Thread 23181650

Why did English lose its inflections but German didn't? Apparently Proto-Indo-European had even more inflections than Latin.

>>23181650 (OP)
No idea but King's English is one of the most beautiful-sounding languages in the world, after French and Italian. Swedish is more beautiful than German and German is more beautiful than Dutch and Dutch is equal with Portuguese, which is the worst-sounding Romance language. Now, another topic that...hey, this isn't politics!

>>23181650 (OP)
Literally Danes, who were occupying England at the time, thought it was too much work.

>>23181650 (OP)
>Apparently Proto-Indo-European had even more inflections than Latin.
How the fuck did a bunch of illiterate people know a ton of moderately difficult grammar rules?
Also, isn’t modern german case and inflection system derived from latin instead of proto-germanic languages due to the medieval and renaissance prevalence of latin as the learned language?

>>23181650 (OP)
German has lost most of its declension, so nouns for the most part don't decline for case anymore. Strongly declining adjectives still do, as do pronouns and determiners, but the former are not used all that often (only when there is no determiner in the noun phrase) and the latter are often the last to lose this sort of declension, e.g. French to this day distinguishes four noun cases for pronouns: il - son - lui - le.
The reason I guess why German retained noun case but most other Germanic languages lost it is because Germany's eastern neighbours do use noun case fairly extensively and Germans settled these lands historically, which would've meant a lot of language contact with languages which to this day retain a Latin-esque 3-gender 6/7-case system.

>>23181653
>How the fuck did a bunch of illiterate people know a ton of moderately difficult grammar rules?
It evolved naturally. Grammar is almost always moderately complex, people just absorb it when they're children.

>Also, isn’t modern german case and inflection system derived from latin instead of proto-germanic languages due to the medieval and renaissance prevalence of latin as the learned language?
No? Why would that be even remotely true? Proto-Germanic had 6 noun cases, so it wouldn't be surprising for some modern Germanic languages to preserve some of them (a much better example being Icelandic btw).

>>23181650 (OP)
Declensions of "i am" in Greek, do you guys even lift?

>>23181650 (OP)
The romans didnt have words for colours retard

>>23181657
Huh, qrd?

>>23181650 (OP)
Gendered inflections are completely retarded. They add almost zero information.

>>23181659
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/513102554/#513112250

>>23181656
I asked Grok to transliterate that into a Romanized version five minutes ago and it's still going.

>>23181661
We have until the heat death of the universe to learn this one word, i think there's a chance.

>>23181659
They make the masculine (grammatical) gender the default one so you can have a legitimate excuse for misgendering trannies
Or, if you want to be more insulting, you can use the neuter one (equivalent of calling a tranny "it", except much worse since you'd use it multiple times)

>>23181662
I think I broke Grok

https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5LWNvcHk%3D_248060c3-0570-497f-a25d-29292375d8fe

sorry elon

>>23181650 (OP)
Then why is it hard for foreign-born non English speakers to not sound foreign?

>>23181658
In greek things werent called green or blue the were called "the shade of the fields" or "the look of the ocean" tranlations just truncate this to colors.

Thats why Nazis argue Octavian was blonde because he is stated as having "hair as the sand"

>>23181659
They convey the same information as all other inflections, for example if you say "the red beads" then you use the plural feminine of red, therefore the next time you say red in that form you don't need to repeat the beads, you can just say red within the same context 10 pages later and everyone will know.

>>23181656
there's more than εἰμί there, there's γίγνομαι, ἔρχομαι, ἵημι, etc... there's many verbs, no just I am

>>23181666
none of this is true in the slightest

>>23181666
They had colour names, just not that many.

leuko - white
melano - black
chloro - green
erythro - red
porphyro - crimson
ochra - ochre
iodes - blue-purple
kyaneo - blue
xantho - shiny, golden
glauco - pastel green

>>23181668
They were all under "i am", check it out.

Agglutinative languages like Finnish seem cool because they have inflections but they're different from the inflections in Latin and German. In Latin and German one ending often has more than one meaning embedded in it, like plural and genitive. And the endings are not always the same. In Finnish each ending has exactly one meaning and it's always the same ending, so you just paste on a string of endings after words to construct the desired meaning, which is much simpler than what you have in Latin.

https://youtu.be/qxOJ4p8e7NQ?si=Ubu4CRsznLZn1joK&t=523

Another interesting thing is this. I thought perhaps analytic languages like Latin were less prone to syntactic ambiguity than analytic languages like English and Swedish, due to all the endings of the former which tell you the relationship between words, so you don't have to guess which word is referring to which word. But Lojban is a constructed language which is designed to have no syntactic ambiguity, and it is an analytic language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban

https://youtu.be/KgxOrTvpWJ4

>>23181670
no, I know ancient Greek, they aren't "I am", ἔρχομαι means to go, ἵημι to send, γίγνομαι to become

>>23181666
>Thats why Nazis argue Octavian was blonde because he is stated as having "hair as the sand"
He was blonde lmao. This was pre-Islamic invasion Italy.

