Beauty Of Language

greg   Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:27 pm GMT
En français, la place de l'adjectif peut être variable : <une femme belle> & <une belle femme>.
Yann   Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:45 pm GMT
Greg, it's true but I have the feeling that we often prefer one order depending on the word.

For exemple: « verts paturages » (lit. « greens pastures » ) sounds better than « paturages verts, » (lit. « pastures green » ) while « un vert chien » (lit. « a green dog » ) would just not sound write.

I also find funny that we say « petite taille » (lit. « small size » ) and « grande taille » (lit. « big size » ) , but « taille moyenne! » (lit. « size medium » ).
Yann   Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:54 pm GMT
greens pastures -> green pastures
Sander   Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:59 pm GMT
=>En français, la place de l'adjectif peut être variable<=

When I learned French, I learn the place depended on 'exceptions' not 'peut être's ;-)
ganför   Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:00 pm GMT
Greg don't you think your attitude is a little bit ridiculous? always writing in french cause you're angry with some antimooner...
Yann   Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:32 pm GMT
« When I learned French, I learn the place depended on 'exceptions' not 'peut être's »

Well there are cases where you have a choice and cases were you don't.

As I said earlier both « verts paturages » and « paturages verts » are correct, but the second doesn't sound right to me.
« Belle femme » sounds better than « femme belle » too.
However « cheval rapide » and « rapide cheval » sound both fine to me.

In books, adjective are often put before the noun to create symetry.
E.g: « un ciel bleu au dessus de verts paturages » (lit. « a sky blue above green pastures » ).

However in the following cases you don't have a choice: « petite taille, » « grande taille, » « taille moyenne, »
And I think — but I'm not sure — that you don't have a choice in this cases too: « mois suivant, » « mois précédent. »
Adam   Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:24 pm GMT
"Greg don't you think your attitude is a little bit ridiculous? always writing in french cause you're angry with some antimooner... "

I've said precisely the same thing to Greg many times.

But you have to remember that Greg is French - so he hates writing or speaking any language that isn't French and, because he's French, he tends to go in a sulk for a few weeks if someone has done something nasty to him.
Adam   Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:34 pm GMT
"ok see i ve been on to learning and knowing some other languages butasfarasmy knowledge is concerned i found english one of the most splendid means of expression in the world.
Im not saying that all other languages are wague or dull, no cuz each and every language has its own beauty and is marvelous in its own sense.
But we should remember that we all in this world are somehow, someway connected to english.
And atleast to my knowledge the most appreciated music on earth would be English(mostly us music)
I just need to share with those who agree to my above mentioned point of view, this that why english is a lovely language.
And i believe itis beacuse
--------------it is the most gourgeous form of speech, english when its spoken is very entertaining, easy going, courteous,it is indeed a sign of happiness, joy ,prosperity, when spoken in original form contains the least aggressive expressions as farasmy knowledge is concerned.'
lolzzzzzzzz redheads plz dont comment.............. "


I would say that English is the most beautiful language in the world.

Unlike German and Dutch, English doesn't have huge, ugly compounds of words, formed by joining four or five words together. It forms word compunds, but usually only two small words joined together in a neater way - "handbook", "football", "sunshine", etc. Nothing that produces an ugly tongue-twister of 25 letters.

Unlike Czech, it doesn't have too many consonants and too few vowels. Unlike Finnish, it doesn't have too many vowels and too few consonants. (Finnish actually borrowed consonants from Czech to get rid of its shortage.)

A pop song sung in English sounds a lot better than it would be if it was sung in French, Swedish or any other language.
Uriel   Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:38 pm GMT
Actually, greg writes very well in English.
Sander   Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:09 pm GMT
=>But you have to remember that Greg is French - so he hates writing or speaking any language that isn't French and, because he's French, he tends to go in a sulk for a few weeks if someone has done something nasty to him.<=

Greg hasn't spoken in English since the forum restarted so this comment is utter crap.
Travis   Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:27 pm GMT
>>Unlike German and Dutch, English doesn't have huge, ugly compounds of words, formed by joining four or five words together. It forms word compunds, but usually only two small words joined together in a neater way - "handbook", "football", "sunshine", etc. Nothing that produces an ugly tongue-twister of 25 letters.<<

Oh, it most definitely does, it is just that most compounds are *written out* as separate words or as being hyphenated than being just single words in English orthography; it is still clear, though, from English phonology, in particular with respect to how stress is handled in compound words in English, which acts as if they were single words. Of course, the classic example of this is the compound word "White House" (as in *the* White House) versus phrase "white house" (as in a house that happens to be white), where the former word receives a single primary stress on "white", while the latter phrase receives two primary stresses, one on "white" one on "house", with that on "house" generally being stronger than that on "white".
Yann   Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:55 pm GMT
Those who are so concerned (?) about the speaking French of Greg will find the reason here: http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t115.htm

