Ce sujet est actuellement indiqué comme "en sommeil"—le dernier message date de plus de 90 jours. Vous pouvez le réveiller en postant une réponse.
Jean-Paul Nerriere came up with the idea of Globish from his experience during a business meeting, in which there were a Korean, a Brazilian, and an Englishman. He discovered that the Brazilian, the Korean, and him used a version of English that they all could understand perfectly; however, the Englishman could not.
So what is Globish?
The International Herald Tribune calls it "English lite" - a simplified version of English consisting of 1,500 words. People who speak Globish avoid the use of metaphors, abbreviations, humor, and slangs. In addition, the sentences must be short.
Do you think Globish will catch on? Does Globish pose a serious threat to the English language?
When I return to Singapore, every once in a while, I revert back to Singlish effortlessly and the taxi driver takes to me to any address in the most direct route and not the tourist, round the island, route. There are still enough of the older generation to know the Hokkien and bad Malay I use. When I worked for a major corporation, I once had to sit between a Chinese person speaking English and a person from south India speaking English and translate between them!
But I think that Nerrière provides his 1500 Globish words vocabulary in a poor way: without definitions, and without groups of words.
Ogden published a nice pocket dictionary on his Basic English, "The Basic Words", which included not only his (over) 850 Basic Words, but also the many Groups of Words that would cover all the essential meanings to be covered in a lenguage, for exemple "be able to", "take into account", "looking after", "looking for", etc. ("look" is not one of the few Basic VERBS, so Ogden seams to propose "looking" from the Basic SUBST. "look").
Therefore, these groups of words are essential, and as far as I know Nerrière doesn't work this matter.
By the other hand, Nerrière doesn't provide definitions for his list of 1500 words, in contrast to the 2nd source he mentions (and recommends): the Simple English of Voice of America, and also in contrast to Ogden and his magnum opus "The Basic Dictionary" (which I'm looking for!), where 7 000 words are defined into the terms of Basic English.