>>23181660
> They had living quarters for workers in the refinery
You forgot punctuation.
> They had living quarters for workers, in the refinery
There you go. Now it’s not le scary ambiguous sentence. A century ago people would include more commas in their writing, to make things clearer. Now they don’t… but that’s not a fault of the language. People are just more ignorant.

>>23181666
>>23181670
Thanks, could anyone tell me where I can learn more about this. Seems very counterintuitive to me, so I’d like to know more.

>>23181660
>>23181674
forgot the second part
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/513102554/#513112558

>>23181652
Basically yeah, old english and old norse were mutually intelligible to some degree so the Danes who ruled England at the time simplified everything for their own ease

>>23181676
If it were modifying “workers”, there’d be no comma.

>>23181675
it's nothing unlike nowadays, some colors are common enough that you have a specific word for it that has become exclusively associated with the color itself, other colors being less important were expressed periphrastically, think for example about the word "orange" in European languages, it largely still carries the original fruit connotation from which it gets the name

>>23181672
Yeah all those words are semantically linked, to become is a future tense of i am, and to go is "to be" somewhere else.

Here's a shorter list with most common ones.
>https://users.sch.gr/ipap/Ellinikos%20Politismos/Yliko/Theoria%20arxaia/eimi.htm

>>23181672

Nope. For instance we only have 2 words for the color blue, the first one we see in Homer is γλαυκός: it means "gleaming, or of the sea". It was also used to describe the eyes of Hera.

A later word is κυάνεος: often used to describe the dark and sometimes dark blue

>>23181680
they aren't, I know exactly what confuses you since you don't know ancient Greek, it's because some forms have a similar spelling, the Attic future of I go being εἶμι, which has a different accent from εἰμί and root, not even used in non Attic dialect
ἵημι too in aoristic and perfect forms can have some realizations resembling the I am verb, but, again, unrelated

>>23181674
>>23181678
I don't think punctuation and stress make up for inflections. I just started learning Latin but in Latin you for example change a noun to show if it's object or subject. "Puella" is "girl" if it's subject. "Puellam" is when it's object. And the adjective which is modifying the noun takes the same ending as the noun it's modifying.

The little girl is calling me.
Parva puella me vocat.

I'm calling the little girl.
Me vocat parvam puellam.

In English it's "the little girl" in both cases.

>>23181681
completely irrelevant statement, point is, neither γλαυκός nor κυάνεος are derived from nouns, an example of that would be e.g κρύσεος, gold-like, that is derived from a noun, χρυσός, gold, or some poetic words like ἐλεφάντινος meaning ivory-like thus very white
point is, both Greeks and Romans had a vocabulary of adjectives indicating color per se just like we do, and others they might derive from nouns if they didn't have the color, just like we do

>>23181683
>The little girl is calling me.
>Parva puella me vocat.
>I'm calling the little girl.
>Me vocat parvam puellam.
I probably said that wrong. "Me" should probably be "ego" in the second sentence.

>>23181682
I know some from school. It's called suppletion, they are using different PIE roots that converged to the same meaning, just check your dictionary for the declensions of εἰμί.

In fact γίγνομαι as the aorist of εἰμί is more logical than in any other language.

>>23181684
Okay, well the only words for color i am aware of are the verb versions. I took 3 years of high school latin so although im no expert but ive seen a fair share of translations.

Can you show me some noun versions for colors that they used.

>>23181685
Google translate says something else. Whatever, I'm a total beginner.

>>23181666
We have some like that:
>Cor-de-rosa (color of rose)=pink
>Cor-de-laranja (color of orange)=orange (duh...)
>Cinzento (ashlike)=grey

>>23181686
I have never encountered γίγνομαι as suppletive of εἰμί in any english or italian references, must be a Greek thing
https://logeion.uchicago.edu/morpho/εἰμί

>>23181650 (OP)
i like etymology

>>23181683
I don’t see how that makes the language necessarily better than English.
Maybe I’m biased, but I find punctuation and stress (especially stress) much more useful than inflection for some purposes.
English is a very stressed language and that quality helps to convey certain things beyond words, the ineffable. Precision can’t get you there, only conveyance of feeling can hint at it. And for that stress is most useful.
Of course, English is more a poet’s language than a philosopher’s language, but both types contemplate the same transpheric things.

>>23181674
>alex arrived at the party with the hookers, bob and steve

>>23181692
>ineffable
No. Either something can be expressed with language or it cannot. Where did I say that Latin is better than English?

>>23181652
Based Danes.

>>23181690
Morpho is a morphological database, it's not a dictionary, use this...
>https://el.wiktionary.org/wiki/εἰμί

>>23181667
"the beads"
Fucking retard thinks we can't do that.

>>23181696
even better, morpho shows you the actual attested forms
look at the english wiktionary and you won't find γίγνομαι as suppletive, neither in Italian ones
γίγνομαι is commonly used by itself in all its three aspects, it's not just some suppletive thing, you can very vaguely imagine it as suppletive of the "i am" verb but it's more like a convention than anything real

>>23181698
>>23181696
https://lsj.gr/wiki/εἰμί
this is the golden standard

>>23181697
>I have some red beads and a red apple. I put the red in your ass.
So tell me which thing is in your ass?

>>23181650 (OP)
You can still do them in English. Latin rules still stand.

