BTW, I'm aware of all the mistakes I have typed in the reply above. Gimme a break. ;)
Which languages are dying in Europe?
Occitan (Aranese) is better protected in Catalonia than in France. Even though it is only spoken in one tiny enclave (Aran Valley) it is official in ALL of Catalonia. On the other hand it is much more widely spoken in France and has no official status. What fascists!
Ei ua vergonha qu'occitan non a estat oficiau er eth país a on ei largaments parlat.
Even though it is only spoken in one tiny enclave (Aran Valley) it is official in ALL of Catalonia
Occitan is protected by Spain, Catalonia is not a state.
Occitan is protected by Spain, Catalonia is not a state.
<<Maybe, but many people from the west, Amsterdam, Rotterdam etc have serious difficulties with us from the north-east. (Netherlands). Also our Low-Saxon grammar is different. I'd even say it's closer in pronunciation to German than Dutch>>.
Swedes have difficulties with spoken Danish (especially with Yutish dialect) ,but haven't with Norwegian. French have difficulties with Walloon (langue-lingadje),but Walloon sometimes is treating as a French dialect.
I think,that Limburgish Dutch pronuncation is more closer to High German (ich-ik) than to Standard Dutch.If You live in the Netherlands,You know better.
Swedes have difficulties with spoken Danish (especially with Yutish dialect) ,but haven't with Norwegian. French have difficulties with Walloon (langue-lingadje),but Walloon sometimes is treating as a French dialect.
I think,that Limburgish Dutch pronuncation is more closer to High German (ich-ik) than to Standard Dutch.If You live in the Netherlands,You know better.
The Netherlands are the nether regions of Europe. Neanderthals abound in that ungodly domain.
«antidutch Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:07 pm GMT
The Netherlands are the nether regions of Europe. Neanderthals abound in that ungodly domain. »
Better ungodly than retarded. And apparently you didn't know our government is Christian? Haha, loser.
The Netherlands are the nether regions of Europe. Neanderthals abound in that ungodly domain. »
Better ungodly than retarded. And apparently you didn't know our government is Christian? Haha, loser.
Frisian is not dying. Frisian is expanding more and more. It is teached in primary schools and parts of Groningen are getting more and more Frisian and Low-Saxon is disappearing!!
«Swedes have difficulties with spoken Danish (especially with Yutish dialect) ,but haven't with Norwegian. French have difficulties with Walloon (langue-lingadje),but Walloon sometimes is treating as a French dialect.
I think,that Limburgish Dutch pronuncation is more closer to High German (ich-ik) than to Standard Dutch.If You live in the Netherlands,You know better. »
Limburgish is seen as a separate language by several people. I cannot understand Limburgish, where German is kinda easy. Limburgish erm.. doesn't look like German that much I think but it is more German than Dutch to my opinion. I know Limburgish is a tonal language and well I can understand written Limburgish but spoken it is just.. weird
I think if it comes to similarities to German I'd make this:
1Low-Saxon
2Limburgish
3Frisian
4Dutch
5English
And If I'd compare to English:
1Frisian
2Dutch
3Low-Saxon
4Limburgish
5.German
«Swedes have difficulties with spoken Danish (especially with Yutish dialect) ,but haven't with Norwegian. French have difficulties with Walloon (langue-lingadje),but Walloon sometimes is treating as a French dialect.
I think,that Limburgish Dutch pronuncation is more closer to High German (ich-ik) than to Standard Dutch.If You live in the Netherlands,You know better. »
Limburgish is seen as a separate language by several people. I cannot understand Limburgish, where German is kinda easy. Limburgish erm.. doesn't look like German that much I think but it is more German than Dutch to my opinion. I know Limburgish is a tonal language and well I can understand written Limburgish but spoken it is just.. weird
I think if it comes to similarities to German I'd make this:
1Low-Saxon
2Limburgish
3Frisian
4Dutch
5English
And If I'd compare to English:
1Frisian
2Dutch
3Low-Saxon
4Limburgish
5.German
<<Better ungodly than retarded. And apparently you didn't know our government is Christian? Haha, loser. >>
I meant ungodly in a rather metaphorical sense...
To all those atheists out there trying to prove the falsity of God, look no further, for the proof you seek is the very existence of the Netherlands. Surely no God would be so vindictive as to condemn his subjects to dwell in such a loathsome expanse of utter wretchedness?
I meant ungodly in a rather metaphorical sense...
To all those atheists out there trying to prove the falsity of God, look no further, for the proof you seek is the very existence of the Netherlands. Surely no God would be so vindictive as to condemn his subjects to dwell in such a loathsome expanse of utter wretchedness?
«CommonAswhole Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:09 am GMT
Indeed. What's so bad about not believing in a god? »
Not believing is only a plus.
Oftenly wars are about religion
Believers are oftenly attacked if someone does something that could harm their prophet, Jesus or whatever, while they also could think: "haha, he doesn't believe, he will find out later!" (If their God would be that powerful)
Religions make science die. Because they can declare everything to something in their holy book
Religions harm peoples own life and their decisions and can make life a hell. Like the pope did with that Italian girl who was in coma for 17 years or so.. She doesn't wake up anymore, and without the machinery we have nowadays she wouldn't survive at all and than she would've died back then.
I just say: Live and let live.
If I don't believe in a God and do whatever I like, well let me do that.
If you believe in a God I won't be attacking your style of life, only if you have false arguments about something while science has discovered better evidence I can debate with you.
Indeed. What's so bad about not believing in a god? »
Not believing is only a plus.
Oftenly wars are about religion
Believers are oftenly attacked if someone does something that could harm their prophet, Jesus or whatever, while they also could think: "haha, he doesn't believe, he will find out later!" (If their God would be that powerful)
Religions make science die. Because they can declare everything to something in their holy book
Religions harm peoples own life and their decisions and can make life a hell. Like the pope did with that Italian girl who was in coma for 17 years or so.. She doesn't wake up anymore, and without the machinery we have nowadays she wouldn't survive at all and than she would've died back then.
I just say: Live and let live.
If I don't believe in a God and do whatever I like, well let me do that.
If you believe in a God I won't be attacking your style of life, only if you have false arguments about something while science has discovered better evidence I can debate with you.
«Paul Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:26 am GMT
<<It is teached ...>>
*taught »
I thought so, but then I just went to Google to see the number of hits on 'teached' because I weren't sure about taught and 'teached' seemed reliable looking at the number of hits :(.. Damn
<<It is teached ...>>
*taught »
I thought so, but then I just went to Google to see the number of hits on 'teached' because I weren't sure about taught and 'teached' seemed reliable looking at the number of hits :(.. Damn
12345 Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:31 am GMT
<<because I weren't sure>>
*I wasn't
<<because I weren't sure>>
*I wasn't
Why is I weren't incorrect then?
As far as I know "I were" is the formal form, where "I was" is informal.
I were there
I was there
Both mean the same.
So can you explain why "I weren't" is incorrect?
As far as I know "I were" is the formal form, where "I was" is informal.
I were there
I was there
Both mean the same.
So can you explain why "I weren't" is incorrect?