You can never understand one language until you understand at least two.

The points I wish to make about the world are contained in the molesworth newsletter.
a) the russian are rotters
b) americans are swankpots
c) the french are slack
d) the germans are unspeakable
e) the rest are as bad if not worse than the above
f) the british are brave super noble cheers cheers cheers

It seemed to a number of philosophers of language, myself included, that we should attempt to achieve a unification of Chomsky's syntax, with the results of the researches that were going on in semantics and pragmatics. I believe that this effort has proven to be a failure. Though Chomsky did indeed revolutionize the subject of linguistics, it is not at all clear, at the end the century, what the solid results of this revolution are. As far as I can tell there is not a single rule of syntax that all, or even most, competent linguists are prepared to agree is a rule.

Language doesn't so much cause divisions as it symbolizes them. I don't think using 'evacuee' or 'refugee' will change people's minds, but it will signal differences about how we think about class that has always been there.

Some cities and counties have included language that if you exceed expectations for an entire year, then another year is added to the contract.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.