LAS LENGUAS INGLESA Y ESPAÑOLA de Delfín Carbonell

These alternatives in English  Either...or: "Either pay or go to jail." Neither... nor: "I neither love you nor need you." have their parallel equals in Spanish: O... o: "O me pagas o te parto la cara." Ni... ni: "Ni quiero ir ni puedo ir."

I regularly receive the Modern Language Association newsletter The Source from the MLA Style Center, which I peruse diligently. In the issue of 29 January 2026, an article titled “A Common Mistake: Should of in Place of Should Have” caught my attention. It opens with the statement: “You may have seen people write should of , but that is grammatically incorrect.” I do not generally encounter such usage, nor do I associate with people who write in that manner. Indeed, contrary to the claim, I cannot recall ever hearing anyone say should of in place of should have . I may be living on the fringes of present-day English, but I find the assertion surprising nonetheless. The author, Laura Kiernan, suggests that “the mistake probably comes from the fact that should’ve sounds similar to should of when spoken.” Try as I might, however, I cannot hear should’ve as resembling should of . While the explanation is plausible, pointing out this “mistake” strikes me as somewhat unnecessary for ...

     There was a time when manners , politeness , and etiquette were not just words, but living principles. Today, they risk becoming old-fashioned vocabulary, their meanings fading in the minds of the young. In their place, other expressions are gaining currency—often reflecting a rather different social reality.      One such expression is “to take French leave.” Traditionally, it meant departing without saying goodbye, without asking permission, without so much as a word of notice—a small but unmistakable social offense. In earlier times, such behavior would have been considered a breach of decorum, if not outright rudeness. Now, it passes almost unnoticed.    The phrase itself is a curious example of linguistic blame-shifting across cultures. The French, returning the compliment, say “filer à l’anglaise,” placing the blame squarely on the English. Spanish follows suit with “despedirse a la francesa,” suggesting, perhaps with a faint smil...

  There are words proscribed by society as improper and unacceptable, taboo, and which, nevertheless, we have to name and refer to. Such is the case of the word syphilis, a venereal disease that, it seems, is making a comeback. In former times, it was referred to in polite society as The French Disease , morbo gallico .  As the French had also stigmatized the word, they blamed Italians and called it le mal de Naples . Italians retaliated with il mal francese . Spaniards blamed the French also: el mal francés . It was a curse that ravaged Europe for centuries. In his book The World of Yesterday , Stephen Zweig explains its impact upon the youth of his time. 

 Ya he tratado en este Blog sobre la pronunciación de nombres y apellidos en inglés y he hecho hincapié en su dificultad. No debemos bajar la guardia nunca y cerciorarnos siempre. Leyendo el New York Times (28 de marzo, 2026), veo que llevamos casi dos siglos pronunciando mal el apellido del escritor y filósofo estadounidense Henry David Thoreau. En su artículo "Rethinking Thoreau...", Sarah Lyall nos cuenta que la pronunciación no es /Zoró/, sino /Zóro/,  /THO-reau, y que el acento recae en la primera sílaba. Todo esto a propósito de un programa en ciernes de la PBS sobre el escritor, narrado por actores como George Clooney y Meryl Streep, donde, al parecer, han tenido que enseñarles la nueva -y correcta- pronunciación del apellido francés. Si los mismos nativos tienen problemas fonéticos con nombres y apellidos, recomiendo ejercer cautela siempre. 

  Quiero recordarles a ustedes, estudiosos del idioma, dos citas de Julio Casares (1877-1964), extraídas de su Cosas del lenguaje (Espasa-Calpe, 1961), que, en mi modestísima opinión, hay que tener en cuenta al tratar esta cuestión: "... de un orden infinitamente más complejo y sutil es la lógica del lenguaje; ya que éste, como todo hecho social, como todo producto de cultura, es una obra colectiva, inestable, en cuya evolución intervienen, influyéndose recíprocamente, factores materiales, fisiológicos y psíquicos de muy diversa índole, no siempre fáciles de aislar."   "No intentemos... reformar arbitrariamente el idioma. Tal como está -sin que esto sea desconocer su calidad de perfectible- resulta un instrumento muy superior a la capacidad de casi todos los que lo empleamos; por lo cual, no estaría de más que dedicásemos a estudiar nuestra lengua la mitad del empeño que ponemos en criticarla."