Comments on: 21 Reasons why English Sucks

By: Canvas Man

Canvas Man — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 13:34:35 +0000

Another way to look at this is ’21 reasons why English rocks!’ Not many languages can do what English does and it never fears to introduce new words, or foreign words.

By: Jake Watkins

Jake Watkins — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 20:24:46 +0000

What about “read” and “read”?

By: Christina

Christina — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:01:14 +0000

“21 Reasons Why English Must Really Suck To Learn If You’re Not A Native Speaker”.
Luckily for me, I am.

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:39:27 +0000

You and your life just fail in so many ways.

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:38:04 +0000

“numb
? ?[nuhm] Show IPA adjective -er, -est, verb
adjective ”

Dictionary disagrees with you. You fail.

By: Links

Links — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 17:45:55 +0000

[...] 21 Reasons why English Sucks. [...]

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 09:27:47 +0000

Hahahaha love # 7. My last three SU stops were awesome (this, http://imgflip.com, and uberhumor) GJ stumbleupon…

By: SOme Random

SOme Random — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 02:42:55 +0000

Buffalo, Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

John, while George had had had, had had had had, had had had had a better effect on the teacher.

Yeah this is why our language is retarded.

By: sgts423

sgts423 — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 02:42:04 +0000

omg does it really matter? its supposed to be… wait for it… F.U.N.N.Y. it wasnt posted to create a huge argument

By: Abdel Irada

Abdel Irada — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 09:28:45 +0000

So far, I have at one time or another studied Chinese, Latin, French and Arabic. According to the logic on this page, they all “suck” because they contain homonyms. But I respectfully disagree: To me, this imparts to them all a richness and a variety that would otherwise be lacking. To this versatility, in English, we owe some of the best of our literature; if Shakespeare hadn’t had homonyms to work with, he’d have had to coin some. And poets would be lost if they hadn’t such a variety of choices to satisfy the demands of meter, cadence and rhyme.

In any case, languages are the products not of logic but of history. It is therefore vain to expect them to accord with some model of mathematical precision under which there is one word for each thing or idea, and no two words sound alike.

Besides, even if they did, the existence of other languages creates an entirely different source of sound-alikes. And these represent a joy to multilingual punsters, no matter how they may vex those whom an Arabic-English punster might describe as “blood beans.”