New CBB

Discuss constructed languages, cultures, worlds, related sciences and much more!
It is currently Wed 22 May 2013, 18:30

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed 07 Dec 2011, 19:31 
puremetal
puremetal
User avatar

Joined: Fri 13 Aug 2010, 18:57
Posts: 3054
MONOBA wrote:
Micamo wrote:
He's probably referring to people who think everybody in India speaks one language called "Indian."


It was an indirect expression of my annoyance at people who believe indian/native american is one language. An incredibly uneducated assumption.

Oooh. Ok. You mean you can count to 10 in Native American. I can too!

1 like the buffalo
2 like the buffalo
3 like the buffalo
4 like the buffalo
5 like the buffalo
6 like the buffalo
7 like the buffalo
8 like the buffalo
9 like the buffalo
10 like the buffalo

_________________
♀♥♀
Dotjen
Kotanese


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed 07 Dec 2011, 20:00 
air
air
User avatar

Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 04:26
Posts: 1154
I can count to ten in lakota.

Waŋží
Núŋpa
Yámni
Tópa
Záptaŋ
Šákpe
Šakówiŋ
Šaglóǧaŋ
Napčíyuŋka
Wikčémna

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。
Spoiler: show
Ǧ Š Ȟ Ž Č

ǧ š ŋ ȟ ž č

:swe: [:D] :vgtl: [:D] :eng: [:)] :ita: [:|] :lkt: [:'(]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 30 Dec 2011, 09:16 
wood
wood
User avatar

Joined: Sat 09 Oct 2010, 10:18
Posts: 936
Location: Seattle
Sanskrit is the oldest language in the world. This seems to be a popular religious fringe theory among Indian linguists..

and one I was taught in Russian school and saw a Russian lady talking about it on Facebook:

Sanskrit is the forerunner to all European languages, including Russian. It might be a Russia-specific myth, though...

And the greatest myth(s) ever:

[insert random language here] is obviously related to [insert random, non-related language here] based on this totally coincidental vocabulary list of terms! I have long stopped facedesking when I see theories like these. Too much blunt trauma.

_________________
sup

have some :kal: lessons


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 30 Dec 2011, 22:17 
fire
fire

Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 19:38
Posts: 2804
No, it's (definitely!) not Russian-specific; not even east-of-the-Ural-mountans, east-of-the-Caucasus-mountains, east-of-the-Bosphorus-strait, east-of-the-Ural-river, east-of-the-river-Don, east-of-the-Caspian-sea, specific.

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat 31 Dec 2011, 00:43 
greek
greek
User avatar

Joined: Fri 01 Jul 2011, 06:03
Posts: 266
Location: The darkest pit of madness.
It was repeated in Russian For Dummies. I could say more, but I'm currently experiencing facepalm-induced amnesia.

_________________
Wa mnew yiHegolech.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 12:09 
roman
roman

Joined: Sun 15 Aug 2010, 15:48
Posts: 513
Zumir wrote:
It was repeated in Russian For Dummies. I could say more, but I'm currently experiencing facepalm-induced amnesia.


It's quite commonly held by people from India. They even boast about it. I had a protracted IRL debate over it (I didn't even bring it up, I just quipped that 'uhm, that's not the linguistic consensus' and he launched into a long tirade, where I occasionally tried explaining where he was wrong. Most of the friends present probably ended up thinking he was right.) His main arguments against my counterclaim - viz. Sanskrit is a relatively early off-shoot of the language from which all Indo-European languages come were:
1) It's obvious from the name "Indo-European" that it's Sanskrit
2) If it's not Sanskrit, then tell me the name of that language!

Shit like this convinces people [o.O]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 15:07 
rupestrian
rupestrian

Joined: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 06:45
Posts: 7
Maximillian wrote:
I've heard this myth about how certain languages are more difficult than others. For example, many people seem to believe German is more difficult than French, but then French is more difficult than Italian, and Italian is more difficult than Spanish and so-on-forever.

How do you know you're debunking a myth, here? Specifically, what evidence is there that some languages are not more difficult to learn than any others? Have there been any studies done? It's a devil of a hypothesis to actually test!

Of course, it may be that most natural languages have turned out to have roughly similar levels of difficulty overall, and I can even think of a good reason for this: because roughly similar creatures (humans) speak them. For instance, it's commonly noticed that English has a massive vocabulary but makes up for this fewer features like grammatical gender to be learned and applied.

But I strongly suspect natural languages do indeed differ in their absolute level of difficulty. At the very least, two conlangs could theoretically be designed from one language as a base, with one conlang having its vocabulary, phoneme set, number of cases and tenses, exceptions, etc. reduced, and the other increased. Would the former not be easier to learn, and the latter, harder to learn, irrespective of one's L1? That was the whole notion behind Basic English.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 16:16 
runic
runic
User avatar

Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2011, 03:57
Posts: 1425
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Ναθια wrote:
How do you know you're debunking a myth, here? Specifically, what evidence is there that some languages are not more difficult to learn than any others? Have there been any studies done? It's a devil of a hypothesis to actually test!

