Only Americans have the humility to call the United States an Imperfect Union. Only Americans have the audacity to promise themselves a More Perfect Union. We don't even care if "More Perfect" makes grammatical sense. But then we are Americans. Grammatical sense be damned. Grammatical sense be damned? Not so fast. In 1776 Americans had actually kicked off the greatest grammar debate in the history of the English-speaking world. To make the long story short, some of the American founders argued for "inalienable rights" regarding the early versions of the Declaration of Independence. When it came to the final version, though, they conceded to the majority who voted for "unalienable rights." Interestingly, modern American dictionaries prefer "inalienable" as a proper adjective. Unalienable rights, however, have long been declared enough but not exercised enough. Consequently or consequentially, our history shows a gnawing gap between rights declared and rights exercised. With that being said, this gnawing gap keeps narrowing. If that's not progress, I don't know what is. Can we imagine a world without America? Can we imagine an America without unalienable rights enshrined in its Declaration of Independence? Author: renqiulan
Some people say that
"They nod their head."
"They nod their heads."
is grammatically right.
The phrase "[unalienable rights] = Chinglish :-)" is a playful and somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment that draws attention to the use of the term "unalienable rights" in the context of the Declaration of Independence and how it may be perceived in contemporary language.
Here's an explanation of the elements in the comment:
"[Unalienable Rights]": This refers to the phrase "unalienable rights," which appears in the Declaration of Independence. It means rights that cannot be surrendered, transferred, or taken away because they are considered inherent and fundamental to every individual.
"Chinglish":-): The term "Chinglish" is a blend of "Chinese" and "English" and is used to describe a form of language or communication that results from the literal translation of Chinese phrases into English, often leading to humorous or awkward expressions. It's typically used to highlight translation or language quirks in a light-hearted manner.
"Just like 'long time no see'?": This part of the comment draws a parallel between the use of "unalienable rights" and the phrase "long time no see." "Long time no see" is considered an example of Chinglish because it's a direct translation of a Chinese phrase (好久不见, hǎo jiǔ bù jiàn) into English. It's not a standard English phrase but is widely understood and used informally.
So, the comment playfully suggests that "unalienable rights" may seem like an unusual or awkward phrase in modern English, similar to how "long time no see" is considered an unusual but accepted expression. It's a lighthearted way of highlighting the historical and linguistic aspects of the Declaration of Independence while acknowledging that language can evolve and sometimes produce idiosyncratic phrases over time.
"unalienable rights" may seem like an unusual or awkward phrase in modern English, similar to how "long time no see" is considered an unusual but accepted expression. It's a lighthearted way of highlighting the historical and linguistic aspects of the Declaration of Independence while acknowledging that language can evolve and sometimes produce idiosyncratic phrases over time.
The preference for "unalienable rights" over "inalienable rights" in the context of the Declaration of Independence and American discourse is rooted in historical and linguistic factors. Here's an explanation of this preference and the distinction:
1. Historical Influence: The terms "unalienable rights" and "inalienable rights" are used interchangeably in many contexts and have similar meanings. However, in the context of the Declaration of Independence, "unalienable rights" is the term that Thomas Jefferson used in his draft of the document. This specific wording holds historical significance, as it is the version that was adopted and signed by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776. The historical document itself, with "unalienable rights," is a foundational symbol of American independence and ideals.
2. Linguistic Evolution: The preference for "unalienable" in American usage could also be influenced by the evolving nature of language. Language is dynamic, and over time, word forms and meanings can change. In this case, "unalienable" and "inalienable" both convey the idea of rights that cannot be transferred or surrendered, but "unalienable" is the term that gained prominence and acceptance in the United States. It's possible that the unique linguistic history of American English contributed to this preference.
3. Regional Variations: American English and British English often exhibit differences in spelling, vocabulary, and usage. These variations can result from historical, cultural, and linguistic factors. In the case of "unalienable rights," it reflects the American preference for a particular form of the term that has become deeply ingrained in American political and historical discourse.
Overall, the preference for "unalienable rights" in American usage, as seen in the Declaration of Independence, can be attributed to its historical significance and linguistic evolution within the United States. While "inalienable rights" is a valid term and is used in other English-speaking countries, "unalienable rights" is firmly established in American history and remains a key phrase associated with American ideals of liberty and independence.
-ble rights : )
opposite of, without"; un- means simply "not". The americans appreciate simple.
一个猜想：For open ended questions, un-; for close ended or half-half questions, in-. There is untrue, ungodly, no intrue, ingodly. Undo, yes, Indo-, no...