Page 1 of 1

Euro-English

Posted: Fri May 31, 2013 1:44 pm
by Perry Lassiter
This is a PDF file I got from Quartz this morning. The relevant part is only three or four paragraphs divided like pages. Apparently English for Europe is defined as that spoken in England and Ireland, although I'm not sure the definitions will bear that out. You don't have to read all 50 pp of definitions unless you're masochistic or very interested.

http://ec.europa.eu/translation/english ... ons_en.pdf

Re: Euro-English

Posted: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:20 pm
by Slava
I believe this article from the Middlebury Magazine fits in with this topic. What is the meaning of "meaning"? And who decides?

Re: Euro-English

Posted: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:48 pm
by Perry Lassiter
I took a Master's seminar in Semantics in 1956, and we used a book by Ogden and Richards called The Meaning of Meaning. Though dated 1923, it has been updated several times, most recently in 1995. I happen to have the book on the desk in my office to re-read.

Your article is good and provacative. As I read of Putman's approach, I couldn't help but think of Plato and his world of ideas or forms, which to him is the real world. Consider chairs. I type now from a recliner, but I can see a rocker and a folding chair from where I sit. We also have dining chairs and captain's chairs, yet all evoke the word "chair." What is the commonality? Plato would say it is the idea or form of the chair, which is more real than the chair itself.

Now called semiotic or philosophy of language, semantics is a fascinating field of study. I end in wonder we communicate at all - or seem to.

Re: Euro-English

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:01 am
by Philip Hudson
I have frequently been urged to peel the outer layers from a question so that I can see the core of the issue. But what if the issue is an onion? So many things in life are like onions. They cannot be pared to the core because there is no core. We do not have to know the meaning of meaning before we can exercise meaning. It is sort of like an axiom in mathematics. It is because it is. Some times it takes a brave person to admit an axiom. In mathematics, I was never satisfied with the axiom of choice. Without this axiom there can be no irrational numbers. So I bit the bullet and believed.