Moderator: Forum Administrators
Vlürch wrote:If I could find native speakers of the languages I'm trying to learn who were as politically spineless as me, of course I'd be all over them asking shit about how their languages work, but so far I've yet to come across a single person ever who shared the same exact mindset. I wouldn't even care what someone's political views were if they didn't care what mine are, like if we could agree to disagree, but it seems increasingly that that's impossible since everything is political now and anyone talking to someone who's a bad person is considered guilty by association...
IpseDixit wrote:But an auxlang is not supposed to replace any language at all. The idea is that you use the auxlang only for international communication, the way we do with English nowadays.
IpseDixit wrote:As a speaker of a Romance language, I've always found English to have quite a rigid word order.
IpseDixit wrote:A language split is several dialects is also more difficult to learn.
IpseDixit wrote:Just a suffix and the meaning is radically altered.
IpseDixit wrote:Not to mention that any natlang we use as a lingua franca will always bring with itself the culture of the place(s) where it's spoken natively.
linguoboy wrote:It's quite easy to produce an unnatural-sounding sentence in English; just move around a bit the adverbs. One of the hardest things to explain to learners (since never it was something explicitly taught in my English grammar classes) is to put the adverbs where. It can change sometimes the meaning, but just it's jarring mostly.
eskandar wrote:I don't share your politics, but ask any question about Persian you want on the Persian forum and I'll gladly answer it. (This goes for everyone else too, of course). I enjoy teaching Persian and I'm bummed the forum is totally inactive these days. I don't know what else to do to increase activity, but the rest of Unilang can consider this a PSA: come to me with your Persian questions, no matter how basic or trivial you might think they are, and I will answer them.
Vlürch wrote:Maybe, but eventually it would replace every language. That's already noticeably happening with English. As languages become more influenced by English, the threshold to simply switching to English gets lowered, and eventually non-Anglophone countries will declare themselves Anglophone countries. It hasn't happened yet, but in a handful of decades...
Vlürch wrote:I consider the ability to make sense and be theoretically correct enough for a language to have more or less free word order, even if it sounds unnatural. Basically, as long as the meaning remains the same if the order of words is changed (regardless of slightly different nuances), the word order can't really be said to be fixed.
Vlürch wrote:linguoboy wrote:It's quite easy to produce an unnatural-sounding sentence in English; just move around a bit the adverbs. One of the hardest things to explain to learners (since never it was something explicitly taught in my English grammar classes) is to put the adverbs where. It can change sometimes the meaning, but just it's jarring mostly.
But it's still understandable, especially if there's a pattern to the mistakes that you can pick up on. I'm pretty sure that's the case with every language, but in English you'd never know if it was intentional/instinctional for whatever reason (a regional thing, a certain subculture's thing, etc.) or influence from the speaker's native language.
Vlürch wrote:Most people would almost certainly not go on a crusade to point out all those mistakes because English is the global lingua franca, so it's expected that people who aren't native speakers might make mistakes. With other languages, learners would most likely not be treated with that kind of understanding...
linguoboy wrote:In a handful of decades, what? English was already a major lingua franca before the Second World War. How many non-Anglophone countries have become Anglophone countries in the last hundred years?
linguoboy wrote:A pidgin of a language is not the same as the language itself.
linguoboy wrote:There are "mistakes" which are easily recognised as regional variations (e.g. "might could", positive anymore, double negation) and those which are quite clearly non-native (e.g. substitution of "many/much" for "a lot", confusion of "still/already/yet").
linguoboy wrote:I don't think you can safely make that generalisation. Lots of native English-speakers can be quite rigid about usage even from other native speakers, much less non-natives.
Vlürch wrote:If kids become isolated from the real world already in the first grade or earlier and communicate online in English to the point where it'll feel more natural even among their peers in real life, their community will probably become fully Anglophone in two or three generations because their parents die and then their own children will be taught English instead of their parents' original language.
Vlürch wrote:linguoboy wrote:A pidgin of a language is not the same as the language itself.
Would it really be considered a pidgin if the only difference from the standard language was in word order, though?
Vlürch wrote:My mum got me the super expensive Arabic dictionary as a birthday present (I'm turning 24 tomorrow), and also a small Italian dictionary! I'll definitely have more motivation to learn Arabic now, and also bits of Italian...
ceid donn wrote:Doing Welsh practice on Duolingo before having my morning caffeine
md0 wrote:What does "Oriental" denote in English btw? In Greek it would be Middle Eastern and/or Arab.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest