<<isn't english made up????????
it's a mix of about everything!!! >>
Arrogance is only....
it's a mix of about everything!!! >>
Arrogance is only....
made up languages
I am agreement with Brennus in regard to Elvish and Quenya. Yes, Loglan lost its momentum due to the internecine conflict with Lojban.
The hostility towards constructed languages is partially due to the followers of these languages and their often "cranky" ideologies, e.g. Esperanto.
Although I am not an Esperantist, still there is a lot to be admired in this language. Esperanto functions as full-fledged language with its own literary culture (it even has native speakers, albeit few in number).
Will a language like Esperanto became the de facto international language? No, the psychological factors against it are too overwhelming. While Esperanto, as community, will undoubtedly continue for decades, maybe centuries among language sectarians.
Few constructed languages are fully functioning languages; exceptions are Esperanto and Ido (cf. Esperanto and / or Ido Vikipedia). However, the reality of these two 'successes' is that they still exist among isolated individuals who cultivate their culture on the Internet.
The best (my own opinion) is Latino sine Flexione (Guiseppe Peano), who advanced a language based on an inflectionless Latin, using the classical language along with Anglo-Latin neologisms. However, it was largely rejected by Latinists and was too cumbersome for individuals not familiar with Latin.
Another unique interlanguage was Neo (Arturo Alfandari) but it has since gone moribund and paucity of information has doomed it to oblivion.
Constructed languages are not truly useful as medium of international communication, but rather survive within tightly knit linguistic sects (cults?), where the mundus operandi is separateness and exclusivity, which defeats the primary function of an international language.
Instead of learning constructed languages, the better language "capital" is to learn a major language, e.g. English, French, Chinese, Arabic, etc.
Re: Learning Esperanto
Esperanto is not an easy language to learn, e.g. agreement (nouns and adjectives), extensive use of the accusative case, complex verbal constructions, and a highly esoteric lexicon. The positive is that for the language enthusiast it is a fun language to study.
Alternative to constructed languages is to work on 'reviving' extinct languages or to bolster threatened languages. This topic is far most interesting and culturally relevant in our global world ... oops village.
The hostility towards constructed languages is partially due to the followers of these languages and their often "cranky" ideologies, e.g. Esperanto.
Although I am not an Esperantist, still there is a lot to be admired in this language. Esperanto functions as full-fledged language with its own literary culture (it even has native speakers, albeit few in number).
Will a language like Esperanto became the de facto international language? No, the psychological factors against it are too overwhelming. While Esperanto, as community, will undoubtedly continue for decades, maybe centuries among language sectarians.
Few constructed languages are fully functioning languages; exceptions are Esperanto and Ido (cf. Esperanto and / or Ido Vikipedia). However, the reality of these two 'successes' is that they still exist among isolated individuals who cultivate their culture on the Internet.
The best (my own opinion) is Latino sine Flexione (Guiseppe Peano), who advanced a language based on an inflectionless Latin, using the classical language along with Anglo-Latin neologisms. However, it was largely rejected by Latinists and was too cumbersome for individuals not familiar with Latin.
Another unique interlanguage was Neo (Arturo Alfandari) but it has since gone moribund and paucity of information has doomed it to oblivion.
Constructed languages are not truly useful as medium of international communication, but rather survive within tightly knit linguistic sects (cults?), where the mundus operandi is separateness and exclusivity, which defeats the primary function of an international language.
Instead of learning constructed languages, the better language "capital" is to learn a major language, e.g. English, French, Chinese, Arabic, etc.
Re: Learning Esperanto
Esperanto is not an easy language to learn, e.g. agreement (nouns and adjectives), extensive use of the accusative case, complex verbal constructions, and a highly esoteric lexicon. The positive is that for the language enthusiast it is a fun language to study.
Alternative to constructed languages is to work on 'reviving' extinct languages or to bolster threatened languages. This topic is far most interesting and culturally relevant in our global world ... oops village.