>>23181687
you mean Latins? aureus would be the equivalent for gold-like I just mentioned for Greek, deriving from the thing in itself, gold, another maybe would be cinereous, grey, from cinis, ash, caeruleus from caelum, the sky, so light blue
but then you have a bunch of others that don't have any clear derivation from things, like flavus for yellow-ish, albus for white, niger for black, etc...

>>23181699
how do you find the conjugations in that?

>>23181653
>>23181650 (OP)
what is vulgar latin u retards

95% of the plebs spoke vulgar latin

only faglords spoke classic latin with all the faglord grammar rules

>>23181651
Japanese is most beautiful and most hardest to learn in world
English is trash language

>>23181684
Note that χρυσός tended to be used not just for gold but also for copper according to this inscription, indicating that it could also carry the meaning of shiny or gleaming.

>>23181703
it tells you how the verb is used and the principal parts, which, as you should know, are the 6 forms that allow you to conjugate the verb fully in all its forms
the aorist of γίγνομαι given as third principal part of εἰμί is somewhat understandable but calling it suppletive is kind of a stretch considering γίγνομαι is just a fully conjugated verb of its own, like e.g saying ἐθίζω supplies the imperfect aspect of εἴωθα, it kinda does, but then again you won't typically find it as first and second principal parts of εἴωθα

>>23181706
eh that's already much later in period and kinda pointless, Greeks certainly knew copper/bronze and could thus use the adjective specifically if they really wanted to describe that color, like χάλκεος

poetically though you can usually get away with just about anything

I'm going to bed now

>>23181704
>>23181706
>>23181707
Yes, compared to Classical Latin, Vulgar Latin had fewer grammatical rules and a simpler structure. As the everyday spoken language, it naturally evolved away from the more formal, complex literary standard taught to elites.
Here are the key ways Vulgar Latin's grammar was simpler:
Loss of the case system. The most significant change was the gradual disappearance of the complex system of noun cases, which marked a noun's grammatical function by its ending. In its place, Vulgar Latin began to use prepositions and a more fixed word order.
Classical Latin: regis ("of the king," genitive case)
Vulgar Latin: de rege ("of the king")
More fixed word order. Classical Latin could use a variety of word orders because the case endings made the sentence's meaning clear. With the loss of cases, Vulgar Latin adopted a more standard Subject-Verb-Object (SVO) order to maintain clarity, a pattern reflected in modern Romance languages.
Fewer verb forms. Vulgar Latin reduced the number of distinct verb forms. This meant personal pronouns, which were often omitted in Classical Latin because the verb ending specified the subject, became more necessary.
Simplification of genders. Classical Latin had three grammatical genders: masculine, feminine, and neuter. Vulgar Latin simplified this to a two-gender system, with masculine and neuter merging. This is the same system found in most modern Romance languages.
New articles and pronouns. Classical Latin did not have articles ("the," "a"). In Vulgar Latin, demonstrative pronouns like ille ("that") began to be used as definite articles, another feature that would later be solidified in the Romance languages

>>23181705
>agglutinative languages are hard
No, you just tack on endings as I said earlier in the thread which nobody read.
Your endings are always the same and always have one meaning. You just paste on a string of endings in a totally predictable way. Latin the endings are different for different words and each ending has multiple meanings embedded in it.

>>23181704
So? I was comparing German and English. German is an inflected/synthetic language. Nobody watched the video I posted earlier.

https://youtu.be/qxOJ4p8e7NQ

>>23181694
> Either something can be expressed with language or it cannot.
Duh. But there are certain things that need described, whose explanations are better served outside of brute precisions. Perhaps I did not explain my point well enough.
Language is so much more than a petty garden of grammar cases and inflections. It has sound, feeling, cadence, timing to it. It is musical! And in this regard English is a better language than Latin, though not in every regard(—I go into the subjective rather than objective here).
You cannot contain the infinite in a grammar-scaffold. You can only hint at it with feeling, and stress, and the sonic qualities of language, are the best tools for that. The subtle feelings and impressions conveyed by English were admired by Borges for their power; whereas stylists often recommend against the use of Latin loan words, for while they are precise, they are sterile-feeling, bland, lifeless next to English.

>>23181708
That's the case with every language, they all have their registers, formal, conversational, casual, intimate, youthful, poetic etc which can end up becoming their own dialects.

>>23181712
there's the official kangz/kweens english/Spanish etc

then there's the plebtards language which the majority speak

modern schools have forced plebs to adopt faglord we wuz kangz grammarfagism which no one used up until 100 years ago

>>23181711
Language and all that it conveys is divided into grammar, logic and rhetoric. All languages have these aspects. Knowledge of these three subjects is suppressed for the masses. What you're thinking of is rhetoric. There is no dichotomy between rich grammar and rich rhetoric.

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

>>23181711
Also we talked before about this exact thing. Did you even read my reply that time?

https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/512229253/#512241816

https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/512229253/#512245068

Too many inflections are bad because it makes word order less important. This causes your thinking to be less organized.

>>23181714
I never implied a dichotomy between those two; rather that—for certain ends—the rhetorical aspects of language, as you might call them, are more useful, and in my opinion, of a greater richness in English than in Latin. Of course, I am biased, but I believe what I am saying.
>>23181715
Yes, I did, and I object that it should be implied I did not.

