I was shocked, that such usefull words, are not useing - but everything is "you" and "your".
thou and thy
Thou and thy mean the same as you and your. What difference would a greater prevalence of two archaic synonyms in spoken English make?
That's exactly why I used it. Because there is no connection, and it makes no sense, but it somehow has
meaning in English
In Portuguese it is 'laranja sanguínea'
In French it is 'orange sanguine'
Are Portuguese and French primitive languages too?
Most languages have nouns, particularly those pertaining to animals, geographical features, etc that appear to be compounds of unrelated words. A butterfly is not a fly coated in butter. If you are so intellectually-lacking that combinations of familiar letters/words render you incapable of comprehending a new term, particularly something as simple as 'blood orange', then I'm afraid it is you that is primitive.
I showed you this time how many possibilites have other language - how many words can you create and give them meaning by your own.
In the place of retel you can put any other word, native or borrow, it doesn't matter. But from any word you can create millions new words.
That means, that language, who can do this, is more developed, and this one, who cannot do that, is more primitive.
But what is analitical method? Some think like that: John loves Mary
but when I write: Mary loves John, it means totally differt thing.
And when I write: Mary John loves or loves John Mary - that means nothing.
In fusional language, it is always very precize and almost always has meaning.
Jan kocha Marię.
Marię kocha Jan.
Kocha Jan Marię.
Kocha Marię Jan.
Jan Marię kocha.
Marię Jan kocha.
Every construction has a meaning and in all cases means
exactly the same. There is no doubts: John loves Mary in
every cases. And we need for this only one vowel!
So which tounge is more usefull, developed, precise, rich,
clear, understandable and advanced? Analitic or fusional?
If your language allows you to rearrange words in sentences in any form, without the meaning ever changing, then that would strike me as a primitive feature.
Mary loves John - this informs us of Mary's feelings for John
John loves Mary - this informs us of John's feelings for Mary
John and Mary love each other - both Mary and John love each other (platonic)
John and Mary are in love - both Mary and John love each other (sexual overtones)
It's not hard to understand.
This examples are showing, that such construcions are in the neandethal cave level
Simple enumerating words which have no meaning
Neanderthals appear to have been rather intelligent and capable of abstract thought. Perhaps that explains why Anglophones are capable of perfectly understanding meaning through intonation, context and the many nuanced words in our huge vocabulary (with its many near synonyms). In England, a person who needs everything spelling out to them in the simplest, most-mathematical of forms would be considered childlike, cretinous or, in your words, 'primitive'.
Perhaps, one day, Poland will achieve relevancy and its language will supplant English as mankind's
lingua franca. Fingers crossed!