I just want to say to Sander that English I believe is mixed, because doesn't English borrow other words and sounds from other languages? It does,so that means that it is a mixed language. But that is what I believe because I like to learn different languages and I have noticed that in the languages I know and study, have some of the same words letters and/or sounds like in English. So, that's just what I have to say.
Will this do for a made up language? It is called kontinkieli (kontti language) in Finnish.
The idea is to use word KONTTI (KONT-TI) with every word in a sentence by switching the syllables. A simple example.
Sentence: Anna pusu. (Give a kiss.)
Kontinkieli: Kona antti kosu puntti.
(KONT-TI an-na -> KOna anTTI, KONT-TI pu-su -> KOsu puNTTI)
I haven't heard anyone using it lately, but I think it was something children used to have fun with few decades ago. At least my mom did.
The idea is to use word KONTTI (KONT-TI) with every word in a sentence by switching the syllables. A simple example.
Sentence: Anna pusu. (Give a kiss.)
Kontinkieli: Kona antti kosu puntti.
(KONT-TI an-na -> KOna anTTI, KONT-TI pu-su -> KOsu puNTTI)
I haven't heard anyone using it lately, but I think it was something children used to have fun with few decades ago. At least my mom did.
Beste Fredrik,
I think that Nynorsk isn´t artificial in that sense as Esperanto and Volapük as Aasen derived its structure and vocabulary from Norwegian dialects. Maybe we could say that every literary language is artificial because they are combinations of and compromises between different dialects. Still, Nynorsk relies heavily on the dialects of Vestland, ikke sant?
I think that Nynorsk isn´t artificial in that sense as Esperanto and Volapük as Aasen derived its structure and vocabulary from Norwegian dialects. Maybe we could say that every literary language is artificial because they are combinations of and compromises between different dialects. Still, Nynorsk relies heavily on the dialects of Vestland, ikke sant?
SERBIAN! Made up language, made up history, made up people, made up nationality! Nothing about their language or culture is original! hahaha
ALBUNIAN
Made up language, made up history, made up people, made up nationality!
Before 100 years they didn't have alphabet,they didn't know how to write
they didn't know who they were beyond muslims
Made up language, made up history, made up people, made up nationality!
Before 100 years they didn't have alphabet,they didn't know how to write
they didn't know who they were beyond muslims
lolololololololololol.... i totally thought that you ment Jesus Jesus not that person
hahahah guest you are so retarded! Serbian is made up because Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian is all THE SAME LANGUAGE and you are basically the SAME PEOPLE but with different religions--Orthodox, Muslim, Catholic. Guess what, these religions exist in Albania too, but we still call ourselves ALBANIAN. You however, make up a nationality according to your religion! hahahaha
hehe... this is manipulation for the catholic converted Serbs (Croats)
and the muslim converted Serbs (Bosniaks)
Serbs always have had the same name and no dilusion about their ancestry
On the contrary,Y O U..the ALBOS have manipulated everything.
Pelasgians,Illyrians,Thracians,Etruscans
Shqiptar,Arnavut!!!
Serbs have had always serb-slavic names
Since 1878 with "Rilindja Kombetare"
you made up your noble ancient names
Teuta,Bardhyl etc
and the muslim converted Serbs (Bosniaks)
Serbs always have had the same name and no dilusion about their ancestry
On the contrary,Y O U..the ALBOS have manipulated everything.
Pelasgians,Illyrians,Thracians,Etruscans
Shqiptar,Arnavut!!!
Serbs have had always serb-slavic names
Since 1878 with "Rilindja Kombetare"
you made up your noble ancient names
Teuta,Bardhyl etc
English is NOT a mix of other languages, like Latin, French, Anglo-Saxon, Old Norse, etc. -- English is a distinct language and direct descendant of Anglo-Saxon.
