Obvious ones that are already happening. They will become part of standard English in the future: > going to, want to, need to -> gonna, wanna, needa > should have, would have, could have -> shudda, wudda, cudda
Final sounds like t, nt, ll, will be disappear, replaced by nasalization or vowel length.
The difference between can/can't will become similar: Only tone, nasalization and/or vowel length will distinguish them. > can/can't -> ca/cā Or can will change to be a homophone of "kin". > can/can't -> kin/cā Will and won't will drop final consonants, but the vowels will be different. > will/won't -> wə/wō
H will disappear from words between consonants e.g. I think he... -> I think e.
Shut up loser vive le Québec libre 1488 remember the fourteen words anglos will not replace us
Nathaniel Morgan
> schizos in my thread leave
Lincoln Taylor
That flag is reorests the holy Trinity of soy.
Brayden Powell
what
Jaxson Nguyen
Finally, we're scandies...
James Moore
Its and it's will be gone (most native speakers already don't know the difference) Th might go away like what happened with latin American Spanish. ESLs might have a significant impact on how English is spoken as they refuse to speak properly yet claim it is their native language. See countries like Singapore, India, etc... Lastly there's an interesting situation I've seen here in the USA in which Asian Americans who are ostensibly educated still retain an Asian accent despite not having spoken another language at all, I'm not sure if this will become more prevalent or not. I expect there to be more contractions and generally more slang to be commonly used. It is likely that functional literacy in all anglophone nations will decrease as the result of mass immigration from low IQ countries. I would not expect linguistic aspects of the upper classes to trickle down, so much as the lower classes enforce their mistakes upon society under the guise of it being normal.
Parker Foster
Interesting. I just have question about the last part, do you know of any examples of a language evolving due to lower class speech? It seems from the history of English it was the upper classes who influenced the lower classes, the Danes, the Normans, the academics who studied Greek/Latin, Received Pronunciation in the UK, etc.
Joseph Flores
There seems to be a trend of english relegating conjugation to auxiliary verbs, so maybe this will be taken further. For example, we used to be able to say “want you this” but now it’s required to say “do you want this” Maybe in the future it will be required to say “he does eat” rather than “he eats” These auxiliary words already form contractions with pronouns so maybe in the future there will be one word which carries the information: >person >question >tense >aspect > can/can't -> kin/cā I already say can’t like cat but with nasalization (also the sequence -an triggers diphthongization for me which I still have even after dropping the n)
Jackson Evans
I'm not a linguist so this is just me guessing, but see politicians becoming progressively less eloquent to pander to the lower classes. Trump and Biden are both decent examples. youtu.be/nAgJAxkALyc youtube.com/watch?v=E8FmR_K6xg8 youtu.be/VIZmZe7fe3E youtu.be/kSAo_1mJg0g I have no proof that Anglophones will become less generally eloquent but the deteriorating IQ scores due to mass immigration as well as lack of reading make me expect that to be the case. I found a few studies that say the average college graduate now has a smaller vocabulary than in the past.
Christopher Jones
> thank you -> ty Its over engols
Noah Davis
> will/won't -> wə/wō
All of your other suggestions are more or less already happening, but I don't see the l on will or the n on won't going away anytime soon.
Tyler Cruz
never thought of that. kek it happens if you mix I will and I'll. It comes out like I wuh, or I w with just the w sound. I think it also works with other personal pronouns.
Lucas Johnson
That flag is the holy Trinity of soy
Hudson Young
fpbp
KEK
My sides hurts. jaja
Isaac Foster
He doesn't know what he's talking about. People have already been talking like this for hundreds of years, it's just the spelling that hasn't changed.
Levi Hughes
>46% Anglos don't need to replace you, you're doing it yourself
Levi Young
>Its and it's will be gone (most native speakers already don't know the difference) bull fucking shit
Jace Price
The spelling is too static and will impose itself on the spoken language.
English already had much more minimised and merged pronunciation but spelling, particularly when everyone became literate, has changed pronunciation. If you listen to the oldest recordings this becomes apparent as well, in any Englishspeaker.
This means there's a limit on what can happen and it will always be anchored to the spelling-based sense of correct language. Sounds can change but the combination of them in pronunciations cannot too much.
>There seems to be a trend of english relegating conjugation to auxiliary verbs, so maybe this will be taken further. This is only in questions. There's no trend for the same thing in statements and in statements it has another function (emphasis) that would conflict.
>I already say can’t like cat but with nasalization (also the sequence -an triggers diphthongization for me which I still have even after dropping the n) In Australian can (noun) is lengthened and diphthongised by -n while can (aux) is not, somehow. Can't has a different vowel.
This, though a concern, is not relevant to language I don't think. Immigration is though. More so, the existence of ESLs is.
Isaiah Cook
>Its and it's Is just orthographical. Has no bearing on anything else. Originally people didn't spell 's, s, ies, etc. differently either.. The conventions are fixed now so they're not going away. It's just a matter of knowing or not. Or choosing a more informal style as you please. The more obscure something is, though this is hardly obscure, the more people latch onto it for a sense of special knowledge or exclusivity.
