[quote]I’m curious why anyone would think there are more Canadian English teachers.[/quote]Well every second person I meet is from Canada. Are there any figures anywhere? My guess would be 1) Canadian 2) South African and 3) American.
Rubbish!! The Canadians are here for the warmer climate and twenty-four hour access to beer and liquor. 
We all know that US English is taught because the US is the most influential country, especially here, and the largest market for Taiwanese goods. The fact that there are relatively few British or Australian born Taiwanese might also have something to do with it.
Influential does not necessarily equate with ‘better’ or more important though. Looked at objectively, Spanish would proably have been a much better choice of world language but English is tops because the Brits put more energy into empire building than anyone else. I can’t really argue that that makes Britain somehow superior, nor can I describe the Treaty of Nanking as diplomacy.
Given the simple fact that the US is massively bigger than anyone else, and didn’t waste as much time and energy in ridiculous wars as the nations of Europe it is inevitable that the USA has risen to dominance. I know it, I accept it as a fact of life.
But that doesn’t change the fact that AmE, as it is commonly spoken, is a lazier and less complex language than BritE. It’s another fact of life, and arguing about US foreign policy is hardly contributing to discussion about it.
I find Tigermans arguments to be irrelevant to the original topic, flawed, offensive, and although he seems to be able to produce a lot of facts and figures he doesn’t seem to have any appreciation of anyone else’s viewpoint.
The USA will protect it’s own perceived best interests as it sees fit, as will any other country or organisation. The difference is that widespread public opinion is supposed to mean something to people who claim to support democracy. Using your influence to enforce your own policy over the wishes of the majority is not diplomacy.
Confusing your influence with your importance is exactly the sort of thing that you, Tigerman, were accused of in my first posting: inadequate thinking as a result of inadequate language.
Due to the dominance of the USA the poor decisions made by and for the people of the USA have an enormous impact on the rest of us, so it is inevitable that the results of this poor thinking get dragged into any discussion. But please try and be a little less gung ho, and a little more understanding of the fact that when you start forcefully putting your interests above others then the others - 96% of the world’s population - will have their own opinions about what’s best for them.
I just deleted all the bits where I argued with what you said about how great the USA is. FYI I lived in the USA for several years, made many good friends, and even married an American. I am also on record at this site as admitting that most of my favourite authors are American, and have defended the teaching of colloquial AmE in schools in Taiwan. I am not anti-American any more than I am anti-British, but I am able to look objectively at the actions of both countries and make value judgements without assuming that ‘we’ are always right.
And I am able to look at the language as it is taught, and stand by my opinion that one flavour is better than another, without believing that anybody who disagrees is part of some ‘axis of evil’.
Now get down off your soapbox, and try to stay on-topic. As I said, I’m not going to waste my time arguing about the actions of the USA. And besides: the Canadians get bored with all this serious stuff, eh?
Final suggestion: The best compromise would be to adopt Australian English, which combines the best qualities of both the main brands. It (when written) is grammatically correct, but at the same time is varied and imaginative enough to make it far more palatable than the older ‘stodgy’ english it is derived from. Ideas anyone?
Who said American English is better than British English? 
What the f*&% are you talking about? You are arguing against assertions that have not been made by anyone. :? I entered this discussion merely because I get a bit irritated by frequent allegations that Americans are ignorant of world geography and or have slow or muddled thought processes… I have replied to idiotic assertions (mere opinion), and I note you have not responded to these, but rather now address assertions that were never made… Give it a rest, will ya?
Who gives a hoot about Spanish? The question was “why is AMERICAN English favored in Taiwan over BRITISH English”. Spanish is irrelevant to this discussion. You and some others then decided to go off slagging American English and Americans… and now you cry with “exasperation” when I respond to your baseless statements.
A “fact”? I think you are confusing “fact” and “opinion”. And if you think otherwise, why not add something to your assertion of “fact” to support the same? And, BTW, I didn’t raise the subject of US foreign policy in this thread…
The original topic was the issue of “why is American English favored over British English in Taiwan” and some of you intellectual giants decided it was an appropriate time to slag Americans, American policy, and American English… So who’s off f&%#ing topic?
Boo Hoo. Yes, when I respond to idiotic assertions based on unsubstantiated opinion, I use “facts and figures”. I find these generally more pursuasive than mere “opinion”. I have a great deal of appreciation for the rational opinions of others, and would really love to see you support yours with “facts and figures”. But until you do, your opinions are fairly worthless. Sorry if you find this “offensive”.
For someone who claims that Americans are ignorant, you have much to learn yourself. “Widespread public opinion” is worthless compared to “facts”. You can go on trusting in opinion, but I prefer to trust in facts.
In the early part of American history, “widespread public opinion” among Americans from the southern states held that black people from Africa were less than human. However, the “fact” is, that these blacks were and are every bit as human as were/are the whites in the US. Thank goodness that a sufficient number of Americans were able to distinguish between that “widespread public opinion” and the “fact” that contradicted that fallacy.