>>23181717
You need to back up the statement that English has richer rhetoric than Latin, you haven't done that.

>>23181705
Japanese is very pleasing to my ear in the consistency of rhythm and purity of phonemic pronunciation. However, English is based.

>>23181650 (OP)
>Why did English lose its inflections but German didn't?
Because VIKANGS could only speak Ooga Booga Danish, so they turned Old English into Danish Ebonics.
English Words from VIKANGS include:
>Aloft, anger, are, auk, awesome, awkward, bag, bait, band, bash, bask, bat, berserk, billow, birth, blather, bleak, blend, bloat, bloom, both, brisket, brunt, bulk, bull, cake, call, cart, cast, clip, club, cozy, crawl, crook, crochet, crouch, dangle, dastardly, die, dirt, dregs, dump, egg, filly, fjord, flag, flaw, fleck, fling, floe, flounder, freckle, gable, gag, gang, gap, gasp, gawk, gear, gelding, get, geyser, gift, give, gloat, guest, gust, happy, harsh, haunt, haven, hit, husband, hug, ill, irk, jarl, keg, keel, kick, kidnap, knife, lag, lathe, leg, lift, loan, loft, loose, meek, mink, mistake, muck, muggy, nag, nay, niggard, nudge, oaf, odd, outlaw, plough, prod, race, raft, ragtag, ransack, reef, reindeer, root, rotten, rug, saga, sale, same, scale, scalp, scant, scare, scarf, scathe, scold, seat, seem, ski, skill, skin, skip, skirt, skull, slam, slant, sledge, sleuth, slot, smithy, snub, stain, steak, sway, take, they, thrall, thrift, thrust, thwart, tight, troll, trust, ugly, until, valkyrie, viking, wail, want, weak, whirl, whisk, wile, window, wing, wrong

>>23181651
G'day, brekkie cunt! Finnish literally sounds the best and it is the only one similar to Latin as in Finnish is pronounced exactly as it is written, just like Latin (if you see a word you literally just know how to pronounce it correctly, letters relate to sounds in a very straighforward manner, it's literally the litmus test for languages and only a few pass). Latin aficionados literally listen to Finnish latinists to learn how to pronounce Latin in a more genuine fashion, speaking Latin is literally like a second nature to a Finnish speaking man, we are the only remaining heirs of Rome.

>>23181718
It would be infeasible to do that on here. And in the end it would be subjective anyway.

It mostly comes down to the actual feelings derived from hearing and reading both languages. English is more musical, more stressed, the words have more “texture” and better sonic qualities, etc. etc: which qualities are very important for rhetoric.

Latin is a fine language but it feels more precise and less lively to me, as far as languages go.

I think the characteristics of the peoples who organically developed these languages bear this all out. Romans were a well-organized race, fine logicians and statesmen. English, on the other hand, are more characterized as simple innocent contemplatives, when they are not corrupted.

I actually agree with most of what you say. The point I have been trying to make is: there are ineffable things beyond words, which can only be felt rather than described. You have to get there through the sonic qualities of language and metaphor. This is more the realm of poesy and mysticism, which I feel like languages like English are better suited for.

Again, this is all opinion, not settled.

>>23181650 (OP)
the germanic languages are goyslop tier and take little intelligence to learn and any low iq bog dweller in northern europe could learn it. greek and latin are patrician tier that is why they made up the classical curriculum

>>23181650 (OP)
we also lost our informal pronouns like thou and thy and characters like þ and ð

>>23181722
you feel that way, because you just know english better than Latin. To rephrase: you are deaf to the nuances of Latin because you were not borned into it, you just merely adapted into it.

>>23181724
literally viking letters

>>23181725
Just like Finnish sounds the “best”? ;^)

>>23181726
that is an objective truth, unlike your opinion that Latin lacks "nuance" (when in reality you are just too novice to detect the said "nuances")

Finnish is spoken just like it is written, just like Latin. That alone makes it god tier language, english just can't compete, simple as.

>>23181705
You don't get it, if you speak English you're correct. Reality is perceived in English. Not some fucking " koka desku" confused spastic language, neck yourself in a internet gaming hotel you utter fucking hikikomori, or in English, useless CUNT.

>>23181722
I have no idea what you're talking about. Again, either something can be conveyed with words or it cannot, if it can then grammar, logic and rhetoric apply to those words. We have been deliberately deprived of knowledge of these subjects. That's why nobody knows anything about it now, and it's all very vague to people. They don't want us to know how to parse texts, or how to think. The elite studying grammar, logic and rhetoric, while suppressing the knowledge of these subjects for everyone else is one of the greatest tools they have for enslaving us. Consequently studying them is one of the greatest tools for liberation.

the trivium/how to think/the tools of thought/critical thinking: grammar, logic, rhetoric

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium

>>23181727
I never said that Latin lacked “nuance”, only that English is better sonically and musically. Poetry, which is language in metrical confines, is best with variation, which you get most from stress-timed languages, rather than syllable- or mora-timed ones. This is one way in which English is better than Latin.

