has gone into the creation and evolution of languages. Destroying them like this is barbaric.

But I'm not advocating that any language is destroyed, I believe that a culture needs its language as a vehicle of its ideas, with the Irish language being my concern here, despite my useless ability at it. But there have always been "lingua francas" in existence; (the term itself of course refers to the time when French fulfilled that purpose in Europe), such as Latin or Greek etc. I don't see that as a problem as long as its not an imposed monoculture.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:16 am

Galbally;1050542 wrote: But I'm not advocating that any language is destroyed, I believe that a culture needs its language as a vehicle of its ideas, with the Irish language being my concern here, despite my useless ability at it. But there have always been "lingua francas" in existence; (the term itself of course refers to the time when French fulfilled that purpose in Europe), such as Latin or Greek etc. I don't see that as a problem as long as its not an imposed monoculture.

It is however politeness to do 'When in Rome'. My hubby's bosses and their family have been our friends for years and i can now speak a little Turkish and Urdi. Most of all, i can understand a little of what they are saying.

People become too insular if they believe that the only language they will ever need is their own. It's a form of arrogance that i dislike immensly.

Especially in Britain and America where we are multi-national countrie's.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:51 am

Galbally;1050542 wrote: But I'm not advocating that any language is destroyed, I believe that a culture needs its language as a vehicle of its ideas, with the Irish language being my concern here, despite my useless ability at it. But there have always been "lingua francas" in existence; (the term itself of course refers to the time when French fulfilled that purpose in Europe), such as Latin or Greek etc. I don't see that as a problem as long as its not an imposed monoculture.

I had in view wildhorses' "There is no benefit in the world speaking more than one language. It would be so much easier if we all spoke the same language" which at first sight disagrees with your position.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:14 pm

spot;1050467 wrote: You're all seemingly oblivious to the cultural history tied into each language. I don't just mean the written or even oral literature handed from one generation to another that would be destroyed by this one-language planet you're eagerly advocating, I'm talking about the different ways of thinking which the language structures themselves facilitate. It wouldn't be too much to say that most of human investment to date which still has value to future generations has gone into the creation and evolution of languages. Destroying them like this is barbaric.

No one is advocating a one language world. Just within countries.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:25 pm

wildhorses;1051318 wrote: No one is advocating a one language world. Just within countries.

You and I have trouble enough just communicating in English, and there's meant to be a considerable overlap between US and UK usage still. When I read "There is no benefit in the world speaking more than one language. It would be so much easier if we all spoke the same language" I don't come away with the impression that "No one is advocating a one language world. Just within countries". What am I doing wrong?

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:08 pm

spot;1051324 wrote: You and I have trouble enough just communicating in English, and there's meant to be a considerable overlap between US and UK usage still. When I read "There is no benefit in the world speaking more than one language. It would be so much easier if we all spoke the same language" I don't come away with the impression that "No one is advocating a one language world. Just within countries". What am I doing wrong?

You did not read the entire post the first time. You only read the first sentence. I did say that it would be so much easier if the whole world spoke the same language. But that is in a perfect world. Since there are already different languages it should be left that way. I said in that post that all the countries would fight over which language to use and therefore it should be left as is. But within countries people should speak the same language. Those going to other countries should be willing to learn the language in their host country.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:12 pm

No, this notion of a single language for a single country is cultural death. India has hundreds of languages. Even the UK has six in use and fairly heavy political and cultural pressure to maintain their presence as living languages rather than mere academic studies. What would be far more exciting is an emphasis on more people learning more languages each. That's growth in many senses.

The US has spent too long destroying, for example, the languages of its indigenous peoples. It's time to preserve and expand them, not kill them.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:16 pm

spot;1051345 wrote: No, this notion of a single language for a single country is cultural death. India has hundreds of languages. Even the UK has six in use and fairly heavy political and cultural pressure to maintain their presence as living languages rather than mere academic studies. What would be far more exciting is an emphasis on more people learning more languages each. That's growth in many senses.

When you have too many languages...then you have too many people who cant understand each other. Or you have too many people who cant understand each other well enough. This divides people rather than unites people. Then there are emergency situations....this can be dangerous. Even some emergency personnel who work together cannot communicate well enough.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:30 pm

I've heard that before: "Whenever I hear of culture... I release the safety-catch of my Browning!"