BTW, the US is a republic, or in other words, a representative democracy, because our founding fathers wanted to protect us from mob rule, sometimes activated by “widespread public opinion”. There is no contradiction in the support for the ideal of democracy and the understanding that “widespread public opinion” is sometimes, and frequently, wrong.
And what, pray tell, are the wishes of the majority? And from what population are you taking this majority?
Bullshit. The question, again is, why is American English favored in Taiwan over British English. You and others have turned this into a thread to bash the USA, and I have responded… and now you are crying that I am not nice and that I somehow don’t play fair :? Your accusation would be offensive, if it were not so laughable.
That the decisions were “poor” is your opinion… it is not a fact.
Bullshit. The issue in this thread is simple and clear. Taiwan prefers American English over British English because the US is the most powerful and influential nation on the planet currently, because Taiwan depends upon the US for defense and in part, economic prosperity, and because many Taiwanese have chosen to live in the US. Your opinion regarding the intellectual and linguistic inferiority of Americans has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. “Inevitable” my arse .
Please try to use some “facts and figures” when making statements about any topic… then I won’t become so “gung ho” in responding.
I didn’t say the US was “great”. I said that it is the most powerful nation on the planet in terms of military force, economic power and diplomatic influence. Do you disagree with that statement? If you argued against something I didn’t say, then I’m glad you deleted your arguments, because they were irrelevant and thus a waste of time.
Good for you. I have plenty of friends from Europe, Canada, NZ and Australia. Many of these are considered family, as they were originally exchange students who lived with my family for extended periods … I am well aware of the other “opinions” out there.
That’s funny. You are implying that I am not “objective” because I dared to respond to your baseless statements of “opinion” with “facts and figures”. Please explain how that makes you “objective” and me not.
Fine. You stand by your “opinions” and I’ll stand next to my “facts and figures”. BTW, I never said that American English is “better” than British English. I rather enjoy speaking with my British friends and hearing them use English. You are the one who has trumpeted the superiority of British English over American English… And furthermore, I never implied or stated that anyone was a part of an “axis of evil” in connection with the discussion regarding American and British English. You’re being really silly now.
Typical. You go off topic… I respond to your “opinion” with “facts and figures” and then you chastise me for going off topic :? If you don’t want to “waste your time” talking about US policy, then I suggest that you refrain from raising the same in a discussion regarding the reason that American English is favored in Taiwan over British English… Sheesh!
I think that, if it’s OK with you chaps, I would like to just agree to differ.
There doesn’t seem to be much point in anyone trying to win anyone else over to their point of view here.
Lovely day otherwise. Has anyone been outside at all?
That is a great example. The “u” in humor and similar spelling differences really make “AmE” look lazy next to “BrE”. A shining example of complexity and basically thinking like my grandmother.
Ah, diplomacy?
twmc and Tigerman. My compliments.
Does it really matter??
I’m from NZ and I don’t give a damn what style of English is prefered. I teach, I get paid, I explain any differences - problem solved. Geez, leave the goat alone
A modest attempt. Thank you for recognising it as such.
Does this mean there will be peace in our time?
And Boss Hogg:
[quote]Does it really matter??
I’m from NZ and I don’t give a damn what style of English is prefered. I teach, I get paid, I explain any differences - problem solved. Geez, leave the goat alone[/quote]
You’ve probably hit the nail on the head there, but I didn’t see any goat in there. Have I missed something?
Ah, I get it. Goat, Satan, Axis of Evil, right? Or is it just some Kiwi expression drawing a parallel between bestiality and other unprofitable activities?
Tigerman,
Without sounding too simplistic I was wondering how I could possibly give you a logically articulate argument that would concur with all of your realist based assumptions on the state of global affairs today. I, unlike you, obviously, have a life outside of this forum and do not have time to conduct meticulous research on every post that I make. If that were the case I would attempt to use these posts as credit towards my PhD. In addition, while your argument had some points that definitely have merit lines like;
“No shit Sherlock. Why should US policy NOT serve US interests? Again, what the fuck are you smoking?”
take away from the point your trying to make, and instead make me think that you are a complete as**ole, although a somewhat articulate one.
I’d just like to ask you one question Is it a coincidence that George Bush gets elected, through the political donations and clout of the oil industry and the military industrial complex and you see a reversal in Ameirican foreign policy agenda towards a much more militaristic and unilateralist approach than before?
As to your questioning me over China and Cuba, now whose being simplistic? I never said that their situations should be treated equally. I merely said that American perscriptions for this policy were hypocritical. I have no real problem with the way that the Bush regime handles relations with China, save the pawn status which Taiwan plays in the equation, but that’s real politik for you. China poses a much greater economic and military threat than Cuba does. In fact, many might accuse the American embargo of Cuba for maintaining the high levels of poverty on the island. I know that some of the Cubans I have met have felt this way.