Of course, it may be that most natural languages have turned out to have roughly similar levels of difficulty overall, and I can even think of a good reason for this: because roughly similar creatures (humans) speak them. For instance, it's commonly noticed that English has a massive vocabulary but makes up for this fewer features like grammatical gender to be learned and applied.

But I strongly suspect natural languages do indeed differ in their absolute level of difficulty. At the very least, two conlangs could theoretically be designed from one language as a base, with one conlang having its vocabulary, phoneme set, number of cases and tenses, exceptions, etc. reduced, and the other increased. Would the former not be easier to learn, and the latter, harder to learn, irrespective of one's L1? That was the whole notion behind Basic English.
The obligation isn't to prove the negative, so until someone does come out with the evidence for the claim, it's still a myth.
If language (A) lacks a feature that language (B) has, then language (A) needs to compensate with something else if it is required to convey the same things, which you may or may not find easier than the method used by (B).

_________________
I speak English and a touch of Gàidhlig.
I am creating a conworld, which I refer to as the Carrion Series, that will contain three languages, Iriex, Dvoen and Maxna.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 17:05 
MVP
MVP
User avatar

Joined: Sun 22 Aug 2010, 18:46
Posts: 3788
If you understand Swedish, you can read this thread where some guy claims that Hungarian is Proto-World.

Regarding the absolute simplicity or difficulty of languages, one method to measure this could be to see how fast children acquire their respective L1s.

_________________
constructedlanguages.net


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 17:22 
shadowlight
shadowlight
User avatar

Joined: Sat 16 Oct 2010, 02:14
Posts: 2533
Location: Bakom dig.
Oh Flashback, you never cease to amaze with your stupidity :roll:.

There are a handful of golden eggs there, but most of them are rotten...

_________________
Proto-Hyảlim | Bjarmish

Ón gráti sem jett barn kvéner jag syggji jett lag um deiðan...
[oʊ̯n ˈgɾaːtɪ sɛmː jɛtː baɾn ˈkʰʋɛːnɛɾ jaː ˈsʏd͡ʑːɪ jɛtː laː ʊmː ˈdɛɪ̯an]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 18:43 
roman
roman

Joined: Sun 15 Aug 2010, 15:48
Posts: 513
Ναθια wrote:
Maximillian wrote:
I've heard this myth about how certain languages are more difficult than others. For example, many people seem to believe German is more difficult than French, but then French is more difficult than Italian, and Italian is more difficult than Spanish and so-on-forever.

How do you know you're debunking a myth, here? Specifically, what evidence is there that some languages are not more difficult to learn than any others? Have there been any studies done? It's a devil of a hypothesis to actually test!

Of course, it may be that most natural languages have turned out to have roughly similar levels of difficulty overall, and I can even think of a good reason for this: because roughly similar creatures (humans) speak them. For instance, it's commonly noticed that English has a massive vocabulary but makes up for this fewer features like grammatical gender to be learned and applied.

But I strongly suspect natural languages do indeed differ in their absolute level of difficulty. At the very least, two conlangs could theoretically be designed from one language as a base, with one conlang having its vocabulary, phoneme set, number of cases and tenses, exceptions, etc. reduced, and the other increased. Would the former not be easier to learn, and the latter, harder to learn, irrespective of one's L1? That was the whole notion behind Basic English.

The number of cases, the number of tenses, etc etc isn't a reasonable measurement of difficulty.

Seriously, no matter what measurements we come up with, they'll be so flawed as to be nearly useless, or they won't measure anything that actually has to do with the difficulty the individual learner will have to wrestle with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Jan 2012, 18:53 
roman
roman
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb 2011, 20:43
Posts: 512
Location: Sol III
xingoxa wrote:
If you understand Swedish, you can read this thread where some guy claims that Hungarian is Proto-World.


What... How... Why...

...

Does not compute.

...

Error.

...

Errorerrorerrorrewtdghhgkfgj.......

_________________
[:D] :fin: :eng: | [:)] :swe: | [:(] :fra: :lat: | [:'(] :jpn: :mex: (Nahuatl) | :idea: :kal: :hin: (Sanskrit & Pali) :chi: (Yaghan) | :con: Image (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat 14 Jan 2012, 02:17 
sinic
sinic
User avatar

Joined: Fri 13 Jan 2012, 02:12
Posts: 190
MONOBA wrote:
"I know how to count to 10 in Indian".


[o.O]


The following are paraphrases of things I have heard people say or have had said to me over the years.

- 'Does anyone speak Hindu?' - Because apparently the Hindu religion is a language now, so I'm curious to see what Hindi has turned into - I'm guessing some sort of fast-food chain or car manufacturer. I'm just waiting for somebody to talk about speaking 'Muslim'.
- 'Do you speak [ethnic slur for 'Pakistani'], Parminder?' - Said to an Indian (Punjabi) friend of mine.
- 'Chinese and Japanese are the same, aren't they?' - Said by a girl who earlier in the same conversation had been amazed to learn that the Japanese people aren't fundamentally different anatomically to the rest of the world in a way that doesn't bear repeating on a civilised forum.
- 'The [ethnic slur for 'Chinese'] just draw pictures instead of writing.' - From the same girl who made the Chinese-Japanese error.
- 'Of course English and French aren't related.' - Although this may have been more motivated by racism (Tristan despised the French) than ignorance, but that only makes it worse.
- 'English is obviously the best language in the world, because so many people speak it.' - The guy who said this was offended when I laughed because I assumed he was joking. Which, apparently, he wasn't.
- 'Why would you want to learn another language?' - So many times.

