Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: António Marques <m.ap@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 20:50:01 +0100
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
'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.
There are native Esperanto speakers, "denaskaj Esperantistoj," yet it is a constructed language.
Where are there native Esperanto speakers?
And if they ever meet, can they understand each other?
And if they can, how much of it is by the massive amount of common
vocuablary rather than common structure?
--
am
laurus : rhodophyta : brezoneg : smalltalk : stargate
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: Herman Rubin
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: Raymond S. Wise
- 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?
- From: me
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Settling an Argument - Assembly *IS* a Language, Right?
- Prev by Date: Re: "subconscious language acquisition"
- Next by Date: /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
- 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
|
Loading