• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

itv coverage

I can imagine! 7 years at the language and I'm still anything but fluent! Hopefully a year studying in Toulouse next year will help, no clue why I chose there of all places! ;)

I was there last weekend, laaaaaaaaaavly spot, just gotta make sure you don't take the accent home with you!
 
I disagree - in fact I'd say that simply calling it "a mongrel" is the gross oversimplification.

Aside from vocabulary borrowed from Latin and French, it's broadly similar to modern Scandinavian languages, and to a lesser extent certain Germanic languages (Dutch, German etc.).

It's one of the main reasons why Scandinavians often sound like far more natural English speakers than anyone else - even if they have never lived abroad or spend much time at all conversing in English.
Because there is very little conflict in grammar and such a huge overlap in core vocabulary - holding basic day-to-day conversations takes very little conscious effort from them, as opposed to Romance language speakers, for example.

A good article: https://www.apollon.uio.no/english/articles/2012/4-english-scandinavian.html

My point was that while the syntactic roots may be Germanic, the vocabulary is from all sorts of places, so to identify one language or language group as "the root" is over simplistic.

Thanks for the article, will have a look when I have time.

Tell you what I found weird, when studying Spanish I noticed that Romanians are all super fluent in Spanish and the languages are very similar. That struck me as odd.

Romance languages (meaning latin-based); Romanian/Romania and Romany (as in gypsy) are from the same linguistic roots. Romanian is a Latin root language, very similar to Spanish, Italian etc.

On the French - I don't know if you've taught any other nationalities, but I taught EFL in London, to students from all sorts of different mother tongues. I didn't find the French particularly worse than others, I just think most people in most of the world are not very good at foreign languages.
 
My point was that while the syntactic roots may be Germanic, the vocabulary is from all sorts of places, so to identify one language or language group as "the root" is over simplistic.

Thanks for the article, will have a look when I have time.



Romance languages (meaning latin-based); Romanian/Romania and Romany (as in gypsy) are from the same linguistic roots. Romanian is a Latin root language, very similar to Spanish, Italian etc.

On the French - I don't know if you've taught any other nationalities, but I taught EFL in London, to students from all sorts of different mother tongues. I didn't find the French particularly worse than others, I just think most people in most of the world are not very good at foreign languages.

I've had the privilege of teaching German students, who are wonderful, but in general I've found the Russians to be either terrible or brilliant.
 
Romance languages (meaning latin-based); Romanian/Romania and Romany (as in gypsy) are from the same linguistic roots. Romanian is a Latin root language, very similar to Spanish, Italian etc.

On the French - I don't know if you've taught any other nationalities, but I taught EFL in London, to students from all sorts of different mother tongues. I didn't find the French particularly worse than others, I just think most people in most of the world are not very good at foreign languages.

Romani isn't a Romance language, it's Indo-Aryan.
 
What associations would you make between France and Ireland though? Obviously there's tons of reasons, but surely an Englishman would associate Ireland with Britain much more... :huh:
 
What associations would you make between France and Ireland though? Obviously there's tons of reasons, but surely an Englishman would associate Ireland with Britain much more... :huh:

Maybe the Euro?
 
So why didn't ITV cover the presenting of the Millenium Trophy at the end of today's game?
 
So why didn't ITV cover the presenting of the Millenium Trophy at the end of today's game?

No-one seems able to help me with this so I sent ITV an email saying how disappointed I was with their after match coverage and this was their reply:

"Thank you for your recent email regarding Rugby: Six Nations.


I can confirm that your comments have been logged here at ITV and will be fed back to the relevant teams.


Unfortunately, with scheduling commitments to the live programme following the rugby we did not have the air-time to cover the post match interviews, ceremonies and analysis. Further Six Nations coverage can be found via the following link: http://www.itv.com/six-nations "


So what they're saying is they couldn't complete their commitment fully because of their scheduling. That's crap.
While I was glad the 6N stayed on terrestrial TV even though its not one of the "Crown Jewels", I want to see all that's involved with the match esp. when my team wins a trophy, not cut away so Ant & Dec can do their thing.

ITV have previous for not covering sports events properly, and it seems nothing has changed.
 
Isn't getting a trophy for Beating Ireland like getting a trophy for beating the 2nd slowest kid in school.

Scotland being the slowest.
 
Top