But why do we (I'm sure some languages don't, but I'm talking of the ones that do) start a sentence with a capital letter? I've always done it without questioning and there is obviously a good reason for it, otherwise language would have evolved and stopped doing it but having spent the grand total of five minutes actually considering why, I'm unsure.

 

I was just reading and came across a word which I was unsure as to whether it began with a capitalised letter because it was at the start of the sentence or because it was a proper noun. The word in question was God. Naturally god can be a proper noun or simply a noun depending on the subjectivity of the writer. At this point I am unaware of the intent of the writer.

 

This then got me thinking as to why we have a capital at the start of the sentence. I figured that the only two reasons for it could be that it lets you know when you are reading the beginning of a sentence, this way you know you are not missing some of the information. The other thing was that sometimes a full stop can be used in a different way than to signify the end of a sentence, such as after a word which has been shortened, such as etc.

 

These two examples pose their own problems, however, in that with regards to the start of a sentence and ensuring you aren't missing the start of a piece of text, surely it would only be desired to have a capital letter right at the start of a piece of writing, otherwise you could be missing full sentences at the beginning of the text. Both of the examples open up the possibility of confusion as listed in my second paragraph. The second problem (shortened words) could be easily remedied by taking the time to write words in full, or adopting shortened words into normal vocabulary enough to get rid of the full stop proceeding them as they are a word in their own right.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure how much of that makes sense, and I'm not particularly good with language so I'm sure I've taken a very blinkered view on this and therefore missed an obvious answer but I'm willing to put the question in the opening paragraph to you and take the ridicule as I would like to know the answer.

I've taken several linguistic classes and I don't have an answer for you. :P

I'm guessing it's supposed to enhanve readability but I've just never questioned it before. I never questioned why I have to capitalise every single noun in German either, I just know that it annoys me when people don't do it.

Coz the grammar police sez so

 

I studied English Language for a few years so I'll try to answer best I can. I think you'll find your answer if you look back at the progression of modern English. It's mostly because back in ye olden days a minority of people used to be able to spell and they all spelled things differently. Until some people came along and set specific rules about lexis and spelling, punctuation, grammar rules and all that jazz. (some people where spelling things in their accent, I can't think of an example right now but it was weird as hell) Their group has a name but I can't actually remember it.

These people strictly enforced the grammar rules into every bit of written text and most of the rules still stand today. It was a way to get the whole of the English language into a proper standardised order so we could actually understand what people where writing.

This is still practised today and is seen as the "correct" way of writing as it is formal,proper and worldly recognised.

 

Maybe in the future we will stop using full stops, who knows. There are a bunch of other rules that we don't really follow already, especially when we are writing in an informal way. Most of us don't really mind if there are no capitals or a lack of punctuation. However a lot of people feel that we should not lose our grammar rules lest we all fall into the habit of tlkin lyke dis all teh tyme!!! which is understandable.

 

Also, in reference to the God thing, there are different types of nouns. Concrete, Abstract and Proper. The word God can be an abstract noun.... used to label intangable things. Such as taste or touch or fear or curiosity. But it is also a name of someone so it fall under the category of Proper noun too. So it depends whether you're talking about God as a person or god as an idea as to whether it's capitalised. (I'm not sure if you were asking that, but still.)

Cheers girls, and yes, that was part of what I was talking about. And I feel less of an idiot now since it wasn't some obvious thing that I'd just missed out on. I can't imagine full stops going as you need it to know when a sentence ends, but the capital letter at the start can just be confusing if it makes it unclear of what kind of noun is found at the start of a sentence. I might try and start a revolution to banish it. It's a specific revolution I admit.

 

I agree that it's likely to improve reading though. I do have a friend who doesn't like reading entirely capitalised text, but entirely lower case would be easier I feel as those are the letters that you first learn. You know, like before you turn up to school one day and they say 'You know that alphabet you know, abcdefg... Well it's rubbish, forget it all, it's ABCDEFG!'.

