Žinutės: 386
Kalba: English
ceigered (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 08:12:47
johmue (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 10:57:50
razlem:Introducing ambiguities.johmue:So you'd like to have some kind of marker, that tells you wether a verb is transitive or intransitive. This would add an extra syllable to more or less every verb. Quite a bit of an overhead, don't you think?I would have no markers, but make every action ambitransitive.
sudanglo (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 11:53:35
There is so much work to be done before you can turn an idea for a language into a viable language.
This precisely why it is laughable to compare Esperanto with the language projects that came after it, as though they had the same status.
ceigered (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 12:00:41
sudanglo:This precisely why it is laughable to compare Esperanto with the language projects that came after it, as though they had the same status.Please, stop being so god damn condescending with such hyperbolic statements (intentionally or unintentionally written).
Esperanto may have progressed further as a language but that does not give it some sort of divine status that grants such mockery touted around on a public forum as if it's the sensible and correct thing for any intelligent individual to do.
qwertz (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 12:25:27
ceigered:Esperanto definitivly has no divine status. But probably movaduloj will not wanna accept that. I really "hope" that the spirit of the e-o komunuloj will take over that exciting Esperanto language project.sudanglo:This precisely why it is laughable to compare Esperanto with the language projects that came after it, as though they had the same status.Esperanto may have progressed further as a language but that does not give it some sort of divine status.
Btw. Interesting video about the Interlingua folks. (Thanks to KienLi)
T0dd (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 14:14:17
sudanglo:Todd, I think you have admirably hit the nail on the head.No, that's precisely why it's laughable that you persist in insinuating (you've backed away from asserting outright) that Ido and Interlingua aren't languages. People really have done a lot of work on these, over generations, beyond the death of the people who started them. That video of the Interlingua gathering doesn't look very different from the Esperanto gatherings that I've experienced. If you want to claim that we're speaking (and singing) a language but they're not, you can't really expect anything but laughter.
There is so much work to be done before you can turn an idea for a language into a viable language.
This precisely why it is laughable to compare Esperanto with the language projects that came after it, as though they had the same status.
razlem (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 14:42:51
johmue:If you take the verbs out of context, then yes. But this is true of any language. One can not hope to create a language with no ambiguity.razlem:I would have no markers, but make every action ambitransitive.Introducing ambiguities.
johmue (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 15:16:15
razlem:But with less ambiguity than others. That's the philosophy of Esperanto. Create as little ambiguity as possible.johmue:If you take the verbs out of context, then yes. But this is true of any language. One can not hope to create a language with no ambiguity.razlem:I would have no markers, but make every action ambitransitive.Introducing ambiguities.
Your "true for any language" sounds a bit like "There is no 100% security, so why should I care about security issues?"
qwertz (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 16:51:33
Pardon, that probably was something off-topic.
sudanglo (Rodyti profilį) 2011 m. kovas 13 d. 19:06:31
Why do you not find them compelling? Isn't he right.