I have heard Finnish from a classmate, and I would not consider it the best language. It is grating to the ears. Being spoken as it is written does not redeem it at all.

>>23181721
Finnish is an agglutinative language, Latin is a fusional language. >>23181671

>>23181723
The topic is why German still is an inflectional language while English used to be inflectional but lost all of it over time.

>>23181729
I don’t see what is so confusing.
> either something can be conveyed with words or it cannot
Yes? Who are you saying this to? We all agree!
What I am driving at is where precise description fails, one must communicate the ineffable with metaphor and conveyance of feeling.
A mystic could not give a precise description of what he experienced in euphoria, but he can give a dim hint at it with a poem, like St John of God did.

>>23181730
You literally can't into Latin or Finnish, that is the sole reason you say they lack "nuance" qualities. Literally the fox and the sour grapes type of thing if you catch my drift. I can speak english just fine and unfortunately have to use it almost daily, it's a fubar (fucked up beyond all repair) language, you literally can't know how to say a word you see if you haven't heard somebody say it before, that thing alone disqualifies english from the god tier of languages and condemns it into shit rung lingos, simple as.

>>23181734
That’s a fault of dictionaries and whatnot. The spoken language is still pronounced as it should be—and sounds beautiful.
I can’t say the same for Finnish, which is musically deficient, sounds dead and depressed, as I heard from a Finn.

>>23181731
it literally is not "harder" if separate things have not separate "add-ons" but share some of them instead, like plural and genitive. It's literally the definition of being simpler. The harder way is the Finnish way when different things do not share "add-ons" and so you don't get anything for "free" in the learning phase and you must learn them all.

Finnish and Latin vibe together very well, that is just a fact.

>>23181727
>>23181734
english's chaotic spelling has long been a measure of a person's affluence and education. we intentionally spell latin, greek, french, etc words as they originally are to demonstrate class and tradition. we don't spell physics, orchestra, parliament as fisiks, orkestra, parlement like other languages do. just like you say latin is complex in nuance and precision, english is complex in spelling. mastering either one is a measure of intelligence

but you're right, english spelling should still be cleaned up. if we went from gaol to jail we can fix other words, too

>>23181735
>english
>beautiful
that's just not true, and it's not a matter of opinion, dicktionaries can't repair a broken language

and congratz, you have met one of our self-hating globohomo-loving NPCs who indeed say shit like that, they are insufferable and the world would be better place if they just kyssed themselves

>>23181733
You said
>there are ineffable things beyond words, which can only be felt rather than described. You have to get there through the sonic qualities of language and metaphor.
If something can only be felt and not described with words, then it can't be described with words, period. If it can be described with words then it's either through grammar, logic or rhetoric or usually all three simultaneously. I don't know what you mean by sonic qualities, stress is not beyond language, it's part of it. What I'm saying is that this is some very vague thing to you and all you back it up with is "how it feels" which is utterly uninteresting, and furthermore I'm saying this is something we have been deliberately made ignorant of, but something which we can study and learn about, it's called grammar, logic and rhetoric, not magic or mysticism or any such thing. Anyway this discussion is over because you're making a proposition but when prompted you have nothing to back it up with other than feeling, that's nothing.

>>23181650 (OP)
>Jacob Grimm: "No one of all the modern languages has acquired a greater force and strength than the English, through the derangement and relinquishment of its ancient laws of sound. The unteachable (nevertheless learnable) profusion of its middle-tones has conferred upon it an intrinsic power of expression, such as no other human tongue ever possessed. Its entire, thoroughly intellectual and wonderfully successful foundation and perfected development issued from a marvelous union of the two noblest tongues of Europe, the Germanic and the Romanic. Their mutual relation in the English language is well known, since the former furnished chiefly the material basis, while the latter added the intellectual conceptions. The English language, by and through which the greatest and most eminent poet of modern times—as contrasted with ancient classical poetry—(of course I can refer only to Shakespeare) was begotten and nourished, has a just claim to be called a language of the world; and it appears to be destined, like the English race, to a higher and broader sway in all quarters of the earth. For in richness, in compact adjustment of parts, and in pure intelligence, none of the living languages can be compared with it,—not even our German, which is divided even as we are divided, and which must cast off many imperfections before it can boldly enter on its career."—Ueber den Ursprung der Sprache.

>>23181734
>you literally can't know how to say a word you see if you haven't heard somebody say it before
you usually can as long as you recognize the language of origin
if you fail, people usually know what you mean anyway, you just give up some information density

>>23181737
english speakers literally can't pronounce a single Latin word correctly, Finnish folks pronounce Latin naturally right (with very minor errors like sometimes putting long vowel instead of the correct short one), so Finnish people are more intelligent and educated, and what not. Q.E.D.

is telling that Egyptians, Chinese, Mayans, and Aztecs used Logographic languages. Logographic languages are the lowest form of language - where ideas/objects/concepts are represented as a whole using a symbol. Symbolic languages restrict the human thinking to an emotional state - each human will associate his/her own emotions with a symbol.

The next step in evolution are the alphabetical, abjad and abugida languages. These language permit the representation of complex ideas through words. Words are further broken down into vowels and consonants.