But why do we (I'm sure some languages don't, but I'm talking of the ones that do) start a sentence with a capital letter? I've always done it without questioning and there is obviously a good reason for it, otherwise language would have evolved and stopped doing it but having spent the grand total of five minutes actually considering why, I'm unsure.

 

I was just reading and came across a word which I was unsure as to whether it began with a capitalised letter because it was at the start of the sentence or because it was a proper noun. The word in question was God. Naturally god can be a proper noun or simply a noun depending on the subjectivity of the writer. At this point I am unaware of the intent of the writer.

 

This then got me thinking as to why we have a capital at the start of the sentence. I figured that the only two reasons for it could be that it lets you know when you are reading the beginning of a sentence, this way you know you are not missing some of the information. The other thing was that sometimes a full stop can be used in a different way than to signify the end of a sentence, such as after a word which has been shortened, such as etc.

 

These two examples pose their own problems, however, in that with regards to the start of a sentence and ensuring you aren't missing the start of a piece of text, surely it would only be desired to have a capital letter right at the start of a piece of writing, otherwise you could be missing full sentences at the beginning of the text. Both of the examples open up the possibility of confusion as listed in my second paragraph. The second problem (shortened words) could be easily remedied by taking the time to write words in full, or adopting shortened words into normal vocabulary enough to get rid of the full stop proceeding them as they are a word in their own right.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure how much of that makes sense, and I'm not particularly good with language so I'm sure I've taken a very blinkered view on this and therefore missed an obvious answer but I'm willing to put the question in the opening paragraph to you and take the ridicule as I would like to know the answer.

 

...why?

Why would you not want to know an answer if you felt there was an obvious one that you had overlooked? What else do you deprive yourself of?

Basically, what Empily said. :) To simplify it, it's one of the ways linguists used to standardise the language.

Does that mean it could be dispensed of eventually then?

This may seem like a silly question (but I'd rather have an idea before I properly respond to the original question)... is this format consistent among all languages?

I guess it's because as mentioned it can signify the start of a sentence. Also not as if it matters but to throw my two cents into the discussion from a visual standpoint using a capital letter to start a sentence looks more visually pleasing or also more proper in terms of how you're coming across. Like what I mean by that is if I just used lower case letters for everything I've ever written I'm sure that people might not take what I'm saying seriously.

^ That somehow makes sense, too, although I believe it isn't the actual reason why we started using capital letters, more like a reason why we shouldn't stop doing it now that we are used to it.

Edit: I don't think there's anything dumb in asking this question.

There must be histories behind this but I think that's all that matters....?

This may seem like a silly question (but I'd rather have an idea before I properly respond to the original question)... is this format consistent among all languages?

 

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090331035429AA0hLay

 

No idea if this is a correct answer but it is an answer.

Edit: I don't think there's anything dumb in asking this question.

 

Thanks

Rules can definitely change. Look at the example of irregular verbs like burn (past participle would be burnt and burned). I believe that only one variant of it was correct in past centuries (Empily will probably correct me on this one - I haven't studied the history of the English language in detail) but nowadays, both variations can be used without people being accused of having bad grammar skills. Now, it depends which one's more common in a region but as far as I know, both participles are accepted in all regional English versions. I might be wrong, though.

 

More generally speaking, it also depends on the grammarians. If they believe in descriptive grammar, they're more likely to set rules according to usage and they'll take into account whatever is going on with their language (how would you explain 'LOL' in OED otherwise?), whereas prescriptive grammarians will set the norms according to, idk, past rules and what they believe is right.

 

 

Ooops, I've digressed from the original question but I hope I've explained some things about grammar.

Yeah, cheers for that.

I prefer language to be evolving. It has to be. Have you read Pinkers' 'The Language Instinct'? I recommend it.

 

I wonder if we'll ever lose the '.' after etc., as whilst it's there to show that it is a shortened word, surely etc. itself has become part of our language enough to be as it is. Therefore both versions would be acceptable.

Why would you not want to know an answer if you felt there was an obvious one that you had overlooked? What else do you deprive yourself of?

