A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Solutions
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bill Cosby - NAACP leaders stunned by remarks of prominent comedian



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #481  
Old June 2nd 04, 07:56 PM
Circe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob LeChevalier wrote:
Holger Dansk wrote:
Their language is no more primitive than yours, of course.


I didn't live a thousand years ago.


Language a thousand years ago was no more primitive than it is
today. (Latin was big some 2000 years ago, of course).

And, purely as a data point, it is a well-known linguistic fact that
languages progress from complex to simple. Thus, the more primitive a
language, the more complex it is.
--
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


  #482  
Old June 2nd 04, 07:58 PM
Herman Rubin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
Holger Dansk wrote:
The Greeks put vowels in the alphabet which made language a lot more
useful.


Are you claiming that Hebrew, the language of the Bible, and Arabic,
the language of the Qur'an, are not "useful"?


The introduction of vowels into the alphabet, made separately
at least by the Greeks and the Indians, made the alphabet more
suitable for Indo-European languages. One can get by in the
Semitic languages rather well without them.

The Greeks mainly converted consonants and semi-vowels into
full vowels; the Indians added a new set of letters. That
this is needed in Indo-European languages can be attested by
the East European Jews converting some of the consonants into
vowels for Yiddish, which is mainly a dialect of German.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #483  
Old June 2nd 04, 08:11 PM
Fletch F. Fletch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Circe wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
Holger Dansk wrote:
Their language is no more primitive than yours, of course.

I didn't live a thousand years ago.


Language a thousand years ago was no more primitive than it is
today. (Latin was big some 2000 years ago, of course).

And, purely as a data point, it is a well-known linguistic fact that
languages progress from complex to simple. Thus, the more primitive a
language, the more complex it is.


This comports well with intuition. One wouldn't expect early attempts at
languages to be as efficient as later ones. Much like systems of numbers I
imagine. I sure am glad that I didn't have to use Roman numerals in my math
classes.

Slainte,
Fletch


  #484  
Old June 2nd 04, 09:12 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"Fletch F. Fletch" wrote:

You do realize that there are black people who are far smarter than you,
right? How does that square with your beliefs? Do you look down on even
those who are your intellectual superiors?


There are a few under-age-25 drivers who are safer than most over-age 25
drivers, but that doesn't keep the insurance companies from charging
higher rates to the younger group. Insurance companies just
go by the *Group_Statistics*. You should adjust your dealingz
with DAFNz by the same approach; you don't have the resources to
check them all out...
  #485  
Old June 2nd 04, 09:13 PM
Holger Dansk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:08:55 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
wrote:

Any leisure time was probably spent sitting on a termite mound
saying "muhfugger". (in their primitive language, of course)


Their language is no more primitive than yours, of course.


What an enormous chip you have on your shoulder. I'm trying to tell you
that they did not use the noise, "muhfugger" when they were in Africa.
Muhfugger is not a language but they spoke differently.

Holger

http://www.mindspring.com/~holger1/holger1.htm
  #486  
Old June 2nd 04, 09:19 PM
Holger Dansk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 14:42:58 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
wrote:

Holger Dansk wrote:
The Greeks put vowels in the alphabet which made language a lot more
useful.


Are you claiming that Hebrew, the language of the Bible, and Arabic,
the language of the Qur'an, are not "useful"?


I'm not claiming anything. I'm stating the fact that the Greeks were
the first people to put vowels in language. Prior to that time, it was
all consonants in all languages. With vowels, they could make more
words and do more thinking. (We think with words.) This gave them an
advantage over other civilizations.

http://www.translexis.demon.co.uk/new_page_2.htm

lojbab


Holger

http://www.mindspring.com/~holger1/holger1.htm
  #487  
Old June 2nd 04, 09:33 PM
Circe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Holger Dansk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 14:42:58 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
wrote:

Holger Dansk wrote:
The Greeks put vowels in the alphabet which made language a lot
more useful.


Are you claiming that Hebrew, the language of the Bible, and
Arabic, the language of the Qur'an, are not "useful"?


I'm not claiming anything. I'm stating the fact that the Greeks
were the first people to put vowels in language. Prior to that
time, it was all consonants in all languages. With vowels, they
could make more words and do more thinking. (We think with
words.)


Um, are you suggesting that Greek was the first language to have vowels in
it? Do you honestly think that everyone up to that time manage to speak in
nothing but consonants? All the Greeks did was to assign symbols to the
vowels for *writing* them--they didn't *invent* the vowel sound! Earlier
written languages (including Linear B, which was a Greek script) either used
a system of symbols for syllables (which, by definition, *include* a vowel
sound) or wrote symbols only for the consonants on the theory that any
native speaker would presume the vowel sounds by virtue of familiarity with
the language.
--
Be well, Barbara
Mom to Sin (Vernon, 2), Misery (Aurora, 4), and the Rising Son (Julian, 6)

Aurora (in the bathroom with her dad)--"It looks like an elephant, Daddy."
Me (later)--"You should feel flattered."

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


  #488  
Old June 2nd 04, 11:36 PM
Bob LeChevalier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Holger Dansk wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:08:55 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
wrote:

Any leisure time was probably spent sitting on a termite mound
saying "muhfugger". (in their primitive language, of course)


Their language is no more primitive than yours, of course.


What an enormous chip you have on your shoulder. I'm trying to tell you
that they did not use the noise, "muhfugger" when they were in Africa.
Muhfugger is not a language but they spoke differently.


The point remains that you made a judgement-in-ignorance about a
language you know nothing about, labeling it "primitive". You also
have no clue whether they have a 'noise meaning "muhfugger"'

lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:
http://www.lojban.org
  #490  
Old June 2nd 04, 11:41 PM
Bob LeChevalier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Holger Dansk wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 14:42:58 -0400, Bob LeChevalier
wrote:
Holger Dansk wrote:
The Greeks put vowels in the alphabet which made language a lot more
useful.


Are you claiming that Hebrew, the language of the Bible, and Arabic,
the language of the Qur'an, are not "useful"?


I'm not claiming anything. I'm stating the fact that the Greeks were
the first people to put vowels in language. Prior to that time, it was
all consonants in all languages.


Not Chinese.

With vowels, they could make more words and do more thinking.


Nonsense.

By that argument, a language with twice as many vowels or twice as
long words could do more thinking (and there are languages that fit
each category).

You are expressing a VERY naive and extreme form of the Sapir-Whorf
hypothesis, something I am well-informed on, and showing yourself to
be an idiot.

lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:
http://www.lojban.org
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A first 'Parker Jensen' bill advances wexwimpy Foster Parents 0 February 8th 04 07:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.