Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: "Neeraj Mathur" <neemathur@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 13:19:24 +0100
"Raymond S. Wise" <mplsray@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1149398524.225674.187630@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Neeraj Mathur , addressing <hanumizzle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
linguistics courses. 'Human language', or better, 'natural language'
refers
to those systems that are L1 transmitted - that is, things that children
can
learn from their community. Lojban, and other constructed languages,
don't
qualify at all, much less programming languages. If you want to gain a
There are native Esperanto speakers, "denaskaj Esperantistoj," yet it
is a constructed language.
I said 'L1 transmitted'. Esperanto does not qualify: there are no
significant communities functioning wholly or mainly in Esperanto, and (most
importantly) the vast majority of those who know the language have not
learned it as their L1 or from an L1 community. That's why people keep
believing in the 16 rule garbage.
Neeraj Mathur
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: Raymond S. Wise
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: Helmut Richter
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- References:
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: Raymond S. Wise
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- Prev by Date: Re: Love in Tennis
- Next by Date: Re: Etymology of "Ketzer"
- Previous by thread: Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- Next by thread: Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|