Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Why can't Spanish be like English, and English be like French, andFrench be like Arabic?

Language is ❌ just a ๐Ÿ’ป๐Ÿ“  ๐Ÿ’๐Ÿ’ to ๐Ÿ“ฑ๐Ÿ™†; it’s also ๐Ÿ‘ฆ ๐Ÿ‘ฅ. Language is a ๐Ÿ‘Š๐Ÿ’ต๐Ÿ’ถ, a ๐Ÿ’ฑ group, a ๐Ÿ“•๐Ÿ“– of ๐Ÿ”ก that can ๐Ÿ ➕ to create meaningful 1⃣➕2⃣. Language is given a set of ๐Ÿ“‹, and is used to convey ๐Ÿ“„๐Ÿ“ฒ and ๐Ÿ’ญ to ๐Ÿ‘ซ๐Ÿ‘ฌ๐Ÿ‘ญ. But language isn’t just a ๐Ÿ” ๐Ÿ“”; it’s a ๐Ÿด of the๐Ÿ• —a ๐Ÿ‘ฆ ๐Ÿ‘ฅ. ๐Ÿ‘ฌ๐Ÿ‘ญ๐Ÿ’• more than others, it is their ๐Ÿ‘ฅ.

❓ isn’t ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ like๐Ÿ‘„ ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ, and ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ like๐Ÿ‘„ ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท? Well, for a language to ๐Ÿ a language, ๐ŸŽ ๐Ÿ‘ถ ❌ just ๐Ÿ‘€ at the ๐Ÿ“–๐Ÿ“Œ or ๐Ÿ’ญ ๐Ÿ‘† the ๐Ÿ”ก. ๐ŸŽ ๐Ÿ‘ถ must ๐Ÿ‘€ beyond the ๐Ÿ“– and into the ๐Ÿ˜ฑ ๐Ÿ‘ฅ, the legitimacy of the language, the ๐Ÿ“ฐ๐Ÿ“‡ and the ๐Ÿ’ญ๐Ÿ’ฅ๐Ÿ’ซ of ๐Ÿ”ก. A language is only legitimate if it can ✊ the ⚓๐Ÿ’ช of ๐Ÿ“š๐Ÿ“˜ and ๐Ÿ“œ๐Ÿ““. No 1⃣ ๐Ÿ‘ถ language can ๐Ÿ ๐Ÿ‘‘ to the other, ❓ Well, language in itself isn’t ๐Ÿ‘ฏ. So for something that isn’t even considered ๐Ÿ‘ฏ how can it ๐Ÿ ๐Ÿ‘‘ to another?

Language creates an ๐Ÿš—๐Ÿ -๐Ÿก๐ŸŒณ๐ŸŒฐ๐ŸŒฟ ๐Ÿ’‘ with the ๐Ÿ‘ซ๐Ÿ‘ฌ๐Ÿ‘ญ who share that language and the ๐Ÿ‘ซ๐Ÿ‘ฌ๐Ÿ‘ญ who have ❌ ๐Ÿ’ญ as to what that a particular language may mean. ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ may ๐Ÿ ๐Ÿ‘€ as an ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‘„; but how can it ๐Ÿ an ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‘„ when ๐Ÿ‘ซ๐Ÿ‘ฌ๐Ÿ‘ญ are obligated to ๐Ÿ”ฌ✏ it. As language is an ๐Ÿ‘ฅ, it creates ๐Ÿšง๐Ÿšง for ๐Ÿ‘ฒ๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿ‘ณ๐Ÿ’‚ who have ❌ ❔ as to what “๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ” is. But of course, even if a ๐Ÿ‘ณ๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿ‘ฒ๐Ÿ’‚ knew ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ, unless their ๐Ÿ”ก๐Ÿ“’ was ๐Ÿ“‚๐Ÿ“ with ๐Ÿค, ๐Ÿซ, and ๐Ÿข ๐Ÿ”ก they wouldn’t be taken as seriously and would be ๐Ÿ“Œ✒ as ๐Ÿ˜‹, or just a ๐Ÿ˜ถ ๐Ÿ‘ณ. Should it matter whether a ๐Ÿ‘ฆ is ๐Ÿ˜ฑ “๐Ÿ‘† and ๐Ÿ‘‡” or ๐Ÿ‘‡ and ๐Ÿ‘†, or “to whom” or “to who”? The ๐Ÿ‘ฑ ๐Ÿ“ ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช are gone, but ❓ do we still expect ๐Ÿ‘ฒ๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿ‘ฆ๐Ÿ‘ณ and basically ๐Ÿ‘ฆ๐Ÿ‘ง๐Ÿ‘ฉ else to ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‘„?

