The weirdest things about English

Enjoy this whistlestop tour of the weirdness of English. And start speaking a new languages in 3 weeks with Babbel 🎉. Get up to 60% OFF your subscription ➡️ Here: go.babbel.com/t?bsc=usa-influ...
English is special. It's unique. It's weird.
In this video, I run through 10 aspects of English that make it bizarre in comparison with other languages. These include its "meaningless do", dreadful spellings, odd use of tenses, missing pronouns and the strange array of sounds in English.
🌍World Atlas of Language Structures (WALS): wals.info/
📝Excellent article on weird English: corplinguistics.wordpress.com...
⭐️MY PATREON COMMUNITY: patreon.com/robwords
📝FREE NEWSLETTER: www.robwords.com/newsletter
Check me out on the web, on Twitter & TikTok:
robwords.com
x.com/robwordsYT
/ robwords
==CHAPTERS==
0:00 Introduction
0:17 1 - Weird noises
2:46 2 - Odd questions
4:48 3 - Meaningless do
6:05 4 - Phrasal verbs
7:55 Babbel
9:16 5 - Why no genders?
12:13 6 - Pronouns
14:06 7 - Silly spelling
15:43 8 - Tenses
17:45 9 - Articles
19:37 10 - Things English doesn't have

[@RobWords]

What's missing from English? Let me know below. And start speaking a new languages in 3 weeks with Babbel 🎉. Get up to 60% OFF your subscription ➡ Here: go.babbel.com/t?bsc=usa-influ-promo&btp=default&KZbin&Influencer..May-2024..USA-TATAM..promo-yt-robwords-may-2024

[@minecraftmore4359]

First! 🎉 Also, there should be a letter for "sh" "ch" and "kh". Stuff like that! Like, Turkish has the letter “Şş” which makes the “Sh” sound. Bye! 😊

[@LiteKipe]

One weird thing that English does not have is tone--the use of pitch to distinguish meaning. In many Asian languages, changing the pitch you use on a certain phoneme changes the meaning of the word. So, "ma" in standard Mandarin has 5 distinct tones, and using any in place of the other will change the meaning of the word significantly. One can be a question particle, one can mean horse, while another can be part of the word for mother.

[@leventevarga]

quite a lot... the "Đ" sound is considered quite usual along with "r". The word order isjust makes sense, rets of the more developed languages dont HAVE TO, since we can overcomplicate with pre--and suffixes.(saying this as a Hungarian)

[@leventevarga]

also in Hungarian w euse plenty of thos fixes (up, dodown, etc, and we literally say the same way to give up (felad , whereas fel= up ; give(s) = ad )

[@CAP198462]

Rob likes him a proper brew. 👍

[@-Subtle-]

English is weird. It can be understood through tough thorough thought though.

[@m4m4b0y2]

Nicely done! I may plagiarize you very soon.

[@xNillowsx]

That's a thoroughgoing thought thoroughly thought throughout; through and through!

[@TomMarvan]

It's good to see you have thought it through.

[@thorstenjaspert9394]

The English world is connected and divided by one language.

[@yakkothegoat2326]

are you trying to give me a stroke?!

[@stevencoghill4323]

When only a contraction sounds "right" but the full words do not. Don't you dare! v. Do not you dare!

[@sem1ot1c]

Interestingly, to my ear the first is a command and the second a question.

[@frankleyJ]

well, I think it would be rearranged... You do not dare!

[@apolo399]

The cambridge grammar of the english language argues that ·n't functions as a verbal suffix, that verbs negated this way are inflected for the negative (synthetic negation) and as such are not entirely equivalent to the "non-contracted" construction (analytic negation). They do acknowledge that ·n't was a contraction, that its etymology was of a reduced pronunciation of "not", but they argue that that's no longer the case. If you have access to the book, it's chapter 3, section 1.9

[@sidarthur8706]

'dare not' is better but no one would take you seriously

[@MusikCassette]

@@sidarthur8706 Do not dare!

[@graphicmaterial5947]

As a Swede, I'm so jealous of your access to single words to describe certain bodily movements like "shrug", "squat", "frown", "nudge" and "poke". In Swedish, you often have to describe it with a whole sentence, like "sitting down in a crouched position" or "push someone gently with your elbow". A terrible waste of time for us..

[@NikiHolmes]

Feel free to borrow the English words 😊

[@Threezi04]

@@NikiHolmes Yes we already borrowed our fair share of Scandinavian ones 😂

[@katam6471]

But we can say "closing your eyes" and "opening your mouth" with just one word . And moving away from bodily movements, what about bädda=making the bed, diska=doing the dishes, cykla=ridning a bike?

[@cathjj840]

@@katam6471 Well, we do have cycling, but not usually used in the same context. And the Brits have washing up (unless they've americanized that one, too). As for the first one, young men just don't bother, either with the words or the thing.

[@jeffrascal9244]

Swedish is like most European languages then.

[@absurdbird3556]

A conversation with my Italian friend... "How do you say your alarm wakes you up in the morning?" "My alarm goes off.." "NO! Your alarm goes ON!" Gave me pause for thought.

[@danytalksmusic]

Well if it's going off in the morning, then logically you should turn it on to stop it?

[@twincast2005]

@@danytalksmusic Technically you turn it on when you set the timer (or activate the smoke detector), and the alarm is the last thing it does before it gets turned off.

[@TheAtomoh]

​@danytalksmusic If the alarm is on then it's making a sound, if it is off then it's doing nothing.

[@FriedAudio]

Perhaps the phrase "goes off" is like a rocket "goes/going off" its launchpad. Something IS happening within the mechanism of the alarm clock to keep it from ringing (launching) UNTIL its proper set time. The alarm sounds when the silencing mechanism "goes off".

[@FriedAudio]

@@danytalksmusic Well, you'd be "turning on" the stop mechanism to cease the audible alarm sound.

[@BensBrickDesigns]

A friend of mine started using "grandboss" for boss's boss and I love it.

[@RobWords]

That's excellent

[@Rocketsong]

I would probably go with Überboss (overboss).

[@CheeseWyrm]

The Big Boss!

[@PHill]

​@CheeseWyrm But Big Boss is the CEO, the person at the point of the org chart. Well, at least in my dialect it is.

[@listen2meokidoki264]

Even grandbosses have a boss. It keeps going until you reach the Godfather who is God's earthy representative. His title is The Godfather. And he is always a genetically determined man who identifies as a man who, like God himself only makes offers you can't refuse..

[@LiverTeep]

In Australia, we use a word to negate a negative statement and we use it all the time. For example “Rob, you didn’t take the bins out again.” “Bullshit!”

[@Morpheux1]

🤣🤣🤣

[@Siqueira_andrew]

Bullshit! I'm living here hahahah

[@snowstrobe]

Can confirm!

[@Wreniffer]

As an australian I have no idea what your talking about. 😢

[@CheeseWyrm]

@@Wreniffer Bullshit! 🤣

[@amedina.mobile]

Loved the "medieval KZbin" screen 😂 The little details like "brethren", "subscribeth", the video with the boar. That's quality: taking time to produce a result, even if that product is there for a few seconds.

[@respectedgentleman4322]

Yeah I had to go back and pause it to see all the little details. Top work!

[@amedina.mobile]

@@respectedgentleman4322 I also had to and it's how one realizes, values, and appreciates the effort that goes into quality work.

[@rmanr1853]

As a native Spanish speaker, you don't know how glad I am that English lost its genders and that the verb conjugations are so simple. It made it so much easier to learn as opposed to French or Italian.

[@Philrc]

Or Spanish

[@ivanheffner2587]

“Rob, you didn’t take the bins out again.” “False.”

[@ZeMarkKrazee]

I like to use “correct” and “incorrect” in these situations.

[@belg4mit]

That is appropriating a nother word for the situation, he was referring to a dedicated word.