The English VOCABULARY is Anglo-Saxon with admixture of Old Norse, Low German, French, Graeco-Latin, and others...similar to the way the vocabulary of MANY OTHER languages show admixture: Albanian, Korean, Finnish, even LATIN (Latin was heavily influenced by Greek vocab. Does that mean Latin was a mixture of Italic and Greek??? Absurd!), etc. English is no different.
Do not confuse a Language with its Word Stock. They are not synonymous.
This does not make English a mix of those languages...the structure, syntax, morphology of English is still Anglo-Saxon [with Norse influence].
The English VOCABULARY is Anglo-Saxon with admixture of Old Norse, Low German, French, Graeco-Latin, and others...similar to the way the vocabulary of MANY OTHER languages show admixture: Albanian, Korean, Finnish, even LATIN (Latin was heavily influenced by Greek vocab. Does that mean Latin was a mixture of Italic and Greek??? Absurd!), etc. English is no different.
Do not confuse a Language with its Word Stock. They are not synonymous.
This does not make English a mix of those languages...the structure, syntax, morphology of English is still Anglo-Saxon [with Norse influence].
English lost 85% of its original AS words, but how many NEW words are created on AS roots:
foreword (in favor of preface)
handbook (instead of manual)
withdraw
withhold
household; housewife
undertake ("take" <AS<Old Norse)
overdraft
layer; ledger
aftermath
knowledge
stand-by
flight path
meaningful/meaningless
choosy
against; off
foreplay
underhanded
insight[ful]; oversight; hindsight
outlook (instead of preview)
outfit
outcome (in lieu of result)
etc etc etc - this list could go on for a very long time
These and many others count as Anglo-Saxon in English.
The AS element in English is not dead. It is contributing to our words today. The 85% loss rate, though accurate, is a bit misleading.
foreword (in favor of preface)
handbook (instead of manual)
withdraw
withhold
household; housewife
undertake ("take" <AS<Old Norse)
overdraft
layer; ledger
aftermath
knowledge
stand-by
flight path
meaningful/meaningless
choosy
against; off
foreplay
underhanded
insight[ful]; oversight; hindsight
outlook (instead of preview)
outfit
outcome (in lieu of result)
etc etc etc - this list could go on for a very long time
These and many others count as Anglo-Saxon in English.
The AS element in English is not dead. It is contributing to our words today. The 85% loss rate, though accurate, is a bit misleading.
A computerised survey of about 80,000 words in the old Shorter Oxford Dictionary (3rd ed.) was published in Ordered Profusion by Thomas Finkenstaedt and Dieter Wolff (1973) that estimated the origin of English words as follows:
* Langue d'oïl, including French and Old Norman: 28.3%
* Latin, including modern scientific and technical Latin: 28.24%
* Other Germanic languages (including words directly inherited from Old English): 25%
* Greek: 5.32%
* No etymology given: 4.03%
* Derived from proper names: 3.28%
* All other languages contributed less than 1%
Other estimates have also been made:
* French, 40%[3]
* Greek, 13%[4]
* Anglo-Saxon (Old English), 10%[5]
* Danish, 2%[6]
* Dutch, 1%[7]
* And, as about 50% of English is derived from Latin--directly or otherwise--[8] another 10 to 15% can be attributed to direct borrowings from that language.
http://www.answers.com/topic/english-language
* Langue d'oïl, including French and Old Norman: 28.3%
* Latin, including modern scientific and technical Latin: 28.24%
* Other Germanic languages (including words directly inherited from Old English): 25%
* Greek: 5.32%
* No etymology given: 4.03%
* Derived from proper names: 3.28%
* All other languages contributed less than 1%
Other estimates have also been made:
* French, 40%[3]
* Greek, 13%[4]
* Anglo-Saxon (Old English), 10%[5]
* Danish, 2%[6]
* Dutch, 1%[7]
* And, as about 50% of English is derived from Latin--directly or otherwise--[8] another 10 to 15% can be attributed to direct borrowings from that language.
http://www.answers.com/topic/english-language