Comment History

on 2 Roots

2 Comments

Forum: If you could have one superpower, what would it be?
FoxFirelight
0

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
FoxFirelight 18 United States PhlegmaticCholeric INFP 9w1 60C
Eh, this is pretty tame compared with some of the other powers people have chosen, but I think I'd like a shapeshifting ability. It just seems so versatile... I could spend days flying around the clouds as a storm petrel, or roaming what's left of the jungles as a mighty tiger (although in that instance I'd probably have to shift back to me when I got hungry... since I'm a vegetarian and all). I could delve deeper than any human into the ocean as a giant squid, or explore tiny unnoticed nooks and crannies as a mouse. I could see with the acuity of a hawk, or hear sounds I've never heard before with the ears of a bat. I could learn so much... Of course, there'd be a great potential for evil with a shapeshifting ability. After all, I could impersonate anyone, and gain the trust of those who normally wouldn't give it to me, or make decisions in other peoples' names. I could pick locks, or slip through barriers unnoticed. But, I don't know, that just doesn't seem to be in my nature. I'm motivated by curiosity, mainly; power and control hold little appeal for me. Neither does wealth. I guess the universe and life as we know it would be safe if I had such a power.
Forum: Accents
FoxFirelight
0

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
FoxFirelight 18 United States PhlegmaticCholeric INFP 9w1 60C
I don't really think anyone has "the" English accent. I mean, in the land we know as England today, there were the original tribes of people living there, then the Romans came and conquered for a bit (I can't believe I just made that joke >_>"), then the vikings. Then England was ruled by William of Normandy (who was French), for a while. All these groups of people left their marks on the "original language" (and its pronunciations, most likely) which, doubtless, had already been slowly changing itself. What is my point? Languages are fluid. They change over time. I mean really, what is the "definitive" English language? Is it being spoken now, or 50 years ago or 500 years ago?

To illustrate a bit, I'm going to digress and talk about Beowulf some. Beowulf, as many of you probably know, was a Scandinavian tale that was passed along through the generations by memorization. It was brought to England with the vikings where it was finally put down in words by two unnamed scribes. By this time, it had likely been changed greatly over the years due to poor (or selective) memories. Was this written copy "the" Beowulf, or was the "true" one still floating around somewhere? Or was the only "true" tale the one that was told by the original author? No one will ever know, probably, but my point is that none of the versions are "wrong" exactly, they just developed differently.

I personally think it's much the same thing with language. Once English speaking people started emigrating elsewhere, their language began to develop differently than what was actually spoken in England, which was, of course, also changing simultaneously. A lot of other languages contributed to create "English," which as a live language is still changing today, in America, Australia, and England itself (which I assume, like America, has many different regional accents, thus making the claim that the English accent is the correct one more confusing), as well as other places English is spoken. I'm sure not everyone will agree with me, but I just don't think a fluid, changing language like English can ever have a true "perfect accent."

That being said, I personally find my own accent to be pretty lame. >_>"