[@iandrake4683]

Bullocks!

[@CWinterstorm]

"Lies!"

[@na195097]

Often a sound is used but not a word. Like "bah" or a negative grunt-like sound, something that would be classified as a scoff.

[@MrHypnofan]

The part about phrasal verbs reminds me of a joke that Victor Borge used to tell about how, in English, it is odd that you have to cut down a tree before you can cut it up.

[@user-pt3id3xx1f]

Non native speakers of a language are always aware of its idiosyncrasies.

[@TamasSzebeni]

In hungarian we cut the tree out then cut it up.

[@jamesdewane1642]

A: You didn't take the bins out again. B: Rubbish!

[@Primitarian]

Yes, the rubbish bins. You didn't take them out.

[@ThomasBirch]

Preposterous!

[@mattlassen5948]

B: Rubbish?

[@rootkite]

Even the word "weird" is weird! Its etymology involves meanings such as "fate" and "to turn" and "to become". Not only that, I just found out that Shakespeare reintroduced the word into English! It had fallen out of use in Middle English, but came back through Macbeth's Weird Sisters. Your videos are so wonderfully jovial and witty, as well as deeply informative! Thanks so much 😊

[@paulwicht6294]

Guess Shakespeare was the original weirdo then!😂

[@jaibhimadevi5805]

Mine own owl, grown and gowned, owned a crow's crown, mined by the slow plow, flown down, never scowling, yet unknown.

[@thomassunkel9229]

🤣👍🏻👍🏻

[@glennlaroche1524]

Nice.

[@adfaklsdjf]

i don't get it. i see that there are a bunch of "ow"/"own"s that are pronounced differently (seems like mostly 2 pronunciations).. but it seems like there must be more to it than that?

[@angeldude101]

Me trying to read this: ow.

[@chrismanuel9768]

That's... just two pronunciations repeatedly?

[@ericdculver]

When you talked about the present tense, I thought you were going to mention (you almost did but didn't quite), the fact that we don't use the "present tense" as our present tense: "What are you doing?" "I am reading a book." We never ever say: "I read a book." The so-called "present progressive" has completely supplanted the present tense in our language.

[@Acadia26]

I suppose you use it to show habit, 'On my way to work, I read a book', 'On Mondays, I visit my parents'. Also to state facts: 'The moon is Earth's satellite'.

[@infernalstan886]

That.. that is the present tense though.... Or else what tense would you class "I am reading" as?

[@TubeLVT]

Some of these conventions are needed to distinguish between heteronyms (words spelled the same but pronounced differently). For past tense, we write “I read a book.” We understand the pronunciation /rɛd/. For the present tense, we must write “I am reading a book.” The root there is pronounced /riːd/. Vocally there wouldn’t be a problem. It’s in the weird English spellings and phonics. There’s no such difficulty writing the past tense “led” and the present tense “lead”.

[@eoinmacantsaoir811]

Irish has two present tenses for the verb "to be" (immediate & continuous) and so two present progressives. This has shaped how we speak English. So we would say in English: I read books I am reading books (now) I do be reading books (generally)

[@gramail2009]

It's more subtle than that Eric. We have different present tenses for different situations. What you call the present tense, 'I read', is for habitual actions, usually qualified with an expression such as 'on Mondays' or 'if I'm sad'. 'I am reading' is the present tense for just saying what I am doing right now. 'I do read' is a now old fashioned and dialect present form which is mainly used for emphasis now, especially when contradicting a negative.

[@dursty3226]

Rob: we don't have a word to negate a negative statement. me: incorrect

[@cathjj840]

That's only what fastidious people/nerds say

[@ESL1984]

​@@cathjj840 that's what the word "Bullshit" is for.

[@tonemoreno763]

lol, how about “Rubbish”?

[@Origen17]

@@tonemoreno763 Wrong!

[@FryazinoStation]

Objection!

[@dhpbear2]

5:26 - My mother who was raised in England would END a sentence with "do" for emphasis!, as in "Stop it, DO!" (very British!)

[@pablovivant9089]

Like in the song, "Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer, do!"

[@daveanderson802]

@@pablovivant9089 Yes, another use of "do" as a generic verb like in the standard response to "May i (verb)?" = "Please do"

[@geofflepper3207]

I had thought the expression "Do tell" was a request for someone to tell more of the shocking or scandalous or interesting information but a number of sources indicate that it simply an expression of surprise and not necessarily a request for more information.

[@anicecupoftea8303]

“Love Me, Do” by the Beatles.

[@CamerTheDragon]

20:26 We should bring back overmorrow and ereyesterday into common usage, they could be pretty useful (although maybe change "ereyesterday" to sound better since it doesn't sound as nice as "overmorrow" to me).

[@annapplepie9342]

Overmorrow sounds fantastic 😆 I think I'm gonna start using is for real. It's just... it's just too good!

[@saturninefeline6063]

I’m here to stick up for ereyesterday-it sounds poetic to me, and I think that, ere long, it could make a comeback! 😊

[@Bread992]

I'm already using "overmorrow" and explaining to people what it is when they are confused. But "ereyesterday" indeed sounds too odd, I wish there would be some better alternative.

[@jamesmccrea4871]

I use these, sometimes. Confuses the hell out of people. In fact, they were my choice to post as needed words. I tend to pronounce ereyesterday as just eresterday, I guess it seems more like a single word, rather than two words, ere and yesterday, mashed together.

[@altosanon]

I was going to bring up overmorrow - a nice sounding word. We could have yesterdayeve instead of ereyesterday?

[@twincast2005]

3:16 RIP, Rob. Eaten by his Kitten. Another tragic instance in which a comma could've saved a life.

[@chantelm9255]

Great catch! I missed that and went back to look. I sincerely hope the feline's request will not be met!

[@talastra]

I dedicate this comment to my parents, Ayn Rand and God.

[@MrKotBonifacy]

Once I have came across a restaurant in Seoul, advertising it's services - "BREAKFAST, COFFEE JUICE". My Slavic-parsing mind (i.e. one used to proper grammar, as in "Romanes eunt domus", but I digress here) never noticed it, but my pal, a native English speaker, started to laugh the moment he saw it. And this, my children, is what happens to languages when they don't upkeep their grammar and let it disappear - a single coma becomes a life or death difference... ;-)

[@talastra]

@@MrKotBonifacy Yes, a coma is a serious medical situation.

[@user-tf1rq9vg1j]

@@MrKotBonifacy The famous: "Let's eat Grandma.", as opposed to: "Let's eat, Grandma."

[@mrslothman03]

Here are my entries for potential collective nouns for "aunts and uncles": 1. Eldrins - Combines "elders," indicating seniority or older generation, with a suffix "-ins," which adds the familiar touch. 2. Eldsiblings 3. Kinparents - family (or made family) that are in a parental role without directly being parents. 4. Elderkin 5. Eldrets - eld + rets, a creative contraction of relatives of how it may have shortened over time.

[@CheeseWyrm]

I like Elderkin as the collective noun. Furthermore in colloquial application it would likely be contracted as in this example: "Ah yes, let Eldkin Peter have that mug, he is Mum's Uncle after all".

[@lostcause28]

my only weigh in would be to replace the eld with gran or grand so it fits in with general usage of grandparents that we already use. ive also heard "niblings" for collective nieces and nephews

[@pethel12345]

Kul att du lär dig svenska Rob! Det svåraste måste vara att veta när man ska använda ”en” och ”ett”. Många gör fel på det. Och att höra skillnaden på ”anden”, the bird, och ”anden”, the spirit, till exempel, men kämpa på och lycka till!

[@SethWilhelm]

When it comes to family trees, I love the obscure word niblings for nieces and nephews.

[@user-ff4tw8uf4b]

Good one!

