>his language doesn't differentiate between SER (to be (to have the given quality)) and ESTAR (to be; to currently be in a state or have a characteristic; to be located)
His language doesn't differentiate between SER (to be (to have the given quality)) and ESTAR (to be; to currently be in...
Cooper Perry
Zachary Howard
E-English does this, r-right?
Brandon Ross
Totally useless distinction
David Ward
No.
Eu sou um homem -> I'm a man
Eu sou forte -> I'm strong
Eu estou doente -> I'm sick
Eu estou na escola -> I'm at the school
Lucas Martinez
But you can say all those in English, it is just context. Can't say I see the point in this particular feature. Over-complications in language are not a good thing
Adrian Brooks
Of course you can but these two words give nuance.
Like you can say "Eu estou forte" like maybe you weren't strong before and now you are or you're feeling strong at the moment.
Some languages treat green and blue like the same color. Are languages that don't over-complicated?
Carson Gutierrez
I suppose so, but the same nuance can be supplied in English by saying "I'm am strong right now". I guess it is kinda neat having it built in but it is exactly necessary. Also I wonder, would most Brazilians even get that nuance if you said it in the two different ways? Would it go over most peoples heads or is it actually practical and used?
Jacob Peterson
yes anyone will get it.
For example, You can say "você é um doente" or "você é doente" that will translate to "you're a sick man" but if you say "você está doente" that means you're saying that person is sick as in unhealthy
David Peterson
not him, but what do you mean? Eu estou forte always means I'm strong now. it's not a matter of context. does that answer your question? sorry if not
and I agree with you, it's not like you can't express these ideas in English (and not like coming up with a language that expresses every idea is feasible in the first place)
Elijah Scott
ok, I get it. If it is actually practical and people acknowledge the difference then I do see the point.
From the OP I didn't fully understand what the difference was. Now I get it, it isn't about context. I am just saying you can say the same thing in English but you need a sentence like "I am currently strong" to say the same thing. So I don't know how useful the feature really is but I guess it is just a difference in language rather than one being the superior method of conveying this meaning
Lucas Bailey
you can express anything in any ugga bugga language given enough context
Alexander Gonzalez
OP here. I'm just joking around with the thread. I don't think there's a superior way or anything but it's interesting how differently languages work
Henry Lee
Yeah but it would be extremely difficult to do so. I think languages can be both too complicated and too simple. For example the thousands of characters in Chinese and the tonal nature of the language are fucking stupid, whilst WEWUZ languages lack any nuance or complexity to easily convey complex thoughts. Always best to strike a balance
Colton Murphy
>WEWUZ languages lack any nuance or complexity to easily convey complex thoughts
????
Isaac Barnes
Doesn't count, not a pure WEWUZ language. Hardmode: no Arabic or other outside influences beyond sub saharan cultures
Jaxon Sanders
Just because they have some loanwords doesn't mean they aren't an african language. That's ridiculous. Many European languages have Arabic loanwords
en.wikipedia.org
What language are you thinking of? Swahili is also influenced by arabic.
Jack Murphy
i bet every fucking language on earth has this ontological differentiation and you're just a fucking brainlet who doesn't know shit
Kayden Cooper
Well when me and the other user said ooga booga and WEWUZ languages I guess that mainly just refers to the isolated tribe languages. I'm talking pure ooga here, none of that influenced shit.
Anyway I wonder if any anons can find the simplest language to show in the thread
Jordan Rivera
>In keeping with many other Southern Bantu languages, Xhosa is an agglutinative language, with an array of prefixes and suffixes that are attached to root words. Like in other Bantu languages, nouns in Xhosa are classified into morphological classes, or genders (15 in Xhosa), with different prefixes for both singular and plural. Various parts of speech that qualify a noun must agree with the noun according to its gender. Agreements usually reflect part of the original class with which the word agrees. The word order is subject–verb–object, like in English.
Samuel Ortiz
I'm just talking about this, sir
en.wikipedia.org
Samuel Sanders
Oh ffs I was joking for the most part user, just taking the piss out of wewuzers. Couldn't give less of a shit really.
Although a real opinion from me is that sometimes when a language is too complicated, nuance and emotion can end up being lost as the language user tries to put across their point as literally as they can. Yet again I'd list Chinese and South East Asian languages in this group. Tonal languages kill emotion, and when you have to put together a sentence in such a complex language you are generally too busy trying to make the meaning comprehensible rather than having the freedom to convey nuance or emotion
Parker Myers
>his language doesn't use tonality to affect meaning
Wǒ dāngrán xīwàng nǐmen bùyào zhèyàng zuò.
Jacob Lee
Tonal languages, truly the most beautiful in the world youtube.com
Elijah Perez
Aku seorang pria => I'm a man
Aku kuat => I'm strong
Aku sedang sakit => I'm (currently) sick
Aku sedang berada di sekolah => I'm (currently) at the school
English is overall shorter to write though in the formal form.