|
|
How is English less expressive than other languages?
GP: "Totally agree, a genderless language is very ambiguous indeed, creating many problems for academics, law is not the only one affected. "
Gender is only one small area in the wide scope of a language. Please read on:
Uriel: " They [Russians], in turn, probably don't get why we care if it's THE house or just A house."
This is correct, Uriel. I work with some women from Eastern Europe whose language seems to lack indefinite or definite articles. Out of all the grammatical mistakes they make, their confusion of articles is the most prevalent.
Continuing on in this line of reasoning, I once worked with a native Mandarin speaker. Apparently, prepositions are used very little in Mandarin Chinese, and her grammatical mistakes usually dealt with prepositions. (For example, she never knew whether to say "in the barn", "at the barn", etc.)
<<Because English has no gender and GENDER is very IMPORTANT in LAW and SCIENCE, >>
Huh? Maybe in backwards countries like Russia, gender is very important in law, but more progressive countries have realized that, generally speaking, people shouldn't be treated differently depending on what sex they are. And unless you're dealing with biology, sex isn't important in science, and even then it's often not important.
<<If the document is partially destroyed and you are only left with a piece of paper where no names are specified, it is impossible to deduct the gender of the offenders, because English is not a gender specific language. >>
It's "deduce", not "deduct".
<<English is not just less expressive, is very ambiguous as well, difficult to distinguish.>>
You seem to be confused as to what "ambiguous" means. Simply because some particular fact cannot be determined from a statement does not mean it is "ambiguous". In the sentence "Bob broke the vase", it cannot be determined what color the vase was. That doesn't mean that the sentence is "ambiguous".
A country's cultere is related to it's language therefore if one thing is particularly more important in the cultere of the country there will be more words about it. Let's consider arabic for instance. There are more than 20 words for a camel. There are different words for different colored camels for example. So this language is more expressive on that particular area..
<<Let's consider arabic for instance. There are more than 20 words for a camel. There are different words for different colored camels for example. So this language is more expressive on that particular area..>>
But in England, by nature, there are no camels. But, according to www.leo.org, there are cob, bronco, high-stepper and shyer for special kinds of horses. I'm no native speaker of English, but I bet there're more words for horse than that, stallion for exemple, especially if we also count the derogative ones.
In German, we have ''Schimmel'' for white horse (this also means mildew, so it's not a special word for horses), we could say ''Brauner'' for a brown one, ''Klepper'' , ''Gaul'' (derogative), ''Hengst'' (male horse), ''Stute'' (female hores) ''Pony'' (special kind of horse), ''Fohlen'' (very young horse) and so on.
***But, according to www.leo.org, there are cob, bronco, high-stepper and shyer for special kinds of horses***
Shyer? Don't you mean "shire" horses? Those massive horses with great clodding hooves and thick manes you now mostly see in agricultural shows pulling buffed up gleaming ploughs? Up until sixty or seventy years ago they were a common site in rural Britain as they pulled the ploughs on the land. Quite often they used to have their manes tied up with all kinds of decorative ribbons and each magnificent animal had a name, of course, as do all such creatures whether domestic pets or those working hard for a living.
Now of course everything on the land is mechanised, but as I say, shire horses still strut their stuff on all the showgrounds of the UK, a sort of memorial to the long gone past of yesteryear.
Talking of animals working hard for a living - most of Britain was shocked recently when two German shepherd dogs working for the Nottinghamshire Police Force Dog Unit in England, both very experienced and well trained animals, were inadvertently left inside a locked police vehicle by a thoughtless police officer outside Police HQ in Nottingham city centre on a hot sunny day with an external air temperature in the shade of 27C.
Both of them died within ten minutes or so and the hapless PC was subsequently prosecuted by the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals (RSPCA in England, SSPCA in Scotland) on a charge of cruelty to animals. The suffering of those poor dogs does not bear thinking about, but believe me the PC suffered badly as well...what a thing to have remaining on your conscience as a result of a momentary lack of thought and consideration.
Go to www.leo.org and search for ''Pferd''. The next to last entry is shyer. It means a horse who is shying, so the term obviously refers to the behaviour of the horse. But thank's for your vivid depiction of the working horses so many years ago.
I don't consider external air temperature of about 27 degree Celsius as hot. I can hardly believe that the dogs died after 10 min. Now, we have big gooseberry season, so you need not believe everything in the media.
My question remains unanswered apart from the small and specific matter of gender. I want to know how English is supposed to be less expressive overall, how, as I have seen claimed, it is simply an inadequate tool for writing great literature.
I've seen it claimed many times that French, Spanish and German are more expressive, that somehow they can communicate subtle concepts that English simply isn't able to
*************************************
In fact, it's probably the other way around. English can communicate subtle concepts that French, Spanish and German aren't able to.
The French, for example, can't differentiate the difference between "house" and "home" and "mind" and "spirit."
can't differentiate the difference between
************************
That should be "can't differentiate between."
I would hardly say it was an inadequate tool for writing great literature, their are hundreds of authors who have made thier names by writing in that poor language. i.e. joyce, steinbeck, bronte, orwell etc..
The thing is, if you read a passage of German, yes you see loads of fancy inflections, but these bring nothing really in terms of the communication of ideas. What you really notice is that German seems a bit stunted and rigid because of its lack of a comprehensive tense/aspect system. And that's not even taking the richer vocabulary in English into consideration.
<<their are hundreds of authors who have made thier names by writing in that poor language. i.e. joyce, steinbeck, bronte, orwell etc.. >
But is the "great" English literature of lesser quality than the great literature in other languages?
n fact, it's probably the other way around. English can communicate subtle concepts that French, Spanish and German aren't able to.
The French, for example, can't differentiate the difference between "house" and "home" and "mind" and "spirit."
Spanish: casa, hogar, morada...
mente, espíritu, alma...
|