English - overly complicated?

>>And maybe the reason German is good for philosophy is because the best philosophers were German, and not the other way around (ie the best philosophers were German because German is good for philosophy).

Well written.

Only the people who use(d) the language adds the power of a language. Older languages either died out or perished, and we are using some of the best languages that survived turmoils and linguistic competitions in the past centuries. You might well say English or any other language is not good enough for virtually any subject they are seldom studied in, and that is up to your own choice. Even though you can use English "easily" in many places where English is dominant or the non-Anglophones there speak English well, you still have to learn the local ones to get a life...somewhat.

They are just like people. People's personality is different. To develop a life-long relationship with someone, you need to understand him/her, his/her many idiosyncrasies, lifestyles...and so on, and usually those qualities are hardly comparable to those of others. Every language is a different thing.

<<There was an old Antimoon thread where someone claimed that the complex ideas ...>>

If some of these guys -- I don't like to mention their names -- have abstrusly and convoluted obscure ideas, this is called ''complex ideas'' because of their ''profession'' is considered something ''special''. If you and me would have such ideas, we would be considered insane.

You don't like to mention the names of:
"Freud (and presumably Tolstoy, Nietzsche, etc.)"?
Well, you are insane! LOL

<<The books I'm referring to, which I find easier to read in Spanish, are complex philosophical works by authors such as Tolstoy, Nietzsche, etc. >>

So, you're reading books that were originally written in another language, then translated into English, and you blame English for them sounding overly complicated? ;P

Technically speaking; Tolstoy did not write philosophical works and Nietzche's philosophy was not that much complex.
LOL

Nietzsche's philosophy is not that difficult, it explains that everything is a shit and human life is a nonsense.

You need to leave out the "a" before shit and nonsense, by the way.

<<Why don't you give an example of Spanish that can't be translated into English first. >>

I think someone already gave the example of "sombrerucho" which apparently has no direct equivalent in English. My knowledge of Spanish is abysmal, so I have to assume that "sombrerucho" has lots of deep and subtle connotations, perhaps rooted in Spanish folklore or culture, and there's no simple way of expressing all that in English,without writing whole sentences of explanation.

What's funny in this case is that "sombrerucho" seems to be tied in somehow with Sherlock Holmes, if the results of a Google search are any indication.

Sombrero is hat , and -ucho is a suffix that adds despective connotation. Maybe " awful hat " is a good translation. The most important flaw I find in Spanish is it's refusal to form compound names as easily as in English. About phrasal verbs, despite Spanish lacks them, it uses other mechanisms as well to modify the meaning of verbs, mainly adding reflexive pronouns, but they are not nearly as rich as phrasal verbs.

<<Sombrero is hat , and -ucho is a suffix that adds despective connotation. Maybe " awful hat " is a good translation.>>

If "awful hat" or "crummy hat" is all that "sombrerucho" means, why would "Guest" bring it up? (BTW, I wonder if this thread's suffering a bit from the "Multiple Guest syndrome"?)

I think that Guest refered to expressing sombrerucho with just one English word. Obviously you can't, since each language has its own ways to express concepts. For the same reason many compound names can't be constructed the same way in Spanish, you have to add prepositions in the middle .

English has lots of clever compount words like 'happy-go-lucky', 'run-of-the-mill' etc

"Guest" : « English has lots of clever compount words like 'happy-go-lucky', 'run-of-the-mill' etc ».
D'autres langues aussi : casse-pieds, je-m'en-foutisme, je-ne-sais-quoi, jusqu'au-boutiste, marie-couche-toi-là, m'as-tu-vu, pince-sans-rire, rendez-vous, rez-de-chaussée, tape-à-l'œil, tue-l'amour, vis-à-vis etc.



"Guest" : « The most important flaw I find in Spanish is it's refusal to form compound names as easily as in English ».
Mais est-ce bien un inconvénient ? Pourquoi le castillan traduirait-il <housewife> par "casamujer" alors que <ama de casa> fait parfaitement l'affaire ? Pourquoi le français emploierait "maisonfemme" quand il possède déjà le substantif <ménagère> ainsi que les locutions <femme au foyer> & <femme d'intérieur> ? Pareil pour l'italien avec <casalinga>, <massaia> & <donna di casa> : pourquoi "casamoglie" ?



"Guest" : « About phrasal verbs, despite Spanish lacks them, it uses other mechanisms as well to modify the meaning of verbs, mainly adding reflexive pronouns, but they are not nearly as rich as phrasal verbs. »
J'ignore si le castillan est dépourvu de verbes à particule : il faut vérifier. Mais d'autres langues romanes en possèdent : le lombard, le français etc. Dans tous les cas, le linguocentrsime (anglais ou autre) n'est pas la meilleure façon d'appréhender le castillan : c'est même une garantie d'échec.

And maybe the reason German is good for philosophy is because the best philosophers were German, and not the other way around (ie the best philosophers were German because German is good for philosophy).

Yes, but is philosophy good for anything? At least linguistics is useful sometimes.

Please study meaty subjects along with languages, folks!

Linguistics is not more useful than philosophy.