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:43 pm

spot;1051355 wrote: I've heard that before: "Whenever I hear of culture... I release the safety-catch of my Browning!"

Oh for crying out loud. Dont read more into it than is there. Every culture has its place....and that is in the mother country. Anyone can take in culture by traveling. You cant have a bunch of people living and working together who cant communicate. There is nothing wrong with learning the language of your host country. That does not mean that you cant speak your own language also. It just means that you should learn the language of the country you are living in if you are going to be there an extended period of time. Language alone does not expose one to other cultures....especially if no one can communicate. How would you take in another's culture without being able to speak to them?

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:55 pm

wildhorses;1051363 wrote: How would you take in another's culture without being able to speak to them?In Europe we tend to speak more than one language. It soon becomes clear which of them is best suited for speaking to another European. Even if neither of us speak the other's native tongue it would be unusual not to have a third language in common since people tend to learn larger languages as their extras. I was once reduced to Esperanto on a train in Poland back in the sixties and while my Esperanto was feeble at best we were able to exchange politenesses, food and a willingness to show we were pleased to have met. He was a farmer. He owned six horses and ploughed his own fields with them. His farm had no hills and bordered a lake. He had a boat. He fished. He had never met anyone from England before. He would tell his grandchildren he had met one when he got home.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:21 pm

spot;1051365 wrote: In Europe we tend to speak more than one language. It soon becomes clear which of them is best suited for speaking to another European. Even if neither of us speak the other's native tongue it would be unusual not to have a third language in common since people tend to learn larger languages as their extras. I was once reduced to Esperanto on a train in Poland back in the sixties and while my Esperanto was feeble at best we were able to exchange politenesses, food and a willingness to show we were pleased to have met. He was a farmer. He owned six horses and ploughed his own fields with them. His farm had no hills and bordered a lake. He had a boat. He fished. He had never met anyone from England before. He would tell his grandchildren he had met one when he got home.

Yes well thats what happens when you have everyone speaking so many languages. Esperanto is not really a language. It is unfortunate that you were not able to converse more in depth with this gentleman. A common language would have given you that opportunity.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:27 pm

wildhorses;1051370 wrote: Yes well thats what happens when you have everyone speaking so many languages. Esperanto is not really a language. It is unfortunate that you were not able to converse more in depth with this gentleman. A common language would have given you that opportunity.

In what way did we not share a common language?

I have a quote for you from the inventor of Esperanto, Ludwig Lazarus Zamenhof: "I am profoundly convinced that every nationalism offers humanity only the greatest unhappiness... It is true that the nationalism of oppressed peoples - as a natural self-defensive reaction - is much more excusable than the nationalism of peoples who oppress; but, if the nationalism of the strong is ignoble, the nationalism of the weak is imprudent; both give birth to and support each other..."

What you're offering, with your one-language countries, is nationalism reduced to its most uncultured form. It is gross philistinism. To be perfectly honest, "Esperanto is not really a language" is somewhat uninformed too, it strikes me as the very reverse of reality. Even Lojban is a language which offers aspects no other language possesses and I doubt whether there are even a thousand people fluent to any extent on the planet. I think there will be rather more than that in time.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:36 pm

spot;1051377 wrote: In what way did we not share a common language?

I have a quote for you from the inventor of Esperanto, Ludwig Lazarus Zamenhof: "I am profoundly convinced that every nationalism offers humanity only the greatest unhappiness... It is true that the nationalism of oppressed peoples - as a natural self-defensive reaction - is much more excusable than the nationalism of peoples who oppress; but, if the nationalism of the strong is ignoble, the nationalism of the weak is imprudent; both give birth to and support each other..."

What you're offering, with your one-language countries, is nationalism reduced to its most uncultured form. It is gross philistinism. To be perfectly honest, "Esperanto is not really a language" is somewhat uninformed too, it strikes me as the very reverse of reality. Even Lojban is a language which offers aspects no other language possesses and I doubt whether there are even a thousand people fluent to any extent on the planet. I think there will be rather more than that in time.

Esperanto is a collection of well used words from different languages. We do it here also. But we dont call it that. We call it struggling to have a shallow conversation due to lack of newcomers to learn any english. You may define it as a language but I do not. To really communicate the participants must speak the same language. Just because you can get a message across, does not necessarily mean you are having a conversation. You can get a message across by hand gesture too.....but so what? That is preferable to speaking a common language?

