Re: ASL translation?

On Sep 12, 8:10 am, phogl...@xxxxxx wrote:
On 12 syys, 14:51, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 12, 6:09 am, phogl...@xxxxxx wrote:

I am writing something that looks like English, but obviously isn't a
human language, because its standardizers (Samuel Johnson and Noah
Webster) were not linguistically schooled and did not understand the
nature of human language.-

Standardizing spelling makes one a standardizer of language??????

Spelling does not count as an aspect of language? Thank you for
confirming.

Well, _I_ certainly never suggested that it does!

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "par coeur" origin
    ... Is this supposed to somehow be relevant to the nature of human language? ... as explained in the subsequent lines you snipped. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: ASL translation?
    ... human language, because its standardizers (Samuel Johnson and Noah ... Webster) were not linguistically schooled and did not understand the ... nature of human language.- ...
    (sci.lang)