 

I just wondered what made you wonder, it's something that I've never considered, and I study English :P I've just always accepted our grammatical rules and never bothered finding out why we do things. We just do.

 

In answer to your other question, I guess I deprive myself of quite a lot of other "obvious" knowledge. I'm someone who accepts things without question; I don't particularly care why I'm put on Earth, for example.

I just wondered what made you wonder, it's something that I've never considered, and I study English :P I've just always accepted our grammatical rules and never bothered finding out why we do things. We just do.

 

In answer to your other question, I guess I deprive myself of quite a lot of other "obvious" knowledge. I'm someone who accepts things without question; I don't particularly care why I'm put on Earth, for example.

 

I saw the word god used and it was at the start of a sentence, but I didn't know how the word was being used, whether as a proper noun (which would be capitalised) or simply a noun (which wouldn't be), but as it was at the start of a sentence I didn't know which it would be as it was capitalised anyway (though, as has been mentioned in the thread, things are far more complex than that specific example as there are all sorts of nouns, though languages are not my strong point). Then, after wondering this, I became paranoid that I was being idiotic and was missing a glaring reason why we do have them at the start of a sentence.

I saw the word god used and it was at the start of a sentence, but I didn't know how the word was being used, whether as a proper noun (which would be capitalised) or simply a noun (which wouldn't be), but as it was at the start of a sentence I didn't know which it would be as it was capitalised anyway (though, as has been mentioned in the thread, things are far more complex than that specific example as there are all sorts of nouns, though languages are not my strong point). Then, after wondering this, I became paranoid that I was being idiotic and was missing a glaring reason why we do have them at the start of a sentence.

 

Yeah I get that, just thought you had quite an inquisitive mind to think about it.

Yeah, cheers for that.

I prefer language to be evolving. It has to be. Have you read Pinkers' 'The Language Instinct'? I recommend it.

No, I haven't, but thank you for the recommendation.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090331035429AA0hLay

 

No idea if this is a correct answer but it is an answer.

 

I've been writing Arabic for awhile and I've just started Hindi so I can say that's correct.

 

But if you want me to be on topic then I don't think it's a dumb question at all. I guess the English speaking world has just accepted this rule without question (myself included). I'm going along with that the idea that it is used to signify the beginning of a sentence since that makes the most sense to me.

If we didn't ask questions we wouldn't learn anything new, so keep asking away at life's mysteries I say :thumbsup:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090331035429AA0hLay

 

No idea if this is a correct answer but it is an answer.

Thanks. This does help.

 

To me, this means it's not necessary per say to use capital letters to begin a sentence. Empily's response was very insightful in regard to how it evolved.

 

I've always viewed it as simply the standard, proper, and essentially "forced" way to indicate the start of a new written thought/statement, similar to how the period signifies the respective end. Yes, there are other words that may be capitalized within the sentence. Yes, there might be abbreviations within the sentence that necessitate other use of a period.

 

Now in regard to period usage, in school I was always taught that when writing, and when typing in typing class, to always use 2 spaces after the period that comes at the end of a sentence. This was ingrained in us as standard and required. I don't think this was always the case, because a few people I work with still use the "old" method of using 1 space after a sentence. I find myself always having to fix this. Furthermore, it's one of the annoying things that I've had to get used to on this site. As I type this, by virtue of habit I am typing 2 spaces after each sentence; but it doesn't translate on the post.

 

Why do I mention this? Because, in my opinion, the usage of 2 spaces after the period at the end of a sentence is what signals the transition of one sentence to another, even more than the period itself or the capital letter at the beginning of the next sentence. Where else is the use of 2 spaces "required" in written word? Nowhere. If the 2-space rule is "enforced", or given the importance it deserves... yes, I think that the "capital letter at the beginning of each sentence" rule can eventually go the way of the dodo. It would take a very influential person/company/whatever to initiate such a movement though. Too bad Steve Jobs isn't around.

Hmmmm... The only people that put 2 spaces after the period that I've noticed, are from the US. It looks weird to me.

I've never heard of the two space thing.