[@draig2614]

Also “piblings” as a gender-inclusive term for aunts and uncles (parent’s sibling) 🙂

[@amarissa.xaos0320]

and piblings for aunts and uncles! (parents siblings)

[@stevetournay6103]

Sounds like two kinds of Halloween candy...

[@patrickrose1221]

Thanks Seth 😉👍 and I thought I knew it all 😆😅 We're never done learning are we pal 🍻 Like punctuation Patrick? 😆😅

[@anotheruser9876]

Indefinite article in Dutch created the word 'Decoy'. It came from 'Eendekooi', duck cage (Eend = Duck), which was used to catch wild ducks by putting tame ducks in a cage. Wild ducks would flock with the tame ones making it easier to catch them. Anyway, it was wrongly assumed the 'Een' at the beginning was the indefinite article, thus 'Een dekooi' which turned into 'a decoy'.

[@stevencommon]

Same kind of change as "an ewt" becoming "a newt" in English (so I've been told)

[@twincast2005]

@@stevencommon Yep. Also "a nadder" to "an adder", "a napron" to "an apron", "accord" to "a chord", and "alone (all one)" to "a lone" among several others.

[@CallippoShafai]

That's a nice random fact that I'm going to remember 😅

[@ThW5]

@@twincast2005 And the funny thing about the nadder-to-adder thing, is that that one happened both in Dutch and English.

[@ThW5]

That is a bit doubted, you had Eendekooi (modern spelling "eendenkooi"), but you had "de kooi" (the cage) too as a possible source of confusion, it may be that both misunderstandings played a role.

[@JuanMPalacio]

For refuting a negative statement you can say, “FALSE!”

[@shadowpulpfan1810]

Also "Wrong!"

[@stewartmorrison6290]

There is another phrase beginning with 'f' that is commonly used :)

[@ArtUniverse]

OBJECTION!

[@JuanMPalacio]

@@ArtUniverse “You didn’t take the bins out again…” “OBJECTION!”

[@gregorymorse8423]

"Horseradish!"

[@JappeChristian]

5:49 While english may be the only language to use the meaningless "do", danish uses the word "can" in the exact same meaningless way. "I do not like matcha" = "Jeg kan ikke lide matcha (da) / I can not like matcha (en)" "Do you like coffee?" = "Kan du lide kaffe? (da) / Can you like coffee? (en)" "Do you see how special it is?" = "Kan du se hvor specielt det er? (da) / Can you see how special it is? (en)"

[@twincast2005]

Interesting. Points to a general desire in Germanic languages for a filler word. My personal assumption would be to simplify grammar by avoiding inflection for most verbs. And despite Rob's claims, German very much does have meaningless "do" ("tun") as well. It is simply considered "uneducated speech", but it has been resilient despite teachers railing against it for centuries and decades of mass media language standardization. Especially in the north, so there might be a Hanseatic aspect to its origin.

[@Viljarms]

This confuses me as a Norwegian. Lide means suffering in Norwegian. I do not like matcha (En) Jeg kan ikke lide matcha (Da) Jeg liker ikke matcha" (No) The Danske way sounds like "I can't suffer matcha." Do you like coffee?" (En) Kan du lide kaffe? (Da) Liker du kaffe (No) The Dansk sounds like "Can you suffer coffee?"

[@chriswhitham2140]

The missing word I've been asked about several times by learners of English is the question word asking for an ordinal number. "Whichth wierdness was the pronouns?" - "The seventh." "Whichth president was Obama?" - "The forty-fourth." Thanks for the video!

[@KenFullman]

I've had exactly that problem before and it's stumped me as I searched my brain for a method to explain exactly what I'm trying to ask. And I'm a native speaker. "In a chronological list of presidents, where does Obama fall?" seems such a mouthfull. We really need a "whichth" type word.

[@foo0815]

And thus we have another candidate for a crazy spelling...

[@MKisFeelinSpicy]

It doesn't sound like it would be technically correct, but I usually ask this as "which/what number". As in "What number in the list was the pronouns?" or "Which number president was Obama?"

[@jonathanmong4927]

which works fine in both

[@KenFullman]

Ironically we have it available for monarchs but as soon as you try to put it into a sentence you find it's redundant: Which reginal number did Henry the Eighth have?

[@CaptainSpock1701]

Native Afrikaans speaker here. I can attest to the fact that the "th" is *extremely* difficult to learn when learning English. This normally gets substituted by the "f" sound, but "At school I thought a lot" has somewhat of a different meaning than: "At school I fought a lot"

[@CaptainSpock1701]

12:07 - Just went past that bit in the video. Went instantly from "yeah, your English is weird" to a very proud: *"Ah yes! We're also weird!" *

[@andriaduncan5032]

I thought it was only cockneys that said "f" when they meant "th." Some Brit in the KZbin world does that, and to me it feels like fingernails on a blackboard, just intolerable to listen to. Hearing a non-native English speaker do it is probably a lot less aggravating.

[@GingerBiPolarBear]

Somehow I never struggled with the "th" Vs "f". I had more trouble with "r"s. I'm so glad Afrikaans doesn't have gendered forms of words though!

[@jmodified]

But doesn't the other "th" as in "the" use a "z" sound, as well as "th" as in thought when it is in the middle of a word (not beginning or end)?

[@chrismanuel9768]

I do find that particular accent easy to understand myself, and clarification is usually simple if there's ever miscommunication. Bostonian accents though, those are impossible.

[@joshbarron8363]

The disagreeing word in response to you didn’t take the trash out would be “bullshit”

[@Scottbutcher7]

I'm scottish, my wife mocks me for saying y'all. But it is an effective contraction that flows much more easily than "you all". I think it should be formally adopted as an acceptable word.

[@sierragutenberg]

I didn't even know that was Scottish until now 😂

[@michelejones711]

I was born and raised in South Texas and agree 100% that y'all should be adopted as an official word.

[@tonyleukering8832]

@@michelejones711 The problem is created by using "you" for both singular and plural subjects, so "you all" was, presumably, established organically as the plural version of "you," thus allowing for the bastardization into "y'all." However, in the southern US, "y'all" has come to be used for both singular and plural, and that has produced the relatively recent (at least in my experience) adoption of "all y'all" as the plural form of "y'all." Where does it end?

[@andreasmith7910]

Your old-timey KZbin page was brilliant. I went back and paused the video so I could read everything and appreciate the clever humour.

[@AlyraMoondancer]

Yes!!! It's at 10:23 for those who want to go have another look. I could not stop laughing! (well, actually I did, but I'm about to start again just thinking about it) 🤣🤣🤣

[@Mullkaw]

ThouTube 😂😂

[@TheFunkadelicFan]

I want to tell you about a concept that we don't have a word for, in English, but I just can't put it into words!

[@bhami]

That's because English is quick to adopt any such needed words; e.g. "schadenfreude" from recent German. Our history as a massive German/ French creole shows that this goes back centuries.

[@mariapiazza-od8ib]

English is poor in so mAaaaany concepts ; homesickness ( NOSTALGIA for a person, nothing to do with HOME ) , kidnapping ( RAPIMENTO of a dog, nothing to do with KID ) , blackmailing ( RICATTO from a son to his mother ) nothing to do with MAIL etc. 😢😢 What annoys me most is BUTTERFLY 🦋🦋🦋 what the damn has BUTTER to do with this wonderful insect ??? 😅😊😅😊😊

[@Kastchei]

​​​@@mariapiazza-od8ibI can't attest for any English other than what I speak on the US east coast, but I don't use the words you describe in that way. Homesickness really is about one's home. It might be a physical house, but could also be about a hometown. If my parents moved away from my childhood home into an apartment, I'd never say I was homesick unless I meant the town I grew up in or my childhood home. Likewise, if I live alone and have been traveling for a month, I would say homesick to mean I miss my apartment, despite there being no one there. Kidnapping is most often used to describe the taking (napping?) of a child. Yes, it can be used for an adult, too, but it's usually a kid. I'd never use it for a dog. I'd probably just say someone stole the dog. Maybe I'd playfully say dognapped. Blackmail, to my knowledge, used to be done by mail, but yes, nowadays means any form of extortion. It means threatening someone with some action, often revealing a secret, if the victim doesn't pay money to the blackmailer. It doesn't really have to do with sons and mothers. Usually it's between non-family, and often enemies or work colleagues/adversaries. You got me with butterfly!

