Personally I find the arguments put forward suggesting Shakespeare not only wasnt the author of all the works accredited to him,but COULDNT have been ,quite convincing. Mark Twain's views on the issue are well worth reading,and its difficult to argue with his logic imo. However its not really important who the author/authors were,its the content that matters ,and the exploitation ,beauty and richness of the English language,still available for the public to enjoy despite the present day bastardisation of the language, by Americans in particular,and by everyone else in general.
I was writing a little tongue in cheek,not meaning to give offense.Ive nothing against Americans -in fact Im married to one.The bastardisation (which strictly speaking isnt bastardisation) is the modern use by the younger generation of words such as kewl, etc and written expressions on the internet pmsl-ffs- and of course "gangbanga" language(if that is the correct term)and so on and so forth.
Universal language?If it is its not because of the fact its spoken in Britain. Its because,in part ,its one of the simplest,easiest languages in the world,both in speech and script. Britains empire contributed to its spread obviously.I wasnt trying to suggest that anything that came from Britain ,must by virtue of that fact be superior .Though it probabley is.
Anyway no offence intended
No offence taken...Firstly I'm a Brit myself...and hopefully a realistic one! But be aware that many folk on here are left pond and might well look askance!
My contention would be that it's U.S.English the world is eagerly learning to speak...the British Empire obviously spread the useage initially, but it's continuation as an international language is really down to US influence!
It certainly isn't one of the simplest languages in the world...in it's irregularity of construction it's probably one of the most difficult, and persons trying to learn it as a second tongue will probably confirm this...
Yes indeed, languages evolve - every year a whole raft of new words make it into the OED and another raft of words fade into obscurity.
The words that tend to change are those pertaining to culture - like new words 'downlink' 'defriend' etc. Words petaining to environment, human interaction - immovables basically - tend to remain pretty constant.
That's why we can (mostly) understand Shakespeare after 400 years.
And the idea of 'bastardising' English is hilarious - English isn't a 'real' language at all - it's a mish-mash of several itself; so the idea that it can be 'bastardised' is highly questionable.