Whether a ๐Ÿ‘ฆ is from a ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‘„ their language or whether they are from a ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ ๐Ÿ’ต ๐Ÿ•“ ๐Ÿ“ the “๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ๐Ÿ‘„,” ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ? Regardless, they will feel as ๐Ÿก๐ŸŒณ๐ŸŒฐ๐Ÿ‚ to the common language like other ๐Ÿ‘ซ๐Ÿ‘ฌ๐Ÿ‘ญ feel in the ๐Ÿ‘ช of a different language.

๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ isn’t the only language in the ๐ŸŒ. However, ๐ŸŽ ๐Ÿ‘ถ believe it is—well that it should ๐Ÿ. But why? ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ is❌❌ else but a bunch of borrowed ๐Ÿ”ก. A language that was borrowed, that brings together so much ๐Ÿ‘ณ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ’‚๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ, and then ✅ its ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‘ฆ to judge other languages, doesn’t seem ✅ at all. How ๐Ÿ”จ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ‘ a borrowed language and its ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‘ฆ ✋๐Ÿ’จ ๐Ÿ‘ณ๐Ÿ’‚๐Ÿ‘จ groups to ๐Ÿ’ฐ๐Ÿ“ฅ๐Ÿ’ท their ๐Ÿ‘ฅ and ๐Ÿ“ the ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ, when ๐Ÿ‘„๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ is only but a ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿฏ of languages and ๐Ÿ‘ฅ๐Ÿ‘ฅ. Regardless of the ๐Ÿ‘˜๐Ÿ‘š๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น and language ๐Ÿšง๐Ÿšง, a language is ➕ than just ๐Ÿ”ก; it’s a ๐Ÿ‘ฆ ๐Ÿ‘ฅ and potentially their entire ๐Ÿ‘ถ๐Ÿ‘ง๐Ÿ‘ฉ.






This was one of my hardest blog posts to write because it went from being a meaningful blog post to a well written text message. Using the emoji’s to replace words was difficult but easy. I knew what emoji I wanted to use for each word I wanted to replace, however I was afraid that none of the audience would understand what I was saying. I made many compromises while writing because I knew I had to choose words that I would be able to easily or effectively communicate the meaning through emoji’s. Standard English of course was included, however if I ever had to type or write with emoji’s right smack in the middle of my sentences I would probably go nuts. The way I had to create words through emoji's was difficult since there isn't an emoji for absolutely everything. However whatever much I could do, I did, so that the meaning of the post wasn't changed too dramatically. Ultimately I don’t think I was able to fully get my point across effectively.

1 comments:

  1. First, I'd like to compliment you on taking on the challenge of writing in Emoji - It actually took me a while to read! I love the detail and time you put into actually trying to make each and every Emoji describe what you were trying to say. I think you have to give yourself more credit -- you did a really good job making sense of just Emoji's! I think the fact that you used Standard English was interesting, especially since we have been debating why authors use standard instead of another dialect. In this case, I think using any other dialect/language would've made this extremely confusing, so the standard english was a good choice for using in between Emoji's. However, I also really like the topic you chose to address within your passage pertaining to language. It almost relates to your use of Emoji's, and both the standard english and emoji's fit in really well together! Overall, good job!

    ReplyDelete

Samiha Julakha. Powered by Blogger.

featured-content

© And I’ll squeeze into a dress so I can be like you--Samiha's Social Change Blog, AllRightsReserved.

Designed by ScreenWritersArena