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:46 pm

wildhorses;1051382 wrote: Esperanto is a collection of well used words from different languages. We do it here also. But we dont call it that. We call it struggling to have a shallow conversation due to lack of newcomers to learn any english. You may define it as a language but I do not. To really communicate the participants must speak the same language. Just because you can get a message across, does not necessarily mean you are having a conversation. You can get a message across by hand gesture too.....but so what? That is preferable to speaking a common language?

There are thousands of native-tongue languages in the world - around five thousand last time I looked, and there are a couple of hundred countries. You're recommending that all but a couple of hundred of those native-tongue languages become secondary languages as opposed to primary languages. The subtleties of each will be lost, the number of speakers will diminish, humanity will be impoverished in the process. The entire suggestion is utilitarian. Those five thousand languages are one of the great treasure-troves of the world, one of the richest seams of intergenerational artistic development. Short of seeing someone suggest that we have too many species on the planet and we ought to cull their number by a factor of ten to free up more wilderness areas for development I can't imagine any suggestion that offends me more.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:06 pm

spot;1051384 wrote: There are thousands of native-tongue languages in the world - around five thousand last time I looked, and there are a couple of hundred countries. You're recommending that all but a couple of hundred of those native-tongue languages become secondary languages as opposed to primary languages. The subtleties of each will be lost, the number of speakers will diminish, humanity will be impoverished in the process. The entire suggestion is utilitarian. Those five thousand languages are one of the great treasure-troves of the world, one of the richest seams of intergenerational artistic development. Short of seeing someone suggest that we have too many species on the planet and we ought to cull their number by a factor of ten to free up more wilderness areas for development I can't imagine any suggestion that offends me more.

Yes. You are the one who said that people should speak different languages. So the people who speak less used languages can learn the major language of their country. That does not mean they cant retain their lesser used language and pass it to their offspring. Meantime everyone would be able to communicate on a much more in depth level. And those native-tongue speakers do not have to make their language the second language. They can learn the major language as their second language, while retaining their native language as their primary language.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:28 pm

You change your position with every post, don't you.

The posts are there in the thread now, I'm sure others can reach their own conclusions on which argument is the more useful.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:33 pm

spot;1051406 wrote: You change your position with every post, don't you.

The posts are there in the thread now, I'm sure others can reach their own conclusions on which argument is the more useful.

What part of my original position did I change? Basically my position is that everyone within a country should be able to communicate. Separate languages divides people.....common language unites people. Everyone in a country should be able to communicate with each other. Yes, spot, others can decide which argument is more useful....you are right abou that....LOL.

Post by **spot** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:44 pm

When all else fails and the argument is irretrievably lost, "LOL". It's the hallmark of the definitively American poster, you have no idea how often I've seen it. Whether it's intended to be face-saving or a sign to other Americans to pile in and say "good win" I don't quite know - both seem generally to be the case. The real answer is not to treat it as a competition. The only sense in which a thread can produce a win is if the thread as a whole is informative and offers insight. I much prefer discussion to argument.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:47 pm

spot;1051414 wrote: When all else fails and the argument is irretrievably lost, "LOL". It's the hallmark of the definitively American poster, you have no idea how often I've seen it. Whether it's intended to be face-saving or a sign to other Americans to pile in and say "good win" I don't quite know - both seem generally to be the case. The real answer is not to treat it as a competition. The only sense in which a thread can produce a win is if the thread as a whole is informative and offers insight. I much prefer discussion to argument.

Oh please...you love to argue. You are a "bait" expert. LOL just equals laughing. A definitively American poster???? LOL>>>LOL>>>LOL>>>LOL>>>LOL>>>LOL>>>

You are funny spot.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:35 pm

oscar;1050508 wrote: Are you suggesting a touch of 'bitch-slapping' for Spot???? :wah:

That all depends on in how he takes it!

:yh_rotfl...

I kid. I kid.

Hehe...

:wah:...

:yh_wink...

:yh_kiss...<-----Not for spot, for oscar. :wah:...)...

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:42 pm

Nothing wrong with different languages.

Everything wrong with the ideology backed by those who find it difficult to trust other human beings.

I'll go wallow back in my cave now!