Language rating...?

Travis   Friday, April 15, 2005, 16:20 GMT
I wasn't really speaking about Dutch orthography and pronunciation above, but primarily morphology, syntax, and usage, and actually, from what it looks like, Dutch orthography is /logically/ rather simple, once one learns the details of it (even though it may be hard to properly pronounce when simply guessing, unlike German, due to the highly context-dependent nature of how vowels are specified in Dutch orthography, and also because most people, at least here, are likely to have more passive exposure to German words than to Dutch words), even though the actual sounds represented represent a far more complex phonological system than that in German. On the other hand in German, for monosyllabic words, one must often just /remember/ what the appropriate vowel length should be, and many things in how various German words are /written/ are relatively arbitrary, such as whether vowels are to be elongated with doubling or a following "h", even though these things don't make it harder to /read/ German, but rather require one to often remember how words are exactly spelled, as the same /phonemes/ can be written multiple ways.
Sander   Friday, April 15, 2005, 16:57 GMT
Ive always learned that languages are never logical...

Still you finding Dutch simple,it has got to do with the fact that you speak..english and german.(people don't like it butn there is very strong clues that english originated from dutch,instead of having a "mutual ancestor, what do you think?!)
Travis   Friday, April 15, 2005, 18:04 GMT
Well, my view of the relationship between English and Dutch is that both are descended from the group of West Germanic dialects which were not affected by the Second Germanic Sound Shift, that is, the "low" West Germanic dialects, but they come from different branches of the "low" West Germanic dialects, with Dutch being from the Low Franconian branch of such, albeit with possible Low Saxon influence, depending on the dialect in question, and Old English being most immediately related to Old Frisian and Old Saxon, rather than Old Dutch, and remaining very close to Old Frisian into the Middle English period, but diverging from what would become the modern Frisian languages with the Early Modern English period.

However, there has been coevolution throughout all of the "low" West Germanic languages, to varying degrees, towards loss of inflection and analyticity, which has been most reflected in Afrikaans and English, and is also shown in Low Saxon, Dutch, and West Flemish, and to a somewhat lesser extent in the Frisian languages. Such has resulted in them all remaining grammatically rather close together, even though they were all far more synthetic and inflecting when they initially diverged from each other than they are today, and has resulted in them overall being more analytic and less inflecting than the High German dialects, which together have tended towards the preservation of inflection and case usage. On the other hand, though, Upper Allemanic dialects, of which Schwyzerdütsch is the most notable group, have lost much of their case system, even to the point of reducing such to a just a common/dative case system, outside of pronouns, where a nominative/accusative/dative case system is preserved.
Sander   Friday, April 15, 2005, 19:17 GMT
=>on the dialect in question, and Old English being most immediately related to Old Frisian and Old Saxon, rather than Old Dutch, and remaining very close to Old Frisian into the Middle English period, but diverging from what would become the modern Frisian languages with the Early Modern English period.<=

Well...in that time you had 2 kinds of dutch....northern and southern...southern was more frankish and the Nothern was more saxon.Modern Dutch is a blend of those to (but a slight bit more towards frankish).Really if you look at texts of old-dutch and old-english you couldent tell the difference.In fact the oldest Dutch text was found in a monestary in Kent.It was thought to be the oldest english text!

(For all the non-experts....the franks arren't the modern french.)

(And saxons arren't the same as the anglo-saxons)
JJM   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 07:15 GMT
"Ive [sic] always learned that languages are never logical..."

While every language has its own particular grammatical idiosyncracies - which may seem illogical - every language is logical AS A WHOLE (the sum is greater than the parts).

If a language were not "logical," it would be impossible to use it to communicate.
Sander   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 07:24 GMT
=>While every language has its own particular grammatical idiosyncracies - which may seem illogical - every language is logical AS A WHOLE (the sum is greater than the parts).<=

A language is never logical,especially foreighn ones.Math,now that is logical...but languages.....no way.
Someone   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 07:27 GMT
It depends on how you define "logical".
Sander   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 09:23 GMT
I think I just gave a pretty good example,of what "logical" means to me.
Kirk   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 09:43 GMT
I would beg to differ, Sander. Human language in general is full of logic. As JJM pointed out, if they weren't, communication would be doomed. Altho natural language isn't always consistent (in the way we'd expect math or a computer language to be), that doesn't mean that languages aren't logical.
Sander   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 09:46 GMT
A language can never be logical...but if its unlogiacal it doesn't mean that its impossible to speak.
Cro Magnon   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 13:18 GMT
Languages are semi-logical. They have logical rules, but those rules are often broken, especially in the informal spoken language.
Sander   Saturday, April 16, 2005, 16:36 GMT
No,I mean it in a philosofical kind of way...

Like why is an "apple" called an "apple" and not "qidmjvr" ?!

but 1+1=2 this is never going to change....see what I mean?!
Easterner   Sunday, April 17, 2005, 19:02 GMT
Concerning Dutch vs. German in terms of difficulty, I have found the grammar of German slightly more complex than that of Dutch, while I have been generally more perplexed by Dutch syntax (e.g. word order) and usage in general (it is less predictable than that of German). Therefore, at least for me, the result is very nearly a draw, admitting that it is more difficult to learn Dutch in terms of pronunciation than German.
Sander   Sunday, April 17, 2005, 19:26 GMT
=>Concerning Dutch vs. German in terms of difficulty, I have found the grammar of German slightly more complex than that of Dutch, while I have been generally more perplexed by Dutch syntax (e.g. word order) and usage in general (it is less predictable than that of German). Therefore, at least for me, the result is very nearly a draw, admitting that it is more difficult to learn Dutch in terms of pronunciation than German.<=


Oh Travis!!!! :) I have gained a friend! Many more victories will follow!
John   Monday, April 18, 2005, 03:46 GMT
No,I mean it in a philosofical kind of way...

What?