[@Aetheraev]

​@@mariapiazza-od8ibI'm not really sure what you are saying in the first part. Are you trying to say the words are more restricted in their definitions than the Italian words you mention or that the etymology of them is strange. Blackmail for example comes from "mal" an old word for payment or rent. As to butterfly I quite like that each European language seems to have their own idiosyncratic word for butterflies: vlinder, schmetterling, mariposa, farfalla, papillon, sommerfugl, borboleta, leptir, motyl, fjäril. No two languages seem to have gone for the same origin

[@user-hz4zq3lu5e]

@@mariapiazza-od8ib well butterfly, is a hiccup of flutterby which was the original, surely!

[@aust-ratatatata5516]

"English does not a word for disagreeing" OBJECTION YOUR HONOUR

[@loisdungey3528]

I disagree works very well. Or " I don't happen to agree with you!"

[@judithmccrea2601]

I taught for years at a high school in Northern California that had a huge immigrant population from eastern Europe and Asia. Those poor kids. I finally ended up telling them, “don’t try to make sense of it. It’s English”. 😆😆😆👍🏼. Very much enjoy your channel.

We, who managed to learn english as a second language, thank you from the bottom of our hearts, Rob! You just validated a lot of struggles people had to come to terms with.

[@CaritasGothKaraoke]

Rob: “We don’t have a single word to negate a statement.” Me: “False.”

[@mr.turdlybird4387]

Wrong

[@btbb3726]

“Not” or “N’t” 😜

[@encycl07pedia-]

SMH

[@mbfhh]

Nuh-uh! Yuh-huh!

[@daphnegeorge7481]

Me - Rubbish!

[@takomega7189]

I was searching KZbin for English history videos, and this channel popped up. So I clicked on it. This is now one of my top three favorite KZbin channels. Thanks for not only being educational, but also amusing.

[@hansduran9462]

I love the overall video: the script, editing, background, etc. You've just got another subscriber. Thank you.

[@karabearcomics]

I would argue that the indefinite article serves an absolute purpose, in clarification. Such as, from Monty Python and the Holy Grail: "You got my note!" "Well, I got A note." It doesn't work the same without that indefinite article specifying that he doubts the note's authenticity.

[@stevieinselby]

Zactly. There are all sorts of aspects of language that are functionally redundant in _many_ cases as they can be inferred from context and probability, but there are still times when their correct usage provides a useful distinction or where their incorrect usage could create confusion.

[@CahiraOMalley]

I think it works. In Irish your example would be "Fuair ​​tú mo nóta" - "Fuair ​​mé nóta" (I got a note) instead of "Fuair me do nóta" (I got your note). If I leave out the "do" (your) intentionally it is the same statement as in the English example. Namely "don't know if it's YOUR note".

[@Shna_na]

I can definitely understand where you're coming from with this in that it's good for emphasis of clarity, but in the case where there was no indefinite article then the very absence of the definite article is enough to provide that clarity. In your example, "You got my note!" "Well, I got note" would be understood to mean that the received note wouldn't necessarily (though still could) be the one indicated by the definitive article

[@CahiraOMalley]

@@Shna_na That's what I intended to say. Reading over my own comment again I think it might be a bit confusing?! 🤔😬

[@Shna_na]

@@CahiraOMalley Ah, yes, I had the video paused for a while before watching so your comments weren't there for me when I replied. My reply was for the original post, don't worry

[@JustSayin916]

I love all your videos but I find this particularly meaningful since every non-English speaking friend has complained about English's "weirdness." This spells that out. Thanks!

[@barrymcdonald16]

Or do what we Irish do....never give a yes/no answer.. agree/disagree with the question with an "I didn't", or "I did", or if its obvious the action wasn't carried out just say say "I know"

[@snikrepyarnivek]

Your content is fantastic! Thank you!!

[@dustgreylynx]

Just take it from German: A day before yesterday = foreyesterday A day after tomorrow = overtomorrow And though for doch You're welcome

[@FlorianBaumann]

Und wir tun was ähnliches haben wie das Englische "do". Gilt nur halt als schlechtes Deutsch. (And we do have something like the English "do", but it's considered as bad German)

[@leslietruver7386]

English does (or did) have overmorrow (no 'to') and ereyesterday.

[@Bjowolf2]

They already have it in English: overmorrow But unfortunately only very few English speaking people seem to know that these days ;-) It would be fun if some people just starting using it - and other old words - again casually to see how people would react to the use of such archaic and "mysterious" English words.

[@bodanerius]

Swedish has male and female names for pet owners. Husse - male owner of pet Matte - female owner of pet

[@davidioanhedges]

...and it's useful exactly how ? ..and how to you refer to an owner of a pet you don't know the gender of?

[@reineh3477]

@@davidioanhedges you have the same thing in English when you talk about children; mother, father and parent. If you don't know the gender just say "ägare" (owner).

[@Ceruleanst]

In English these are "master" and "mistress" but the words have so many other uncomfortable connotations that most prefer to pretend we are their parents instead.

[@akaHarvesteR]

Ok we definitely need this added to English

[@letitiarademakers6304]

I often see hudad and humom used in pet related social media posts... In Dutch we have 'baas' or 'baasje' (boss, little boss) as non gender option over 'eigenaar/eigenaresse' (owner).

[@mjsubterra]

The episode should be shown at the beginning of every B1 ESL course - the best one so far. Thanks Rob!

[@corvidsRcool]

It should also be showed to every bigoted person who throws a fit when they see a person in the US speaking a language other than English in public. I grew up speaking English and I'm impressed anyone can learn it as a 2nd or 3rd language because of all the weird quirks. I still have trouble some days myself!

[@bopmaster404]

​@@corvidsRcool The worst part of english is pronunciation tbh. I mean it's satisfying if you're able to read/speak something in your amalgamation of english accents (it's my case; I target mostly northern american; I know there's more to it but idk) but it's also frustrating if you stumble upon something you didn't really say in your entire life or its grammatical structure makes it tongue twister for you

[@greengonzonz]

Love this, (English speaker here). Recently went on a new language journey. Other than learning a new language I learned that English is horrible to learn as an adult ❤

[@winterzee]

Meaningless Do made learning other languages in school very hard. I was always asking what's the word for Do in situations where the foreign language structure was different.

[@topherthe11th23]

When a judge is tired of hearing a witness's ranting tirade, the judge can either shut up the witness or shut down the witness, and these two things are the same despite "up" and "down" being opposites. And "beating up" and "beating down" a person are ALMOST (but not quite) synonyms, again regardless of which opposite "up" and "down" is used. At least "standing up" and "standing down", and "sitting up" and "sitting down", are more reasonably distinct.

[@kinolibby6580]

It's the same with a form you can 'fill it in' or you can 'fill it out' and it means the same thing even though in and out are opposites

[@SchmulKrieger]

I would say that up in English is actually a cognate of German auf and Dutch op, it means on(to). I don't thing down and up are opposites, especially not historically.

[@JaysicleSticks]

@@SchmulKriegerregardless of their origins, up is now generally the opposite of down.

[@topherthe11th23]

@@SchmulKrieger Clearly, in English, "up" and "down" are opposites. When you stand outside an elevator-shaft and press one of two buttons to summon the elevator (this assumes you are not on the lowest nor the highest floor), if they are labeled in English they will say "up" and "down". Also when you want louder music, you say "turn it up", while for quieter music you say "turn it down". "Uptown" and "downtown" are also opposites. If "up" is NOT the opposite of "down", then what is? Please Reply, as I'm genuinely curious as to what your opinion is.