« je boycotterai l'usage de la langue anglaise aussi longtemps que cette honteuse séparation entre celle-ci et le "reste" des langues ne sera pas abolie. J'écrirai donc en français (ou en allemand ou en espagnol) dans la section réservée à l'anglais même si cela doit me coûter une exclusion définitive. »

Rough translation:

« I will boycott the use of the English language [in Antimoon] as a long as this shameful separation between said language and the "rest" of the languages will not be abolished. Thus, I shall write in French (or German or Spanish) in the English pages even if it may cause me to be banned permanently. »
Damian in Edinburgh   Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:58 pm GMT
The English Language has developed, like most others, over the centuries and in the process has been enriched by the incorporation of words into it's vocabulary from so many other tongues.

As a result it has amassed a huge vocabulary and, I think it's fair to say, one of the most extensive of all Languages. It contains more synonyms than most others, and means of expression that appear to be the same but which carry just a shade of difference depending on context.

All Languages are beautiful in their own way, and I suppose most people would say that their own was "the most beautiful". It depends how you define "beautiful"...sound, accent, words used, how they are pronounced and all the rest of it.

I would say that English is, or can be if spoken well, a Language that rolls off the tongue easily...like quicksilver (not that it's advisable to have quicksilver near your tongue) and without the more harsh sounds of other Languages. It's a very practical Language and as a result it is "beautiful" from the point of view of business, commerce and everything in that direction. It can of course be "beautiful" in matters of the heart...romantic poetry and literature and the like.

The Romance Languages, however, will always have the edge over English when it comes to the "Language of Love and Passion".

For me though, English is the most "beautiful"...in every way. I admit that because I am very biased.......I am deeply in love with my Language.....English.....my version of it. I have the deepest respect for all other versions of it as well.
Treebeard   Tue Nov 08, 2005 11:01 pm GMT
I think that when trying to explain grammar connection between French and English (including in this also the "Greg plot", concerning his style of writing), you have lost the main idea of the topic. It isn't "Origins of English" or any other connected with grammar. It is "Beauty of Language". In my opinion it isn't place for considering grammar rules, but for expressing our OPINIONS. I intentialy capitalized the word OPINIONS.
<< <<Still, there are many other languages in the world that fit the descriptions of "pretty", "musical" or "lyrical" better than English>>

That's entirely subjective.>>
Don't you think, that this topic requires expressing subjective points of view??? I think it does, and what's more it's the only way to analize it precisely.


Coming back to the topic.

Some years ago I'd been learning Russian. It's "soft", "melodic" language (opposite to German). French, which I've been learning for last two years proved itself to be even more melodic and soft than Russian. It's a really beautiful language. But after all as the most beautifu languagel i consider English, for ability to express sophisticated ideas, even with quite "simple" vocabulary (as far as I remember someone have compared English with German considering this aspect) and finally for it's fluency, so important in contacts with other people.
Brennus   Tue Nov 08, 2005 11:05 pm GMT
Kirk,

Generally I agree with what you say, especially regarding Korean (It is still basically a Ural-Altaic language) but one caveat regarding this one: "Brennus, it wouldn't matter if 75% of English words were of Celtic origin--the underlying structure of the language is clearly Western Germanic." You don't have an air-tight argument here.

The syntax of English has changed a lot since the Anglo-Saxon period. It has followed an analytical drift that is somewhat reminiscent of Chinese (as pointed out by Bodmer & Hogben in "The Loom of Language" - and by other writers too). On the other hand, German has an archaic grammar which is still much like Old and Middle English, even Latin and Ancient Greek where the verb often comes at the end of the sentence rather than near the beginning like modern English.

Travis,

Altogether, I know where you are coming from and I wouldn't say that you're wrong pure and simple because we are talking about something that is kind of complicated. I've also read some authors who say pretty much the same thing you do . However, if you've read Mario Pei's "Story of Language there is one page in there where he says that many words we think are native English words are actually not native at all. He cites 'cake' and 'jump' as two of them as I remember (from Scandinavian) and 'sure' as another (from Norman French). I think he's right in this regard and one could extend the list even further than he does.

Anyhow, his book can be found in most libraries and used book stores. I wish they would put it on the internet like thay have done with Bodmer and Hogben's "Loom of Language" (1943).