Sometimes the stupid burns so very hard.

Dan

_________________
Valar morghulis.

Zidhgebzhail Orthography


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat 14 Jan 2012, 03:28 
light
light
User avatar

Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2010, 03:04
Posts: 667
DanH34 wrote:
- 'Why would you want to learn another language?' - So many times.

This one makes me sad


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat 14 Jan 2012, 04:17 
puremetal
puremetal
User avatar

Joined: Fri 13 Aug 2010, 18:57
Posts: 3054
DanH34 wrote:
\- 'English is obviously the best language in the world, because so many people speak it.' - The guy who said this was offended when I laughed because I assumed he was joking. Which, apparently, he wasn't.

I don't know that that is a myth so much as an opinion.

_________________
♀♥♀
Dotjen
Kotanese


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat 14 Jan 2012, 10:28 
runic
runic
User avatar

Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2011, 03:57
Posts: 1425
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
DanH34 wrote:
- 'Does anyone speak Hindu?' - Because apparently the Hindu religion is a language now, so I'm curious to see what Hindi has turned into - I'm guessing some sort of fast-food chain or car manufacturer. I'm just waiting for somebody to talk about speaking 'Muslim'.
Reminds me of the time I got called racist for criticising Islam's creation story... :|
DanH34 wrote:
- 'Do you speak [ethnic slur for 'Pakistani'], Parminder?' - Said to an Indian (Punjabi) friend of mine.
This wouldn't happen to be 'Paki', would it? For a long time I thought that meant 'person from Pakistan' only to discover it was a slur against 'middle-Easterners'. Oddly though, an Indian man who runs a local shop describes himself as such...


A related one; "English decends from Latin." It even seems that a number of past linguists tried to create/perpetuate this myth.

_________________
I speak English and a touch of Gàidhlig.
I am creating a conworld, which I refer to as the Carrion Series, that will contain three languages, Iriex, Dvoen and Maxna.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat 14 Jan 2012, 22:23 
admin
admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue 11 May 2010, 05:46
Posts: 1235
Location: Upp.
"paki" is a slur against all Middle-easterners? I didn't know that, I thought it was only a slur against people from Pakistan and India and thereabouts.. Like Lodhas I originally thought it was just a word for Pakistanian.

_________________
Image КЕРВЕНСКИЙ


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 15 Jan 2012, 03:21 
runic
runic
User avatar

Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2011, 03:57
Posts: 1425
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Aszev wrote:
"paki" is a slur against all Middle-easterners? I didn't know that, I thought it was only a slur against people from Pakistan and India and thereabouts.. Like Lodhas I originally thought it was just a word for Pakistanian.

That's the thing about racial slurs, they tend not to be specific. Of course, it might be a Glasgow specific thing.

_________________
I speak English and a touch of Gàidhlig.
I am creating a conworld, which I refer to as the Carrion Series, that will contain three languages, Iriex, Dvoen and Maxna.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 15 Jan 2012, 03:26 
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
User avatar

Joined: Sun 05 Sep 2010, 19:48
Posts: 4887
Systemzwang wrote:
The number of cases, the number of tenses, etc etc isn't a reasonable measurement of difficulty.

Seriously, no matter what measurements we come up with, they'll be so flawed as to be nearly useless, or they won't measure anything that actually has to do with the difficulty the individual learner will have to wrestle with.


We could measure this by the average age at which a child learning the language as their L1 achieves full mastery of all the language's structures. I believe I read on Wikipedia at some point that the language with the honor of being the "most difficult" by this measure being Korean.

_________________
♀♥Ø


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 15 Jan 2012, 05:24 
light
light
User avatar

Joined: Thu 04 Aug 2011, 05:13
Posts: 944
Location: Sparta
Micamo wrote:
Systemzwang wrote:
The number of cases, the number of tenses, etc etc isn't a reasonable measurement of difficulty.

Seriously, no matter what measurements we come up with, they'll be so flawed as to be nearly useless, or they won't measure anything that actually has to do with the difficulty the individual learner will have to wrestle with.


We could measure this by the average age at which a child learning the language as their L1 achieves full mastery of all the language's structures. I believe I read on Wikipedia at some point that the language with the honor of being the "most difficult" by this measure being Korean. (Visi: If it's true, it was deleted. It doesn't appear in the texts.)



No language is more difficult than any other. The average age of mastery for a child is when their brain splits (literally) in two, which means 7-8 years old. Once it's done, the child has totally unconsciously acquired the grammar of its language and can't acquire another one, unless they willingly study it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eldin raigmore and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group