[@topherthe11th23]

@@kinolibby6580 Meanwhile, "we'll get that nailed down" and "we'll get that screwed up" are nowhere near synonymous. It's so inconsistent.

[@topherthe11th23]

"We can't make a question out of a statement by merely appending one word, eh?" is a perfect example of something that might be intrinsic to almost all languages, because it's in no way "official" grammar for English but it's so NEEDED that we all do it anyway.

[@dbolt6543]

You can in Canadian eh!?

[@tiyenin]

Easiest minimum pair for TH voiceless and TH voiced: Thigh / Thy. I've also used Thistle / This'll, because I'm a word nerd.

[@tiyenin]

17:44 English didn't even use articles CONSISTENTLY. Plurals are under no obligation to use an article ("I bought a chair / I bought chairs"), but what's weirder is that there isn't really an indefinite plural article at all, with the possible exception of "some": I bought the chair / I bought the chairs I bought a chair / I bought (some) chairs

[@WizardofoOZeAU]

Innit?

[@grizwoldphantasia5005]

I had a short conversation in Japan at an onsen (hot spring). Among other things, she said "inu suki" (dog like) with a rising tone making it an obvious question. No "ka" at the end, just that rising tone. You can do the exact same thing in English, but the words reverse: "like dogs" with a rising tone. Language are surprisingly flexible.

[@MikeCaffyn1]

Absolutely brilliantly thought provoking. Best video for ages Rob. Thank you. We (English) just take so much for granted. This will provide me and my French English students hours of fun. I will encourage them to look up some examples and not to look down on me.

[@ShaneMclane-PrivateEye]

Excellent video, thank you.

[@louisdesroches]

Tom Scott's short video about language features that don't exist in English was neat. Of those, clusivity is easily the most useful and I wish we (all) had it.

[@ahorrell]

I speak Tok Pisin and I'm learning Te Reo Māori, both of which have clusivity. In my experience, clusivity is not as useful as you'd think. Cos how often do we find ourselves saying "Do mean 'you and me' or 'you and them'? I don't understand." BUT Tok Pisin is kinda fun cos it has singular, dual, trial, and plural clusivity! It all looks super confusing until you see the English etymology - eg, 'Yumitripela' comes from You-me-three-fellows. SINGULAR: Mi = I/me Yu = you Em = she/her/he/him/it DUAL: Mitupela = The two of us (but not you) Yumitupela = The two of us (including you) Yutupela = the two of you Tupela = the two of them TRIAL: Mitripela = The three of us (but not you) Yumitripela = The three of us (including you) Yutripela = the three of you Tripela = the three of them PLURAL: Mipela = Us (4 or more, but not you) Yumi = Us (4 or more, including you) Yupela = You (4 or more) Ol = Them (4 or more) But in practice, a lot of people drop the dual and trial. Eg, if you're about to leave a place with someone, they'll often just say 'yumi go' instead of 'yumitupela go'

[@wolf1066]

@@ahorrell Good on ya for learning Te Reo Māori. Personally, I do find the clusivity of Te Reo useful and bemoan its lack in English - and I'm a "pasty white boy", so it's not a "my language is the best" thing. As an autistic person, I find myself confused when someone says "we are going to..." *more often than I care to remember* if there's enough people to make a "we" that doesn't include me. I constantly find myself wondering if only they're going or they mean me as well. I don't get that with "mātou" and "tātou".

[@bopmaster404]

@@ahorrell I don't understand. Is "mitupela" used in situation where there are 2 people or 3 people? If the first is the case why don't use "mi" for instance? I'd understand if a person wants to make them clear that it's not you but other than that it seems somewhat useless. I think plural ones are really neat tho PS. Didn't notice the thing you typed on a bottom bottom of a comment. I see why they drop it

[@CheeseWyrm]

@@bopmaster404 "tupela" is used in the case of a grouping of 2 people. "mitupela" signifies that the 2-person group includes me. For 3 people (me, you & another) it would be "yumitripela". Tok Pisin is intriguing ... think of "tupela" as "two fellas". So "mitupela" (or me-two fellas) = "two fellas including me". This clearly excludes you - as to include you would be "mi-YU-tupela" (me-YOU-two fellas). Same concept applies to 3 people (tri-pela), and likewise Plural. Hope that helps :)

[@lanjieke]

Yes! This exists in Mandarin, although usage is not entirely strict. 我们 (wo men) can mean 'we' in all contexts. 咱们 (zan men) can only mean 'we' as in the people included in the conversation. Unfortunately, I am so used to my native English that I never use 咱们, since 我们 works just fine, and as many native Chinese speakers often neglect to use 咱们, I can't see that changing anytime soon! I do believe (though I may be wrong) that 咱们 is more often used up north, whereas I live in Shanghai, which is in the east.

[@FEBear1]

round of applause for the medieval KZbin recreation, Rob. I had a good chuckle at that.

[@eekee6034]

That was well done :)

[@althejazzman]

I particularly loved the video titled "Should I learn to read?". Rather ironic title.

[@realfist1]

About grandparents our family traditionally call the father’s side ‘ grandpa and grandma’ and mother’s side ‘nanna and granddad’. Saves a lot of confusion. Love you show.

[@sspfn]

Does that get confusing between cross cousins? The grandchildren by your male children and the grandchildren by your female children would refer to you by different terms then

[@aquamarrina]

That's really very interesting! Thanks a lot!

[@ScrapKing73]

A fun fact: in “Star Trek: Enterprise” they don’t use the definite article about the ship (eg. “We need to get back to Enterprise.”). In other Star Trek series, they do use it (eg. “We need to get back to the Enterprise.”).

[@adrianbruce2963]

I've always thought that there was a general difference between American and English on that topic - Nelson served on HMS Victory versus Kirk served on the USS Enterprise. It's not always like that - just usually.

[@redmondmacdonagh7557]

In the film Titanic, they always referred to the vessel as simply Titanic. In my dialect, I say the Titanic - as I do for all large floating vessels. The Mayflower, the Golden Hind, the Flying Dutchman, the Bounty, etc, etc. Note that the 1960s British war film was "Sink the Bismark", not "Sink Bismark"

[@mattyt1961]

Enterprise would be more accurate since military vessels tend to be gendered. So you would "Go to Rob" not "Got to the Rob"

[@SigEpBlue]

But what if he's the only one? ;)

[@chrismanuel9768]

The difference between humanizing a ship (Enterprise) versus treating it like an object (the Enterprise)

[@SolarGranulation]

The thing I think English really needs is an exclusive we/our. A simple way to indicate "[belonging to] the group of which I am a member, but you/they are not."

[@rerdavies2]

Them.

[@MRTOWELRACK]

Us. Ourselves. Edit: "Our group" (as stated by @gregorymorse8423) is even better. Not perfect but ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

[@jumpingjohnflash]

​but we don't say "Us are going" or "Ourselves are going" - and neither distinguish between including or excluding the listener in any case.

[@jumpingjohnflash]

Te reo Maori has "maua" (s/he and I) and taua (you the listener and I) and also matou (3 or more people excluding the listener) and tatau (3 or more people including the listener)

[@gregorymorse8423]

"Our group"... done. You are welcome

[@thekurdishtapes8317]

Brilliant video! Great content excellently presented

[@user-gs3pt1uf1g]

Great learning material and a lot of relatable observations.

[@zaangtwyt]

20:07 Meanwhile in the dictionary... Ereyesterday: **Am I a joke to you?** Overmorrow: **Am I a joke to you?** Aside from that, great content :D

[@razerx100]

Those are archaic words.

[@mjb7015]

@@razerx100 they're only archaic if people don't use them. I also want "fromwards" to be brought back.

