• ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I was just thinking about this (the real one) a few days ago. I remember reading an article in a French magazine (I think it was SVJ? Sometime around 2011-2012) about this exact thing. I distinctly remember “Ordiphone” for “smartphone” and “biofilm” for “biopic”.

    The concept of language-by-committee is… neat but kind of futile. I don’t hate the idea of analyzing language like one would the classical fine arts and having a “conservatory-style” stylistically consistent prescription element for new terms. But in practice it’s very silly (and kind of elitist).

    I don’t hate the status quo of the Academie giving opinions and people ignoring them lol

    • LupineTroubles [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Language by commitee is a defensive and ultimately losing proposition that damages the language more than loanwords. Trying to invent equivalent words for concepts, often just as direct transliterations to peg to loanword, without any of the associated meanings either in the borrowed language or how the word is used in borrowing language is crippling to the expression of the language.

      It is just especially absurd with French because the French academics haven’t really gotten over French losing its lingua franca status and French politicians and intellectuals alike try to force French gratuitously to every possible media.

    • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      the only way this sort of thing can work is if it becomes a popular movement and authors and poets get in on the game. that’s how hungarian got a ton of new “native” words for foreign words. this official academy shit is a shambling undead thing.