Simply put, logographic langauges do not encourage the human brain to imagine much - because the combinatorial capacity of the human brain is restricted in logographic languages. Whereas, alphabetical (abjad and abudiga) languages permit the use of combinatorial faculties of the human brain - since they merely provide the rules (grammar) by which the alphabets can be manipulated, and the users can create new words to describe every new item they perceive.

It is thus shocking to see similarities between Mesopotamian, Greek and Roman Gods, and yet see differences in languages in these civilizations. Mesopotamia used cuneiform (which is symbolic or logographic), whereas the Greek and Romans used Alphabetical

>>23181741
not how it works, like I already said, englishmen can't pronounce a single Latin word right

>>23181651
Lmao, english is a disgusting sounding mutt rape baby of a language

>>23181739
You simply don’t understand what I’m getting at.
The ineffable cannot be described Directly, but a part of it can be approached Obliquely. Hence, the “Dark Night of the Soul”, or other poems which touch on the transphere.
It’s not vague to me at all; I’m describing the aspects of language used in poetic expression.
I have backed it up, though you might argue poorly. That’s a fault of my own, not of my beliefs. If this is all uninteresting to you, it may be that you are too materialist.

>>23181650 (OP)
The English language has more words to describe something and doesn't need as many inflections.

>>23181651
bullshit

and in case you are just dumb and not "trolling" (stirring the pot), pol stands for "politically incorrect", not "political discussion"

>>23181736
No, Finnish is easier to learn. Instead of having to learn 20 different endings for genitive you learn one and tack it on, done. You have many endings because every morpheme/meaning has its own ending, which makes it very easy but probably very good and effective too, easy and simple doesn't necessarily mean worse.

>>23181727
I noticed that reading Latin sounded more ''Latin'' in my own language and dialect compared to reading it in English. Funny how that works innit

>>23181679
In Finnish orange color is "oranssi" while the orange fruit is "appelssiini"

>>23181745
But Dutch sounds like an actual baby being raped.

>>23181747
English just took the dictionaries of other languages and said these are English words now.

>>23181740
/thread
Shakespeare demolishes all.

>>23181750
Yes, you just can't speak Latin right if you have the "this is just fancier english" mindset, englishmen just can't pronounce their Latin, it is what it is

>>23181749
Well, partially so, but there are numerous gotchas there. Finnish is great because once you know Finnish reasonably well you can just go by the feeling of "this sounds right" (right as in easy to say, flows well, twists your tongue the least amount) and it's right 99.999 percent of time. Latin is harder in that sense, the correct form is not always the one that flows the best.

>>23181754
shake-sphere is gay shit

>>23181756
seethe tranny
no one can defeat The Bard of Avon
all your best writers are Swedes

>>23181740
Barely anyone in this thread addressed the actual topic, why English lost its inflections over time while German didn't. English being better or worse than any other language, where was that stated as the topic? It blew my mind that Proto-Indo-European had more inflections than Latin, but others don't seem to find it interesting.

>>23181758
Probably path of least resistance as always, we'll probably be all autistic and just speak in one's and zero's eventually.

>>23181734
>you literally can't know how to say a word you see if you haven't heard somebody say it before
That's a feature, not a bug. It's to weed out foreigners, the poorly educated, and shut-ins.

>>23181757
That is literally the testament to how good language Finnish is. Take an intelligent swede and he can create a masterpiece in a language he has just learned.

shake-sphere would be a tranny if he (or should I say "she", in Finnish everyone is just "hän" or more often just "se") liveth (pun not intended) today

>>23181758
Does it matter? Languages evolve organically to fit the people’s needs. I do not mourn the loss of inflections strange to English now. English expression reached a peak with Shakespeare, who wrote in Early Modern English and to whom all these old inflections were alien as well.

>>23181760
literally didn't work for any of those cases, so you just demonstrated that english has failed, also only npcs use "shut-in", just say autist ilke other anons

>>23181752
Abbos are disgusting pieces of genetic garbage, and so are aussiecucks. They can both be true. See how that works, aussiecuck?

>>23181758
there were some on topic comments
language (especially grammar and syntax) is much easier for us to do than to describe/model.
I'm not surprised ancient languages were complex. tonal hymns that predate language are complex. monkey screeches and whale songs are complex. we have multiple brain structures devoted to language because expressing ourselves is crucial to our survival

>>23181758
German inflections have been mostly artificially inserted by scholarly elites back when German vernacular became formalized, so as to emulate Latin and Greek

>>23181744
you're incorrect.
knowing the language of origin is sufficient to pronounce almost any english word merely by reading it.
>englishmen can't pronounce a single Latin word right
also incorrect
they are following the english conventions for latin pronunciation

>>23181767
>knowing the language of origin is sufficient to pronounce almost any english word merely by reading it.
Pure nonsense, top kek how do you retards even come up with this shit

>>23181763
>literally didn't work for any of those cases
It does, though? I can instantly tell whether someone is foreign, poorly socialized, or poorly educated by hearing them speak.

>>23181763
>also only npcs use "shut-in", just say autist ilke other anons
Dipshits who live on instragram and demand that they can turn anything into a diagnosis call everyone slightly awkward and autist now, pekka. It's become normiespeak, and it's not even accurate here, because Autists will be very particular in their word choice and will frequently avoid saying aloud any word they are not completely certain in pronouncing.

