If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Holger Dansk wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 08:25:52 -0700, "Circe" wrote: If the writer had simply accurately stated that Semitic languages didn't have *written* vowels and that the Greeks put vowels into the *written* language, you might not have been led so far astray. All the Greeks invented was a method of representing a vowel sound with a written symbol. That's what putting vowels in a language is. No, it isn't, but never mind. Written vowels clearly haven't improved your capacity either to think or reason Vowel *sounds*, OTOH, had no need to be invented, since any month-old infant is quite capable of producing them! Of course there was every need for vowels. Of course there is a need for vowels. Every language *has* them. Moreover, vowels *are* represented in syllabic writing systems: the symbol for the syllable "ma", for example, is different than the symbol for the syllable "mu", and therefore, the vowel *does* exist in the written language and *is* represented. It gave the Greeks an advantage because they were able to create new words easier. Again, pure nonsense. The Greeks had a very large vocabulary, that is true. The fact that they had individuals symbols for vowels in their written language has absolutely no relevance to the number of words in the language. If it did, one would expect Latin, which also has vowels, to have at least as many words in its vocabulary as Greek. This is not the case. Latin has a *far* smaller vocabulary then Greek. Word formation has absolutely nothing to do with written language: words are typically formed in the *spoken* language and represented in *written* language only when their meaning and usage becomes accepted in the spoken language. There is no point in committing a word to paper if no one understands or recognizes that word. In order to communicate you have to be able to write words down. No. To communicate, you only have to get your ideas across to another person. To preserve and pass communication and learning on into subsequent generation, you need writing. But communication no more requires writing than eating requires cooking. Moreover, languages which do not have symbols with one-to-one correspondence to vowel and consonant sounds are perfectly capable of communication. Are you now going to claim that the Hebrew Bible is incapable of communicating ideas because it is written in a language that had no written vowels at the time it was committed to paper? That ancient Sanskrit and Egyptian hieroglyphs communicate nothing to us because they have no vowel symbols? That modern Chinese does not "write words down" because it is a syllabic system? With every post, you show yourself to be several thousand times more foolish and ignorant than the "savages" you so denigrate. -- Be well, Barbara All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A first 'Parker Jensen' bill advances | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | February 8th 04 06:29 PM |