[@empathogen75]

They’re archaic and weren’t ever really used. They’re mostly attested in translations from German, where it’s a calque of the German equivalent.

[@eboone]

Well I use them.

[@aviat4ion]

@@mjb7015 Also froward (like backward, as in to and fro)

[@maryl2529]

I knew a French man who asked me why do you say washing 'up' and drying 'up' , I didn't have an answer for him.

[@davidhoward4715]

When we do the washing up we're cleaning dishes and cutlery. When we do the washing we're cleaning clothes.

[@franimal86]

Heheh try explaining the difference between a lay up and lay down.

[@sluggo206]

And what's a "lay-by"? In England it's a turnout/siding at the side of a highway where you can stop if your car's not working right or you're tired.

[@Mrbeahz1]

A puddle can dry up. But if you've washed up, you then dry off.

[@jessicajohn1962]

One can just say to wash the dishes and to dry the dishes . Up defines the end task. To do something up = to renovate or make something look better . It adds finality. Like to grow and to grow up. A start up defines the finality of the “start”… geddit? 😅😂

[@butth3ad]

i like that we have a definite and indefinite article idk why it just has good vibes

[@SarahMichelle777]

I have autism and love learning about words / language. This channel is fascinating

[@frankleyJ]

I regularly use the word "false" to negate the negative statement in English

[@eelarol]

Or "untrue" would also work

[@kcgunesq]

The issue isn't that we don't have a word for this. Its just that the common ones aren't polite. But from "poppycock" to "b*llsh&t", we have lots of words that have the ability to do this function.

[@Lectrikfro]

Just "No" and walk away, let them soak in the gravy of their own poorly formatted questions

[@GustavLjungars]

What we need is a contradictory yes, like jo in Swedish, doch in German or si in French. Most of the time we use these words we're far from being aggressive, we're just contradicting in the affirmative.

[@aoi7910]

You sound like Dwight

[@19Szabolcs91]

Gotta love, how as a Hungarian speaker learning English, a lot of these didn’t feel weird at all, like no genders, the clunky future tense and the definite/indefinite articles. Phrasal verbs too.

[@Judith-zl9he]

Yes, phrasal verbs are a very difficult part of learning Hungarian. I have had to create flashcards to drill them in.

[@peterhemmings2929]

uszername checks out

[@andrewcarson5850]

Yeah, but Hungarian is even weirder, or so I've heard.

[@19Szabolcs91]

@@andrewcarson5850 It sure is an outlier in many more ways, I just find it strange and funny how, the first two languages I learned have some common elements that I assumed are the norm, when in fact they are pretty rare.

[@andrewcarson5850]

@@19Szabolcs91 Out of the frying pan and into the fire, one might say.

[@rawkhawk414]

As far as I understand, jokes from other comments aside, I think English did at one point have official "refuting statements". Unless I am misunderstanding we used to use Yay or Nay for "agreeing statements", and Yes or No for refuting statements. For example "Did you not take out the garbage?" could have been answered "Yes, I didn't" or "No, I did." and in that case just answering "Yes." actually implies the former, while answering "No." implies the latter. I THINK with no evidence really that "Yea" and "Nah" might be descendants of "Yay" and "Nay". Such that "Did you take out the bins?" should be answered "Ya I did" or "Nah, I didn't." I would also hedge a guess that there are remnants of these use cases still practised by people. "Are you never on time?" "Yes" probably means you aren't ever on time but as Rob pointed out in modern English it's technically ambiguous and we rely on tone. Replying "Yes, I am." to "Are you NEVER on time?" could be short for "Yes, I am never on time." but sometimes we wonder if it instead means "Yes, actually, I am usually on time". I didn't support or explain this very well but basically as far as I understand there was a time where "Are you ever on time" would have been answered "Ya." and "Are you never on time" would have been answered "Yes." Both meaning you AGREE with the statement, the former for positively posed questions, and the latter for negatively posed question. No meaning you DISAGREED with the negative statement. Because we started using meaningless do it got weird. Some people might say "Didn't you like the movie?" and some people aren't sure the correct way to reply. Based on my conjecture and limited reading, it's appropriate to say "No, I did" or "Yes, I didn't." but we don't REALLY care either way. I think we got away from these distinctions due to fears of double negatives lol. Eventually they lost any distinction and Yes or No became de facto, even though we often still say Yea, we tend to consider Nay archaic, and none of us really care for or understand any distinction.

[@mindyschaper]

Great video! I watch these in the car with my kids

[@greenelmstation7930]

(I) Love your videos, and always find it amusing to compare with my native Danish. My (English) grandchildren call me “morfar” (mother’s father) but in English I can distinguish between granddaughters and grandsons. In Danish they are all børnebørn (childrens’ children). When I studied Bahasa Indonesia, I discovered that you can do very well without the verb “to be”. (“I Danish” in stead of “I am Danish”). My teacher explained that “to be or not to be” had to be rendered as “hidup atau tidak hidup “ (alive or not alive). Languages are such fun.

[@briandouglas2123]

"Do not turn off your computer" You can turn off a motorway so why isn't it - Do not turn your computer off. ? The local supermarket sign says: "Please ask if you need help" So I did. I asked an assistant: "Excuse me - Do I need help?"

[@stevetournay6103]

😁 That's asking WHETHER you need help. But it's their fault for omitting a comma: "please ask, if you need help". Or if it was in certain American locales, perhaps you should have "aksed"?

[@danielstreeter6738]

Since the turning in that sense is figurative and references turning a knob or switch into an "off" position, I'd say that keeping the "off" next to "turn" instead of "computer" is reasonable. You are not turning the computer anywhere, you are doing to the computer the same thing you would do to another device by turning a smaller component on it (one not literally present on your computer).

[@ventonthorn3455]

Assistant: "Yes, I think you do."

[@sethb124]

You can totally say "Do not turn your computer off." It actually sounds a bit more natural to me than the other way, although both sound fine

[@JamesGroom]

Having a little experience with this, I'd guess the choice to use "Do not turn off your computer" was for the benefit of non-native speakers, for whom the 'shifting'[1] of the particle in "Do not turn your computer off" may be unfamiliar or less intuitive. I'd have used the more common "Don't" as well. [1]: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_phrasal_verbs#Shifting

[@pontiuspilatus7900]

Again a well done video Rob, interesting and entertaining. In Australia I heard sometimes "youz" instead of "you", if more than one person is addressed.As a nativ German speaker, I found English much easier to learn than French, or Italian. In the north of Germany and the east of the Netherlands there are some Frisian speakers, which obviously share quite a bit of vocabulary with English.

[@gregsarnecki7581]

10:25 is one of the funniest RobWords moments. Please do a whole video in this style someday!

[@catomajorcensor]

English used to have a yea/nay/yes/no system, where the former two were used literally and the latter two only as a response to negative sentences (yes like French si).

[@Siansonea]

We can repurpose "nay" to serve this role in modern English, I think.

[@naromsky]

Aye!

[@KanchidoShinokyoufu]

Aye, Yea & Nay are used in English but mainly for voting. Also in the military (mostly in the Navy) aye is used.

[@moodyonroody5313]

and it's no nay neverrrr no neverrr no morrrre!

[@Bjowolf2]

Danish: ja [yah], nej [nigh], jo [yoh] ( yes to a negative question a la "si" in French etc. )

[@JoshSZHANG]

Native Chinese(Mandarin) speaker here. When we started to have English classes in 2nd grade, I noticed a whole lot of parallelism between Chinese and English, and it became ever more noticeable when I started to learn even more languages like French Japanese Hebrew and Spanish. I cannot explain the parallelism but it's fun to point out.

[@kiga14]

Both have SVO word order, lack of inflections of nouns and verbs, and Mandarin is in the process of developing the indefinite article as yige (一个). Chinese can drop pronouns but in practice uses them more often than, say, Japanese. The 3rd person singular (he/she/it) is pronounced identically (tā) but in the written form are different (他，她，它). They both have a sound that is like a retroflex r, especially in the Beijing dialect (zher 这儿).

