Aside from dialect divergence and fragmentation, the overall trend I see in English has not been one towards "simplicity" (that is, analyticness) at all, but rather one towards further cliticization, agglutination, and eventually fusionality. The reason for this is that the informal spoken language is already more cliticized than the formal language and certain aspects of English have already taken on almost fusional characteristics (an example from more less informal language is "won't", for instance) since the Early New English period, especially in the spoken language. Anything I have seen seems to only point further in this direction, with no real signs of any increased movement towards analyticity besides the occasional strong verb being replaced with a weak form or the occasional irregular plural (especially borrowed ones) being replaced with a more regular form.
what will be the development tendency of English?
Previous page Pages: 1 2
"Doubtless English is becoming more and more simple"
On what do you base this statement?
"Fewer inflections is universally acknowledged as a sign of simplicity in linguistics."
And on what do you base this assertion?
I suppose what we need here is an explanation of just what you think "simplicity" means in linguistic terms.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Do u really need others to point out this common sense to u?
On what do you base this statement?
"Fewer inflections is universally acknowledged as a sign of simplicity in linguistics."
And on what do you base this assertion?
I suppose what we need here is an explanation of just what you think "simplicity" means in linguistic terms.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Do u really need others to point out this common sense to u?
"Do u really need others to point out this common sense to u?"
What we need is for "u" to provide an objective statement on what you think "simplicity" means in language terms.
What we need is for "u" to provide an objective statement on what you think "simplicity" means in language terms.
What we need is for "u" to provide an objective statement on what you think "simplicity" means in language terms.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07VI is simpy beating around the bush
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07VI is simpy beating around the bush
"07VI is simpy [sic] beating around the bush"
Not at all. If you have a language with no inflection, it does not get "simpler."
If there is no inflection, word order must become paramount and, as a result, very complex and relatively fixed in nature.
For a non-native speaker, learning all the myriad requirements for word order in another language can be just as daunting as memorizing lists of conjugations and inflections. Particularly if the word order of that language is entirely different to one's own.
That's hardly "simpler."
Not at all. If you have a language with no inflection, it does not get "simpler."
If there is no inflection, word order must become paramount and, as a result, very complex and relatively fixed in nature.
For a non-native speaker, learning all the myriad requirements for word order in another language can be just as daunting as memorizing lists of conjugations and inflections. Particularly if the word order of that language is entirely different to one's own.
That's hardly "simpler."
Previous page Pages: 1 2