Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Joachim Pense <snob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 20:58:10 +0100
Ruud Harmsen wrote:
10 Mar 2007 11:07:50 -0800: "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
On Mar 10, 11:40 am, Ruud Harmsen <realemailons...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Sat, 10 Mar 2007 09:43:12 +0100: Joachim Pense <s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
in sci.lang:
I thought I just could enter my trolling mode and ask if they should
be counted as Romance languages.
Interlingua is a full Romance language; Esperanto has a lot of Romance
vocabulary, but its grammar is largely Turkish or Hungarian.
"Turkish or Hungarian"???
Like Turkish or Hungarian, similar to Turkish and Hungarian, has
traits reminiscent of Turkish and Hungarian.
Not true?
You mean Turkish and Hungarian do not have grammatical similarities,
despite the fact they scholars agree they are not related?
.
I never analysed an Esperanto text, but when I see one I can mostly get the
content like with an Interlingua, Italian, or French one. If Esperanto was
anything like Turkish or Hungarian, I'd have noticed.
Made-up Esparanto:
Lingvo Esperantoja estas simplo.
Made-up Hungaranto:
Lingvorasi Esperantonok esterezet simplisi.
Joachim
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: LEE Sau Dan
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- References:
- Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Esperanto and Interlingua
- Prev by Date: Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- Next by Date: Re: How does Armenian fit into the Indo-European family?
- Previous by thread: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Next by thread: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