Anyways, that’s just my 2 cents. I’d also like to apologize for my mispelling of Kalamazoo. Anyone who’d like to accuse me of anti-Americanism may fell free. I don’t feel that the label is apporpriate although, I am and will continue to be highly critical of American governmental policy, which serves the interest of MNC’s, as opposed to the interests of American citizens. But there I go again coming off as over simplistic…
[quote=“mfaass”]Tigerman,
Without sounding too simplistic I was wondering how I could possibly give you a logically articulate argument that would concur with all of your realist based assumptions on the state of global affairs today. I, unlike you, obviously, have a life outside of this forum and do not have time to conduct meticulous research on every post that I make. If that were the case I would attempt to use these posts as credit towards my PhD.[/quote]
So, you admit ignorance. The second comment was uncalled for, and irrelevant. And really, you haven’t a clue as to what type of life I lead.
[quote=“mfaass”]In addition, while your argument had some points that definitely have merit lines like;
“No shit Sherlock. Why should US policy NOT serve US interests? Again, what the fuck are you smoking?”
take away from the point your trying to make, and instead make me think that you are a complete as**ole, although a somewhat articulate one.[/quote]
OK, I apologize for stating my response in such terms. However, I remind you that I did so in reply to your argument against an assertion that you made up and your comment “what are you smokin’”.
Yeah, I can be an asshole sometime. Sorry. But sometimes I just get tired of hearing the same ill-informed arguments and baseless assertions. Everyone “knows” what and why the US is doing everything…
First, Bush was elected by the voters of the US in the US’ electoral college system, not by the oil industry or the military industrial complex. Any reversal in US foreign policy toward more militaristic leanings is a direct result of the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001. I thought that was obvious.
You.
If the two nations should be dealt with differently due to different situations, then why on Earth would you say the US is hypocritical for using two different policies? That doesn’t make sense.
The US is not responsible for poverty in Cuba. Please. The socialist system and Fidel Castro are responsible for Cuba’s current situation. Could the US help. Of course. But that doesn’t mean that the US is responsible for Cuba’s current state of poverty.
No problem.
Yeah. There you go again.
Yeah, Tigerman Bush was voted in due to the will of the American majority, or one might say a minority of malfunctioning ballot stations in Florida. Of course his support for big oil had nothing at all to do with approving drilling for oil in a part of Alaska that had been a national park, and will effect the Canadian ecology as well. Nor, did his tendencies have to do anything with Dick Cheney’s closed door meetings with people from the oil industry, records which have been subpoenaed by Congress but have been witheld. Of course another telling sign might be the fact that both Cheney and Bush are on the boards of big oil companies. No just more coincidences. Of course not. There’s absolutely no reason why industries and lobbies such as the NRA spend millions of dollars every year lobbying Congress and the White House. I’m sure they’d piss their money down the toilet just because they have it, and not because it buys results. Give me a break.
In fact, I’m beginnng to wonder if you’re not on the Bush payroll yourself, you being such a strong proponent and defender of his work and views. 
See, you’re commenting on something that I did NOT say. I said that Bush was elected by the American people using the electoral college system. I didn’t say that Bush received a majority of the votes. But he did, anyway, in Florida.
It works like this: One person-one vote. Its that simple. How is Canada going to be affected by drilling in Alaska?
So what? One person-one vote.
You are aware, aren’t you, that many large organizations and companies give money to and lobby all candidates, regardless of party affiliation. Of course they are trying to buy the winner’s ear… but so what? The winner is not bound by any donation to push any particular policy, and he will not, unless he also agrees with the same.
But to be in a position to do anything, he must first be elected by the people (not the oil companies).
Should I conclude that you are on the payroll of the DNC for opposing pres. Bush?
Interesting the way the American English dictionary is different from the English dictionary:
It is like as Orwell said NEWSPEAK
My first response was going to be to headhonchoII praising him(her?) for his(her?) witty assessment of English. Then I read the responses and things got ugly. We had comments all over the board and frankly I can’t address them all. They ranged from a debate on the basis of American success to the education level of someone who doesn’t speak directly from a dictionary.
My main point I’d like to make is that I used to speak “formal” English - as formal as I could come up with. I’ve relaxed though and feel that I don’t have to prove my intelligence through the words I use.
There are exceptions of course - if I was to say something like “Youz all is idiots”, I would be immediately dismissed as an idiot myself. Obviously, it’s pretty important to be able to communicate clearly. The words one uses should be considered a reflection of that person’s personality, like the clothes they wear or the way they decorate their home. Just as you shouldn’t feel comfortable in criticizing one’s choice in clothes (would you?) or what color their sofa is, don’t criticize the way they speak.
If it is a matter of the education they’ve received, blame their teachers. Then listen to what they are saying. Just because they don’t say it the way you would, doesn’t mean that it isn’t brilliant.
Um…Youz all is idiots…yo!
The most intelligent statement made in this thread. 