Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Is Anglish?

anglish.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 363 posts

Re: What Is Anglish?

#191

Post by gfaure »

tomxor wrote: post #168
hcayless wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting to me how comparatively impoverished Anglish seems. Here’s to promiscuity!

Is that mainly due to it being based upon a historical snapshot of English? that by definition never evolved further. If it had the same huge population of English speakers over hundreds of years (i.e was a living language) then it may also have evolved a diverse range of words without the need to absorb other languages - not that I care for it. On a slight tangent, I've noticed when translating from English to Chine…

That's because that _is_ the word (大腿) for thigh — native speakers don't perceive it as "big leg", which would be 大的腿 instead.

This is exactly analogous to "little finger" in English.

Re: What Is Anglish?

#192

Post by mkotowski »

hcayless wrote: post #166
squiffsquiff wrote: post #7

"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." --James D. Nicoll

It’s interesting to me how comparatively impoverished Anglish seems. Here’s to promiscuity!

Opinion of a Polish guy: In my eyes, English is pretty bloated, when seemingly almost every concept can have three or more alternative words, each from a different source. It is all matter of perspective, I suppose. :)

I think such feeling can be caused by languages that rely strongly on creating compound words rather than borrowing a new ones (example from the site: Dictionary > Wordbook).

Re: What Is Anglish?

#193

Post by wolfram74 »

mkotowski wrote: post #192
hcayless wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting to me how comparatively impoverished Anglish seems. Here’s to promiscuity!

Opinion of a Polish guy: In my eyes, English is pretty bloated, when seemingly almost every concept can have three or more alternative words, each from a different source. It is all matter of perspective, I suppose. :) I think such feeling can be caused by languages that rely strongly on creating compound words rather than borrowing a new ones (example from the site: Dictionary > Wordbook).

The counterargument is that lots of words allow for precise concision. wordbook can be ambiguous, as almost all books are filled with words. Is wordbook specifying that this book is a word book as opposed to a picture book? wordkenbook might be less ambiguous, but maybe this referring to all nonfiction books using words?

all that being said, I think uncleftish[0] beholding is an amazing piece of text and a good exercise for young physicists

[0]https://groups.google.com/g/alt.language.artificial/c/ZL4e3f...

Re: What Is Anglish?

#195

Post by ryanschneider »

I coincidentally just watched a YT video by RobWords on the same subject last week: https://youtu.be/aMA3M6b9iEY

It’s an interesting watch but I do see why the attempts at “purifying” the language are troubling if taken as an actual attempt at anything other than a fun conlang.

Edit: oh the video is mentioned on the site. :)

Re: What Is Anglish?

#196

Post by lifthrasiir »

wolfram74 wrote: post #193
mkotowski wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opinion of a Polish guy: In my eyes, English is pretty bloated, when seemingly almost every concept can have three or more alternative words, each from a different source. It is all matter of perspective, I suppose. :) I think such feeling can be caused by languages that rely strongly on creating compound words rather than borrowing a new ones (example from the site: Dictionary > Wordbook).

The counterargument is that lots of words allow for precise concision. wordbook can be ambiguous, as almost all books are filled with words. Is wordbook specifying that this book is a word book as opposed to a picture book? wordkenbook might be less ambiguous, but maybe this referring to all nonfiction books using words? all that being said, I think uncleftish[0] beholding is an amazing piece of text and a good exerc…

> wordbook can be ambiguous, as almost all books are filled with words. Is wordbook specifying that this book is a word book as opposed to a picture book? wordkenbook might be less ambiguous, but maybe this referring to all nonfiction books using words?

Your description only applies to a word phrase "word book". The lexicalized word "wordbook" would have its own meaning (presumably one of your suggestions), just like "dictionary" does, but without requiring additional foreign morphemes.

Re: What Is Anglish?

#197

Post by nick123567 »

gfaure wrote: post #191
tomxor wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that mainly due to it being based upon a historical snapshot of English? that by definition never evolved further. If it had the same huge population of English speakers over hundreds of years (i.e was a living language) then it may also have evolved a diverse range of words without the need to absorb other languages - not that I care for it. On a slight tangent, I've noticed when translating from English to Chine…

That's because that _is_ the word (大腿) for thigh — native speakers don't perceive it as "big leg", which would be 大的腿 instead. This is exactly analogous to "little finger" in English.

Except we call that one Pinky

Re: What Is Anglish?

#198

Post by ggm »

nwah1 wrote: post #188
ggm wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Borrow is an odd word to use here "loan word": even odder, just a bit posher (why is it posher? is loan more posh than borrow? really?) * when do I have to give it back? * Is it "by permission" * do I have a library card limit how many I can borrow? * can I borrow from the 'enfer' shelves? (there's a loan word...) I'd say "steal" is a better fit. The word isn't coming back. Capice?

If I steal your bicycle, but you still have it, then is it really stolen?

loan has the explicit give back property. thats what a loan IS:

'borrowed' carries the same implications with a down-note on the giving back.

taken, adopted, brought in, co-opted... there's a thesaurus of choices which to my way of thinking do a better job of describing english's habit of .. adopting other languages words.

the key point is that gate-keeping in english doesn't work. we don't have the academie francais to police loanwords, and nobody gets to say loan or borrow words are bad, and that better ones exist: they are what they are.

I'm really just howling at the moon. (I wonder if howl and moon, in some sense are loan words from latin, or anglo saxon)

Re: What Is Anglish?

#199

Post by deafpolygon »

tomxor wrote: post #168
hcayless wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting to me how comparatively impoverished Anglish seems. Here’s to promiscuity!

Is that mainly due to it being based upon a historical snapshot of English? that by definition never evolved further. If it had the same huge population of English speakers over hundreds of years (i.e was a living language) then it may also have evolved a diverse range of words without the need to absorb other languages - not that I care for it. On a slight tangent, I've noticed when translating from English to Chine…

In Dutch, as an example we have a word called zoetwater - which if you translate it literally, is "sweet water". But it is the word for 'freshwater' in English [as opposed to saltwater], not some kind of sweet water. Even though zoetwater could be literally translated, no one really knows it means freshwater in English. There is advertisement for 'fris water' or 'vers water', which means fresh water correctly.
Post reply on HN