>>23181767
>english conventions for latin pronunciation
also known as the wrong way to speak Latin

you cannot say random english word correctly just by looking at the written word, that is just a fact and no matter how much you seethinghagen over it will change it, english is failed language just like
>>23181760
said, it didn't succeed in any of those goals, instead it became the jeetified shit rung lingo of the world

>>23181650 (OP)
We had better things to do.

>>23181769
you literally can't hear that, I can speak the foggiest cockney (if you know what I mean) and you would not have a single idea that I have a master's degree, for example

also you wrote lot's of words for "I'm an autist" without directly saying it, lmaolol

>>23181704
Americans should be the last people calling anyone else grammatical faglords.

We have butchered our mother tongue so bad I pray this nation is nuked abundantly enough to be set back a few hundred years and reclaim it the proper way.

These threads are pointless because what is necessary for people is to become excellent in their own languages, not learn Latin etc unless called to for scholarly purposes.
Each people has its own spirit and this is reflected in its language. Don’t mimic what you are not, be excellent in your people’s way. Be excellent in your people’s language.
Ultimately these threads are materialist: as if education were the greatest thing holding us back! Again the problem owes to a religious one. Satan is in the world and has had the mastery since the fall of the Middle Ages. Address that foremost rather than holding powwows about grammar rules that languages have abandoned.

>>23181746
Yeah it is vague, all you've said is "you feel". What I'm saying is nothing is what you're backing it up with. It could be that you have a very clear understanding in your mind, but you aren't presenting arguments, and that's all that matters, because we are communicating with words, not telepathy. What's uninteresting is how you feel when you can't convey it with arguments. Being materialist or not has nothing to do with it. I gave you a book about grammar, logic and rhetoric, if you're interested in language and thought it should be a book that interests you.

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1756258046187373.jpg

Someone made a video series based on it, as well as an abridged version of it. I haven't watched much of those videos, nor read his book, so I don't know if they are good, but anyway here they are:

https://www.youtube.com/@informedchristians6982/videos

https://www.amazon.com/Logic-Abridged-Isaac-Watts-ebook/dp/B006SLZHH6

>>23181650 (OP)
Because it's fucking stupid to have it

>>23181653
>How the fuck did a bunch of illiterate people know a ton of moderately difficult grammar rules?
Hungarian is said to have 18 cases, because the 18-case sect of linguists won on a technicality. otherwise it's 34, each with its own set of pronouns and the 18 have even multiple forms for endings in order to cater for wovel harmony. even small children can use them, because it's not a matter of intelligence. composing them, however, is an arcane art, judging from the horrible constructs journalists keep coming up with.

>>23181766
This is interesting. Do you have any sources?

>>23181772
Kek, yes. I can.
1. You cannot -and almost no native English speakers- fake a convincing cockney accent.
2. Pinging people as foreign, awkward, or uneducated are test results that more or less override one another; If I were to notice you were foreign (and I almost certainly would) I wouldn't bother making assumptions about your level of education from your English.
3. You cannot fathom how sick I am of hearing every single behavior relegated to a DSM diagnosis, my distant Finngolian kinsman. Have you ever had to listen to 4 women aged 29-60 cluck like hens over every 3 and 4 letter acronym for psychological dysfunction for hours on end, all while bringing up instagram psychologist clips on their phone?

>>23181779
1. not true, I don't have to fake it though
2. my spoken english is actually so good that usually people are genuinely (not just being polite) shocked that I'm actually a Genghis Khan's legitimate heir
3. I use the "woman is talking, lower the volume and/or ignore everything" lifehack and thus just call everyone autist

>>23181778
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A4chsische_Kanzleisprache
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximilianische_Kanzleisprache

>>23181774
Latin was the language of the educated throughout the Western world for millennia, until very recently. I think that's a pretty anti-intellectual idea you have. It is of utmost importance to study grammar, logic and rhetoric, and it doesn't contradict anything religious at all. I'm interested in self-study for all ages, not in homeschooling, but there is some overlap, and here is pastor Anderson talking about homeschooling.

https://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/080215a.mp3

There are many free materials online for learning Latin. This is one example.

https://archive.org/details/familia-romana

>>23181656
Thats about the same amount as latin

>>23181777
You can't compare agglutinative languages like Hungarian and Finnish with fusional languages like Latin. The inflections work totally differently. I don't know which is better but they're different. I think agglutinative languages seem easier to learn and they might also have some other advantages over fusional languages. I don't know much about Proto-Indo-European, but Latin evolved from Proto-Indo-European, while Hungarian and Finnish evolved from Proto-Uralic. English and Swedish, and Lojban, are analytic languages.

https://youtu.be/ROMikM-OAOc

https://youtu.be/2_gnZj7gbnQ

https://youtu.be/qxOJ4p8e7NQ

>>23181782
>italians are white
Nice try

>>23181782
>pastor
>homeschooling
So the old jewish scam instead of the new one? You npcs are hopeless

>>23181757
it is said francis bacon wrote all of it and shake never existed

you are under rosecrucian spell

>>23181768
>>23181770
you can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think

>>23181651
>king english
>most beautiful
Nice little bait right there

>>23181650 (OP)
English had to be piss simple, because otherwise niggers wouldn't be able to speak it.

Do you think having simple language encourages or hinders general intelligence; or is it unrelated?

They came out with articles as a crutch for that
a language with cases doesn't require them

>>23181792
>a language with cases doesn't require them
How? I'm learning Latin. Latin doesn't have "a" and "the". Why does it not need it?

>>23181793
refer to op pic

>>23181794
Those endings don't distinguish between definite and indefinite. "Puella" means "a girl" or "the girl", or just "girl" I guess, you don't know which.

>>23181795
by inflecting the word you're enhancing its context

>>23181651
> Portuguese, which is the worst-sounding Romance language
LOL. you're fucking tone deaf mate.

>>23181745
tikkie ik ook

>>23181790
they can already barely speak it

>>23181651
swedish is a gay nigger language for faggots. I say this as a swede. I much prefer learning german.

>>23181799
that's just welsh

>>23181797
Ronaldinho Saõ Paulo Brasileiro.

Literal macaque language, all degradation of Gallician

>>23181650 (OP)
>hurr PIE was a chad language
it was simpler. complex traits were developed after the dispersion of the various language groups but mostly before the first evidence of the specific historic languages.
>tldr: PIE had 4 cases, 5 tops.

>Proto-Indo-European
learn to recognize pajeet threads. learn to stop giving (You)s, which end up as rupees, to OPs like this. jews pay pajeets to spam this board en masse with the same globohomo agenda that you're still associating with only jews. since 2023 you are much more likely to see jew noise posted by a pajeet. there are a hundred times as many pajeets as there are jews. if you want any part of the internet to survive, you must detect, reject and redeem pajeets everywhere you find them

pajeets have been transplanted all over the world in unbelievable numbers. the plan is to homogenize all countries into a single mass of interchangeable, predictable, suggestible consumers whose only loyalty is to the elite and their system of puppetry. motivated not by heritage or ideology (despite all portrayals to the contrary), but by paltry shares of wealth and status in a materialistic world order in which everyone belongs equally everywhere and nowhere

the majority of pajeets on /pol/ try to hide the fact that they're pajeets. in addition to "leaving that part out" they will proactively, persistently misrepresent their true form. pajeets are all about assuming other people's roles, from today's outsourcing and replacement migration all the way back to thuggee bandits lying to travelers about who they were. pajeets are devoid of their own identity, making them the ideal globalized goyim. they don't want a home where they belong. all that means to them is "compete in squalor." much better to go somewhere nicer, built by other people, and do their jobs for less pay and live slum-barracks life in their suburbs. pajeets don't want to be home. they also don't want to be pajeets. jews know exactly how to play their insecurities and dopey ambitions like the innocent rube fresh off the bus from the cornfield. this is their new golem to replace the ones that don't love them anymore

when in doubt, try this
CLINICAL TEST QUESTION
>are you descended from south asian subcontinental ancestry?
any answer longer than "no" means yes
not answering means yes
lying means yes

>>23181705
>japanese is most beautiful
subjective
>most hardest to learn in world
3 writing systems and no one outside japan speaks it, so there's a strong barrier of learning. At least the other languages have some international influence.
>English is trash language
You're coping. Even if English doesn't sound pretty, its usefulness and utility is unmatched. You almost unlock all human knowledge if you learn English. Japanese unlocks ~3% of human knowledge (most of which is japanese philosophy and japanese history).

>>23181802
brazilian portuguese is pure sex

>>23181650 (OP)
>Why did English lose its inflections but German didn't?
because bongs are retarded and can only communicate in very simple ways.

>>23181650 (OP)
>WHY DON'T YOU RESPECT THE PRONOUNS OF YOUR FURNITURE
Because my chair Will Never Be A Woman.

>>23181812
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xPXrsOYpng
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC0KWA8tVBk

>>23181815
this recording is far superior so i'll post again
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1tBhFAHho3c?t=1530

>>23181650 (OP)
English is germanic pidgin for retards

>>23181812
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOrUsIUHSsM

>>23181812
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQsiLhyqR7w

>>23181812
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anBTZLoWhJg

it's not just about cases, the attitude of Germans vs English is almost paradigmatic in how they treated their lexicon, and if you learn German even as an English speaker you'll immediately notice both being "Germanic" doesn't help you much: the Germans took much more care to import concepts semantically, the English just imported wholesale, i.e, if a German read e.g essentia from a Latin philosophical tradition, he imports Wesenheit, the English imports essentia from french and then butchers it a bit more into essence, and so on for many such examples of acculturation; the Latins too were a bit like this with respect to Greek, they did import a bunch of Greek words, mind you, but especially classical period learned men like Cicero tried to create a Latin lexicon reflecting the Greek semantically rather than just import wholesale

>>23181650 (OP)
>Singular, genitive, masculine
caeruleī
>Plural, nomitive, masculine
caeruleī

They doubled up!

Also, "caerulea" seems to be used all over the place. They really got lazy by the time they got to the neuter plurals.