What have you been smoking??? Every nation or empire requires a common language in order to do business at home and abroad. Greek and Latin was used in ancient times to do business with foreigners from Europe, Africa, and Asia. Europeans, Americans, Latin Americans, Indians, Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese are certainly not going to learn Polish or Lithuanian or Latin!!! They already know English and even German and Spanish! So why would they change language or how are you going to do business with them???
Now I dont know what you are talking about.
I was talking about one language for Europe, and you added Cheneses and others asians.
For what?
If some one of them is knowing english, than when you make spanish one language they will have the same problem if you chose karelian.
So what's a difference?
It should be language for us, not for them.
First of all my friend you need to be careful about saying such things that English is primitive language because it is simply ridiculous. I never heard anyone say English sounds "primitive!"
Not sounds, but his biulding is primitive.
Aspecially grammar and basic vocabulary.
According to grammar:
You can compare english to PIE - you'll see a big diffrence.
You can compare to pragermanic - the same.
To anglosaxonic - the same.
Even to XVIII century english - and if you are english teatcher you should know this!
You are a specialist, so tell me - which one has more complicated structure?
- present day english?
- XVIIth century's?
- anglosaxonic (aenglisc)?
You can compare latin, deutsch, church or old slavonic, even urlaic languages - and
you'll see which language is more developed and which one is less developed.
I can even risk the thesis, that every one language from europe is more developed and
more complicated than english. English in this language panorama is more like tok pisin...
Its obvious from your writing that you had problems learning English. Your grammar is bad and your spelling worse.
Johannes, if you during 24 months of learning polish on your own, without grammar (I don't like it and I dont lern this yet at all - I confess),
without teatcher and withoyt any one who know polish, can learn so many as I did with english during last two years, then you can say
something about correct spelling and grammar errors. Then will see, who better know each others language. I deeply doubt, if you will be
in basic level understand(able) by others. Could you make argument about such deep discuccions as it have place here? I see that people
understand me pretty well, so it is not so horrible
But I know my problems: I make to long sentences, I dont know grammar, and spelling
is so complicated, that even natives make mistakes, who are talking, readng and writing in english whole life. I never wrote in english until
this forum, so - can you do better with polish during two or maybe even three years? I deeply dout. In writing you will be maybe better,
because polish orthography compare to english that is pice of cake.
I am an High School English and History teacher and can tell very easily why you dont like English or think its "primitive": The simple reason is that you are not good at it. I have had thousands of cases of students hating English and/or History simply because they were no good at it. Its simple psychology: when someone is not good at something they deprecate the subject in order to save face.
I know: its human nature
If I would don't like english, I wouldnt learn it. I have no need for that. I'm learning, because I like it.
I know couple of other languages too, so if you can do better... be my guest.
Ad. spelling - as I said, writing on computer is a couse of many mistakes, because you can
press wrong button by accident, or miss him. In polish it is no problem, because you can
uderstand even if every letter are wrong writing. In english one miss letter or one wrong
press button can change everything and make very earsy gibbrish - why? Because words
are not very goog developed. Mostly are build with one sylablle, or two...
Again be careful: If you think English is a "wonderfull (sic) language for slaves"
Maybe not wonderfull, but good, or very good
I am not author of this statement, but my teatcher of german.
I share his opinion. He knew couple of languages in high level...
If you lived in XVII or XVIII centuries and you brought some
slaves from africa (or whatever different culture) you had need
for simple language to communicate with them which they can
quickly learn and understand.
So, maybe this is a reason, who knows...
then there is something wrong with your mind or you have some weird prejudice that I have never heard of.
Don't be so childlish...
I guess, that it must be very hard to hear such humor in america, were even in historical films or fairy tails, you must have negros, hindu and asians...
It is horrible... I am watching film about Cinderella and what I see there? Negros. I watch film about apostles - and what I see? John and some other
apostle are negro, with Mary Magdalene as well... so... this is very hard to hear such kind of digression in such madness enviroment...
Anyone who says English is not fit for international, political, or cultural use is either hopelesly ignorant or insane.
As you can observe in the world, every language is useable. Why? Because is using.
