Talk:English language

Latest comment: 19 days ago by Johnbod in topic Common English language
Good articleEnglish language has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 24, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 23, 2006Good article nomineeListed
February 25, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
June 15, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
January 21, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
September 14, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
April 14, 2015Good article nomineeListed
September 21, 2019Good article reassessmentKept
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of November 30, 2019.
Current status: Good article

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2025

edit

Remove United States from the list of countries where English is dominant without being legally defined, as Executive Order 14224 made English the official national language. ~2025-38158-22 (talk) 00:49, 4 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Not done for now. There has never been a law that has actually been passed declaring English the official language. I would either wait for that to be passed, or establish a consensus. NotJamestack (✉️|📝) 01:00, 4 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
The legality around executive orders is somewhat complicated. They have the force of law, but like any law, including those enacted by Congress, they're subject to judicial review. Normally they only affect the functioning of the federal executive branch, but Congress also affirmatively delegates the executive certain powers beyond what the constitution strictly states for the executive branch ostensibly to make the federal bureaucracy more agile and topic-adept than it otherwise would be. The OP isn't wrong. Absent an adverse final ruling by the judiciary, an executive order stands as law as written. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/executive_order
In short, @NotJamestack you're incorrect that executive orders aren't law. ~2026-73723-4 (talk) 00:44, 3 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Would've been helpful to have that source earlier... NotJamestack (✉️|📝) 01:44, 3 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2025

edit

Please replace the URL from reference 11 in the lede to this one: https://archive.org/details/englishonetongue0000svar_y3z3

the reason being that the current url is dead. Thanks ~2025-38360-06 (talk) 11:54, 21 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

 Done jolielover♥talk 14:03, 21 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Claim about alphabets in lead

edit

Hello @Publicmember. I saw that you asked for reasoning before reverting your edit, so I wanted to bring the discussion here. Edit descriptions are maybe too short for the discussion you want to have.

You made an edit linked here where you added this to the lead: "which contrarily to all other Germanic Languages including German, Swiss-German Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Finnish and Dutch which were created using a Germanic Alphabet, English was created from the Latin alphabet along with the Romanesque Languages of French, Portuguese and Italian". First off, this has nothing in the article's main body which backs it up. See MOS:LEAD to learn more about what lead sections should do, but in particular it says "Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article."

Secondly, I simply want to know more about what you're trying to say. What do you mean about the language being created with an alphabet? This is a strange thing to say, given that languages largely exist independently of the alphabet. Furthermore, English has been documented as using runes before the Latin alphabet, and all the other languages you mentioned use the Latin alphabet today. Is there some other distinction you're making? And what makes it important enough to put in the lead? IndigoManedWolf (talk) 01:16, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Good point. This turns the reality of language evolution on its ear: all other Germanic Languages including German, Swiss-German Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Finnish and Dutch which were created using a Germanic Alphabet, English was created from the Latin alphabet along with the Romanesque Languages of French, Portuguese and Italian. Aside from Finnish not being in any way Germanic except for lexical borrowings... none of these languages nor the many others that could be mentioned in their geographic areas were created using or created from alphabets, whatever that may mean; they evolved over time in speech communities. When a few ventured to write them, they used and to varying degrees adapted the system they were accustomed to (e.g. Cyrillic for Romanian). The leaps in the lead from actual language to written representation are jarring enough without introducing, for the languages cited, counterfactual notions of language evolution. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 23:43, 23 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
not in English ? Do not understand ! ~2026-86339-0 (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
First of, thank you for having this discussion. I am surprised you don't see how languages are correlatively made from alphabets. Alphabets are writing systems made of letters. Visualize a language as a puzzle, and each piece of the puzzle be a letter. Languages are made with letters from an alphabet, just like a picture is made with pieces from a puzzle. Each writing system is unique, just like each puzzle is different. The 26 letters which make up the English language is called the English Alphabet. Period. No other puzzle can be made using these pieces. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Spoken languages came first, made of sounds. Writing systems are invented or adapted to represent speech sounds. Languages differ in their repertoire of sounds (or sound contrasts); is that what you're getting at? —Antonissimo (talk) 04:07, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2026

edit

It is not "English" nor 'English language', but "the English language". West germanic is not a language. English is not German. Change " English is a west germanic language to "English is a language". Then, you can assert that The English Language is West Germanic, because it was "created" by the Anglos and the Saxons tribes which were both West Germanic. However French was also created by the Franks, another West Germanic Tribe, yet is not classified as a "West Germanic language". Therefore, there is a flaw with the former reasoning.

Another aspect of the English Language to consider is the English Alphabet which consists of 26 letters. To write in German, you need 30 letters and French 40. The ancient latin alphabet consists of 21 letters and was the official language of Ancient Greece. During the Roman Empire, the language had involved to include 5 more letters, including the X, Y, W, Z and K, known as the 26 letters of the Roman Alphabet. We still speak the same Roman language, today. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 20:31, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want made. InfernoHues (talk) 20:47, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
The requested changes are solely based on common sense and grammar. The lead sentence: "English is a West Germanic language" is improperly introducing the topic "English language" as "English is...". What English stands for, here, (common sense) is a language. The reason for which you are asserting the English Language is West Germanic would also make the French Language West Germanic, since it was "created" by the FRANKS, a german tribe and name. Contrastingly, neither Anglo nor Saxons is in german. Additionally, the claim that Scandinavia would be Germania is frankly ridiculous. In the English language (grammar), we speak English, write in English and refer to "the English language." ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 23:53, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
We all come from the same monkey. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 23:54, 28 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Additionally, all these "tribes" were part of the Roman Empire. They were therefore all Romans. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
It's talking about a language family that happens to be called "West Germanic." French is called a romance language, because that's the language family it belongs to. It has nothing to do with geography. InfernoHues (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
West Germanic is not a geographical term? ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
It's not being used as a geographic term here. InfernoHues (talk) 00:57, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Could you explain, then, why the English language is West Germanic? ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 01:00, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Languages that have similar features to each other are placed in 'language families.' The language family that English is in is called 'West Germanic.' InfernoHues (talk) 01:02, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
"Language family" is a metaphor. I understand it isn't Geography, but it isn't Poetry either. Use technical and contextual words, please. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 01:07, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Language family is the technical term. See West Germanic languages for more info. InfernoHues (talk) 01:09, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
~2026-15841-03 (talk) 01:52, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
~2026-15841-03 (talk) 02:13, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
If geographical terms have non-gegraphical meanings, my research for consistency and sense, is in vain. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
It is more an ethnic term. —Antonissimo (talk) 04:07, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Did Barbarians even know how to read or write? The first school was created in 800, and was only reserved for Aristocrats, until the abolishment of monarchies and the rise of the People. ~2026-15841-03 (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
We still speak the same Roman language, today. What, because we use Roman letters? So English and Latin and Hungarian are the same language? I suggest you go away and learn the fundamentals of historical linguistics.
French was created by Galli (Celts) who adopted Vulgar Latin. Centuries later, Franks moved into Gaul and adopted Gallo-Latin; that they named their new realm after themselves does not change the origin of the language. —Antonissimo (talk) 03:51, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Common English language

edit

Is (in English lang of old) (disambig: not Old English) how poor people in England used to talk, common English? Being a term from "common people" from years ago? I am English by the way Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) 13:52, 1 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Not sure if I understand the question, but if in "English lang of old" the old is old enough, sure, Old English was the language of common folk. Could you clarify your question by fleshing it out a bit? Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
== Move the article to "English" ==

In my opinion, this article should be moved to "English" because the official name of the English language is English and Wkipedia articles should say the official name of things (except people), not what they're colloquially known as. ~2026-28925-44 (talk) 07:56, 16 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

The page English is a disambiguation page. This is consistent with other languages: French language (versus French), German language (versus German), etc. Sławomir Biały (talk) 08:03, 16 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
What office gave it that official name? —Antonissimo (talk) 00:17, 17 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
And in what country is that office in? Johnbod (talk) 14:24, 17 May 2026 (UTC)Reply