[@jumpingjohnflash]

Yes, you can very often say the same sentence in English or Chinese using the exact same word order.

[@jumpingjohnflash]

​@@kiga14 I found Japanese students would often miss a/the when speaking English, which since English is stressed-timed language ruins the sentence rhythm (and hurt my ears) - I got my revenge on the students by speaking Japanese and leaving out the "wa" 😊 after every subject noun.

[@Hwyadylaw]

@@jumpingjohnflash Leaving out the は isn't *as* bad as leaving out the article in English though

[@jumpingjohnflash]

​. True. Still made them wince though.

[@kilobucket]

there is a video on grammatical gender where a (very small) study was done comparing English speakers ability to distinguish what was said in corrupted audio files vs., i believe, german. germans were markedly better since they have two cues to decipher a word / apart of a phrase: the word, and the gender of the word. so, in crowded rooms and loud spaces, it may have been advantageous to have more cues to distinguish words (ie. gender)

[@FrogeniusW.G.]

AMAZING VIDEO! ❤

[@btbb3726]

Just yesterday I used the word “weird” and I immediately thought of this channel and wondered about the history/etymology of the word “weird” and if it has ever been covered here.

[@miralupa8841]

weird..

[@manueldumont3709]

WEir(ri=ra)D=WED(nesday)=SED=SETH(+RA) .

[@wordytoed9887]

@@miralupa8841weird..

[@amandaburnham8626]

It would have been weird if he did a quick bonus fact about the history of the word weird at the end. 😁

[@btbb3726]

@@amandaburnham8626 Indeed!

[@PazTheHunter]

Hi Rob! Swedish speaker here! It should be "Tycker du om ost?" not um (um is it not word :D) Great video nonetheless!

[@Rancid-Jane]

I found this subject most fascinating!

[@JuanTutors]

How does Rob not have 1 million subscribers? Literally, only needs watch his videos, and there are A LOT of nerds out there.

[@Bear-ig5gu]

I'm surprised you didn't talk about the English 'r' sound in the weird sounds segment. It's only present in 4 other languages.

[@jlangevin65]

Which one? The American, "R," sound is different from the English, and in fact, no other language does it. We Americans do a weird thing in which we curl the edges of the tongue up against the teeth when pronouncing, "R." It confounds ESL students and I think it's a major reason Americans have so much trouble rolling, "R," sounds when speaking other languages. It's hard to roll when you can't overcome the usual habit of curling up the edges.

[@Bear-ig5gu]

@jlangevin65 According to Wikipedia, the 'postalvelar' R sound is the standard one that's used in American, Australian and British English. This sound is only present in 4 other languages. However, the sound is often labialized which means that it's produced with rounded lips. This sound [ɹ̠ʷ] is only present in English dialects. So yes, you are correct that that sound is only in English if that's what you're referring to.

[@britcom1]

Some English speakers don't pronounce the r at all (unless it's at the beginning) and others will roll their r's.

[@Bear-ig5gu]

@britcom1 The standard English R, present in the majority of British, American and Australian dialects is rare.

[@b.a.erlebacher1139]

​@@britcom1And some add an r that isn't there in the written version.

[@talideon]

6:08 - Mind you, the reason why the Celtic languages do something vaguely like this is because we have question particles! "Useless do" might've entered English as a grammatical calque of this, so in a way, English does have a question particle. For those interested in how it looks, if I wanted to say "You understand", I'd say "tuigeann tú" (verb first), whereas if I were asking "do you understand?", I'd say "an dtuigeann tu?"

[@sionsmedia8249]

I personally think it even comes specifically from Welsh (Old Welsh/Brythonic), because of the sound and obvious proximity, Welsh first person pronoun "I do" / "'dw i" (although it's a shortened form of "rydw i") the dw sounds exactly like the English "do".

[@LeReubzRic]

Huh, the word for "you" is the same in Irish (That is irish right?), Spanish, and Hindi. I guess it's an Indo-European thing

[@johnfisk811]

Whilst very few Celtic words entered English Celtic grammar and numerics have done.

[@thomasrinschler6783]

@@LeReubzRic Indo-European pronouns are pretty conservative, which is one of the ways that shows it's a family (other language families are similar with their pronouns). And English does have its cognate for the "tu" in other languages - it's "thou" (which would have been pronounced more like "thu" before the Great Vowel Shift), which was our original 2nd person singular until it was dropped for the more formal "you" in the 1600s.

[@markiec8914]

​@@johnfisk811 They didn't have to borrow but they certainly influenced the syntax and grammatical structure of the prestige language of the time(Old English).

[@althomas6045]

please do another one or three of these "weird" videos.

[@Lampchuanungang]

Current English communication problems: The Anglians languages as English left behind the SVO scheme of discourse by VOVS OR VSVO scheme of discourse which provides yet another reinforcement of polysemy, paradox, redundancy and even verbiage, which are the current diseases of languages and human communications. In these cases, contemporary English is also the rule of the situation described above, unfortunately given its global character and the fact that it functions as a creole romanesque that takes words that are confusing in meaning and repeats without need words with the same meaning and usefulness across all continents of the planet.

[@pirukiddingme1908]

10. Clusivity. I wish we had a separate system for specifying whether “we” was including speaker and listener, speaker and a group but not listener, or all three

[@HalfEye79]

I would like this for German, too. When somebody says something with "we", you can ask: "Who is we?"

[@Siansonea]

To my way of thinking, if context does not make it obvious, then it is the context that is the issue, not the speech. If you're using pronouns, you must first define them somehow, even if it isn't with speech. You can make gestures, etc.

[@Elesario]

@@Siansonea Makes me think about the idea of unspoken language, effectively unspoken English. How universal are gestures and intonations?

[@Dread_2137]

Don't you just use "they/them" if you and listener are not included?

[@jacksondeane1629]

Yes! I want this all the time

[@existenceisillusion6528]

One of the most hilarious things I've ever seen just happened. A mid-roll ad interrupted the embedded ad. 🤣 But also and as well, great video, mightily entertaining! 12:41 my first thought was "What is similar to chocolate?"

[@derekmills5394]

See how many meanings you can get by re-punctuating / capitalising this. "What is this thing called love" (For non-native speakers, remember 'Love' can be a familiar honorific for a partner or in some dialects, any female.) Reply with your version please

[@YvonneWilson312]

@@derekmills5394 "What is this thing called, love?"

[@aylivex]

Yep, that's what my thought too: “like chocolate” = “similar to chocolate.”

[@derekmills5394]

@@YvonneWilson312 What! Is this thing called 'Love'?

[@Hrng270]

The English language, like any other language, has its own characteristics and complexities in its abstract structure. Some examples of logical, grammatical and linguistic flaws in the English language include: 1. Ambiguities: The English language can be ambiguous in certain situations, leading to different interpretations of the same phrase or expression. 2. Irregularities: English has many irregular words and grammatical rules, which can make learning and understanding the language difficult. 3. Lack of consistency: Some English grammar and spelling rules may seem inconsistent or arbitrary, which can cause confusion for language learners. 4. Syntactic complexity: The syntactic structure of English can be complex and difficult to master, especially for speakers of languages ​​with different syntactic structures. 5. Phonology and pronunciation: English pronunciation and phonology can be challenging due to the variety of sounds and the lack of correspondence between the spelling and pronunciation of words. These are just some of the possible flaws and complexities of the English language in its abstract structure, without considering the speakers. It is important to remember that all languages ​​have their own peculiarities and challenges, and understanding these issues can help in learning and using the language effectively.

[@mattipaajanen4109]

A native Finn here. I have noticed all of these, along with the obvious weirdness of articles and the whole cumbersome he/she -business (yes, Finnish has only one he/she -pronoun). Learning English is a life long journey. Some might consider Finnish difficult, and maybe it is to do with the 15 cases of inflections for nouns and verbal forms that inflect like nouns (don't remember the English name of these grammar terms)

[@gmgianluigi]

Why the ChatGPT response?

[@maryfilippou6667]

What an excellent, colorful presentation. Dooby- Do!

[@lexasss]

Splendid! Certainly among the best Rob's videos. Great analysis, great KZbin -1.5ky page, nice humor. Just love it, what a brilliant work!

[@pauldhoff]

"OK" is used throughout the world. It is not unusual to hear any language with an OK thrown in at the end of a sentence'

[@Sal.K--BC]

I've noticed that... Sometimes I'll be watching a documentary from somewhere else in the world where they're speaking some foreign language, and I'll hear an OK.

[@encycl07pedia-]

I believe it's actually spelled "okay," as well, though I often shorten it to "OK" (and it has to be in all caps).

[@ShadowZero27]

i stand by the concept that ok originated from the sound of "k" ancient Phoenician alphabet. "ok" caught on because it was already used in english to mock the normans by saying "oc" instead of "ooi"

[@drs-xj3pb]

@@ShadowZero27 Very odd then that it is not recorded until the 19th century in America.

[@JoelDZ]

​@@ShadowZero27 It's fairly well established that it originated as a fad spelling of "all correct" as "oll korrekt".

[@e4iojk]

I know you have mentioned it in other videos, but the fact that we have different words for live animals and eaten animals is very weird. It's so unnatural, that animals discovered after the Norman Conquest that are eaten, like kangaroo, just get the 1 word

[@w.reidripley1968]

'Mulga Mutton' is slangy.

[@rhvoriginals3083]

We do have something like, “Si!” and, “Doch!” when we disagree with a sentence, many things! “You’re daft!” comes to mind, and I can form a similarly apt phrase for any given situation! Oh! The power of language! It’s why the pen truly is mightier than the sword. Great stuff, Rob!!! I can almost feel myself getting smarter?

[@kenallison9119]

I think this is your best effort yet, Rob. Very thought-provoking... and a lot of fun!

[@Demo-critus]

Rob: Two different "th" sounds River Thames: Hold my beer

[@jamesmccrea4871]

Thames uses the soft "th" in three, at least to my ear. Say them normally, back to back. Of course, your local accent might dictate otherwise, but to my ear, the Thames and Three uses the same sound, it's the "A" and "R" sounds that you have account for that make the "TH" seem different. After all, if you used a different consonant sound, you can really tell the difference is in the third letter. James/Jree or Dames/Dree.

[@Demo-critus]

Thandiwe Newton: And mine!

[@tbirdparis]

@@jamesmccrea4871 no it doesn't, it just uses the regular unvoiced aspirated "T" from the English phoneme inventory. It's written with a "th" at the start, but that has nothing to do with the phoneme we actually use when pronouncing the word.

[@annecarter5181]

I love Rob’s presentations! Educational & entertaining!! Language is so complex.

[@jamesmccrea4871]

@@Stossburg To me, the way I learned to say it, I hear the soft h of 'eth'. I am aware that some people say it without an 'h' sound at all, which is why I noted that your accent probably plays a role. I'm an American as well, and we have so many accents in this country it's weird enough without the weird English.

[@Countryen]

Very good video. I like the clear and slow and colourful examples/texts. Really interesting to me as a beginning learner of Esperanto is that most if not all that you say weird here is "fixed" and first feels a bit odd (as a German native) but then so much easier in comparison. A weird thing to me is level of politeness in the language. Like: Could you / would you be so kind to / would you mind to ... That's (for a language) a bit weird I would add, not sure if there are languages without it, though. I know that Japanese is very strict and in German we basically have the same ways to express politeness as in English - but maybe there are languages that don't?

[@RobKlarmann]

This is so bloody brilliant! Incredible work, mate. Well done. Glad I know how to speak English... As for the words English doesn't have: why not start calling the day after tomorrow 'overmorrow' (in German it is 'Übermorgen') and 'Presterday' (as in pre-yesterday like the German 'Vorgestern'). You can introduce this and maybe it will catch on! You might say: 'No, it won't.' But I say: Dock! (our new English version of 'Doch!'!) :)

[@johnnydarling8021]

20:35 "We don't have a word to negate a negative statement." Well, it may be viewed as a bit rude, but some Americans just say *"wrong"* as a challenge, like Doch or Si.

[@stephanzielinski7922]

Or, for that matter, "Bull!", "Bullsh*t!", or the corresponding euphemism "Baloney!"

[@johnnydarling8021]

@@stephanzielinski7922 True, however those would be perceived as being even more rude. Except for "Bologna", that's probably the nicest way of directly contradicting someone.

[@auldfouter8661]

In Scots you can say Aye , Naw ! for an emphatic no !

[@ChristopherCurtis]

My comment to this was that I sometimes use *"not true"* as such a challenge, which is a bit less harsh than "wrong", but (as an American) I've probably said that as well. Granted, "not true" is two words but as I saw in another comment, _"untrue"_ also fits here.

[@wittay]

@@johnnydarling8021 In certain parts of the States, we use "Hogwash!"

[@jamesmccrea4871]

We do, sorta have a word for "day after tomorrow", "overmorrow". At least, I've heard it used and I have used it. Mostly it confuses people, but it's a word for "day after tomorrow". "Eresterday" or "Ereyesterday" is one I've heard used, and have used for "day before yesterday." Again, it mostly just confuses people. Note: Another archaic word, "yestereve", rather than "last evening" Near as I can tell, they are basically obsolete words that are no longer used. But I like them.

[@minuteman4199]

Where in the world have you seen these words used? Is it in an old regional dialect word?

[@jamesmccrea4871]

@@minuteman4199 I'm an American, but mostly in older movies and TV shows. I remember a old fellow from my childhood, back in the 80s, lol, using ereyesterday and yestereve. Overmorrow I probably picked up years ago from reading various things. (I used to pick up dictionaries and encyclopedias, just to read them.) I'm certain I've seen them in the dictionary of archaic words that some of the "Classics" novels you can get cheap have in them.

[@magnusengeseth5060]

It is also a direct translation to the word we Scandinavians use for this exact thing - övermorgon is how we write it in Swedish. It's just the words we use for "over" and "morning" combined into one word. To get to our word for two days ago you could pretty much get there by translating "ereyesterday" as well, as long as you know that "ere" means before. We say "förrgår" for this, which either combines "förra" which means last or "före" which means "before" with "igår" which is yesterday. Or it could be that we use the prefix "för-", our equivalent to English "fore-" as in forefather. I actually don't know which it is, and it doesn't really matter since either of them make sense.

[@stevetournay6103]

Hey, that disaster movie from a decade or two ago could have been called "Overmorrow"...cool title...

[@oliverscratch]

Thank you, @jamesmccrea4871, I came here to post the same thing. I have a taste for older literature, and these words pop up from time to time in the books I read. They are good words that deserve a return to daily usage.

[@vegxnvxmpire]

rob learning swedish made me unreasonably happy!

[@piratedamon80]

Great video. I would add the use of contractions in English among the weird features. Especially when we have mandatory contractions like "o'clock" and contractions that don't map out properly (won't for will not), and grammar rules for contractions that are different from their mapped out versions (DONT't you want to? to vs DO you NOT want to?). And finally "acceptable" contractions like he'd, she's, won't, it's, would've vs unacceptable (in any non conversational context) contractions like gimme, wanna, gonna, goin'.

[@wernerfritsch6436]

10:25 I had to pause the video at the 1500's version of KZbin. Very creative!

[@rkneerzte]

HrodelbertWords 400k brethren 😄

[@sl1763]

Just can’t get enough of this. Stunningly brilliant

[@melodymichaelis8783]

wonderful video.