I have a never-ending curiosity about languages: how we are able to sense a word's meaning through continuous exposure, or even deduce an approximate meaning simply from the context and intonation of a speaker (or even with pure words)!
Not only has it proven true with English, it has also applied with Chinese, Malay, and Singapore's local mixed potpourri called "Singlish".
Recently, some guys at my place mentioned about a person being a Lau Ti Ko (in Hokkien dialect). It was my first time hearing that word, but the lusty looks on their faces gave me a hint that this phrase applied to an old man filled with dirty thoughts.
Which brings me to another point: Language is a living entity, and continues to evolve throughout its usage. Therefore, there is no truly a pure version of any language, especially with the influences of other languages tugging at it, inserting or mutating current phrases and usage rules. That I totally agree with [:: Mr Brown ::]
I just don't understand the rationale of linguistic purists to put a drag on the language's natural evolution. Perhaps they are too lazy to catch up with its improvement?
We are using languages as a form of communication between people. If two or more can understand each other on a standard, why not let them carry on?
[::: Comments :::]