But in disscusion about which language is better, we must lokking for others qualities than only having users.
Maybe its your Polish nationalism?? I know its extreme
No it isn't. Some people called me cosmopolitan.
But that that I speak polish cannot decide that polish is excluded
from options, the same for you, that that you are speaking english,
does not decide, that english is not primitive. It doesn't matter.
Do you Jahannes speak maybe some other, especially
fusional languages on high level?
Only a person who does not fully learn languages will have a hard time "deciphering" a language. I would imagine in the far future some one who knew little or was weak at languages will have a hard time deciphering Polish compared to English.
Don't be stubborn only because you cannot see this what others are seeing.
You are talking like daltonist, who cannot understand, that red and green are two different colours.
I give you one grammar and one lexical example.
I dont rememberwho, but some one was created a thread were he wrod about Bible God.
Whithout even saxon genitive, what is very common in present day english.
In majority languages this would be gibber.
Because what does it mean?
Bible is the God?
Bible is a god?
God is a Bible?
God is in Bible?
Or maybe this is simple enumerating two words: "God and Bible"
God who is described by Bible?
Or maybe Bible whith was writing by God?
It could mean everything.
And this is the same whith
80-90% words in sentences.
The words means nothing.
Only context decide about meaning.
So, I would say, that english is a language like hebrew script.
It could mean everything and nothing. Meaning is determine
by users on very well known context and situation.
Simple with word.
When some one are taking english dictionary and lokking for meaning of some word,
he has a big problem, because one word is equivalent od 10 some times 20 or more
meanings. Comparing this whith lacking of grammar and contextual meaning, some
one, who would not know english witch would be dead for centuries, would be have
big difficulties to understand what is exactly text talking about.
Simple: about word "live" dictonary is giving me only in
basic meaning 22 different
meanings, plus homofon "leave" - 35 meanings - but it is probably not all.
And according to spelling - some one who would be working with dead english
language, would be reading as it is written, not as it is pronaucing. I am always
amazed when english people cannot even read foreign names in simple alfabeth
which they are using. This is terrrible - how it is possible to not now 22-26 letters?
Even Russians can read in latin alphabet, but not Englishmen...
What sense does it make to attack all ethnicity if you don't agree with one person?
And what the heck happened with your friendship guys? Just tone down the epithets.
This is Lebrok quite popular thinking among everyone who learn english... primarly among people whom I know and Knew during my lifetime.
Among other nationalities you can find similar thinking about english.
It is very difficult to uderstand for englishmen, that english is primitive (meaning simple) because if some one don't know any fusional language,
with differet nouns and verbs, with conjugations and declinations, many modes, aspects, couple of different kinds of numbers, and some others
grammar quantities plus with more correct and unequivocal meanings of words, and more developed words not only by lengh but by usefullness
and possibiliets which are n one word who can do whith many suffixes and prefixes dozes of different and new words.
This ship has sailed. If you want to fly planes or ships, you need to understand English; if you want to do computer work, you need to understand English; if you want to negotiate a loan with the Chinese, you'd better either speak Chinese or English. In India it's a type of lingua franca among all the competing languages of the sub-continent, and their mastery of it is one reason they can service communications and computer companies. Even French is only kept alive as a diplomatic language because the French were founding members of NATO and insist upon it. Spanish would have more right to be one of the official NATO languages because so many people speak it around the world, but that's not going to happen either.
Yes, I agree. This is reality.
I was takling theoritacly.
The only difficult thing about it is that it is not written phonetically, but anyone who can memorize combinations of letters can overcome that easily...
Yea, but I think differently: not orthography is hard but spelling is incorrect
I like, when I can see a root of word. I prefer original latin or germanic visual
image (not
ymyD - or something like that
) because even, if I cannot read
I can see what that word can probably means. Seeing words is more important
than reading - even chenese are knowing that, and the same pictograms, can be
reading by many different nationalities, even from different language-families.
Question for everyone who says, that english isn't primitive language.
How many different words in different forms can you create from my
nick, rethel, using only normal present day english, (not old or aenglisc).
Take rethel as a root. How many? :innocent: