|
 |
Language features you wanted in your.... | ||
Tags: Grammar | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| Siberiano Tetraglot Senior Member Russian Federation one-giant-leap.Registered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6495 days ago 465 posts - 696 votes  Speaks: Russian*, English, ItalianC1, Spanish Studies: Portuguese, Serbian | Message 49 of 52 21 January 2010 at 10:52pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
Is a text with smileys out of reach for a literate person? No, it's perfectly intelligible. If writing incorporates emotions as new signs, next to ? ¿, underscores or overscores, and so on, it will be just a small increment.
I'll tell you why they'll stay. :) Here's the issue: modern writing systems were developed by scholars (thanks to Captain Haddock for the very valuable post), for teaching, serious thoughts and knowledge transfer. They are still best at communicating complicated ideas: many people miss or forget a lot of verbal information and do much better with textual. For this reason even video won't dominate the text, not to mention audio. A strong advantage of text is that your eyes can jump to 1000-2000 signs back and forth in a moment, or see what you've written few secs ago, which is nearly impossible with audio or video content. But since the modern writing system was designed to convey serious thoughts, it can't convey well a non-serious speech. Or it requires a lot of work to express your emotion properly, and still people will read it in a 1000 different ways, being offended or thinking it's you offended. Smileys, even if they're childish, partially do the job.
2. I don't quite get what you mean. Edited by Siberiano on 21 January 2010 at 10:53pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| QiuJP Triglot Senior Member Singapore Joined 5857 days ago 428 posts - 597 votes Speaks: Mandarin*, EnglishC2, French Studies: Czech, GermanB1, Russian, Japanese | Message 50 of 52 23 January 2010 at 7:25am | IP Logged | |||||||||||
But the functions represented in the Greek declension system is less than that of Russian or Finnish right? Even in Russian, some of the cases are overused (gentive in Russian, for example) and it is difficult to differnate the functions of the grammatical syntax when spoken. I want a full declension scheme where one case corresponds exactly to one grammatical syntax or usage. This kind of structure will be neat for me. Edited by QiuJP on 23 January 2010 at 7:27am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Captain Haddock Diglot Senior Member Japan kanjicabinet.tumblr. Joined 6770 days ago 2282 posts - 2814 votes Speaks: English*, Japanese Studies: French, Korean, Ancient Greek | Message 51 of 52 23 January 2010 at 8:53am | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
Basically, you want a lot more noun cases, is that it? That would be a tall order…I think Hungarian has 18. A
Caucasian language called Tsez (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsez_language) apparently has 64 noun cases (!), but no articles. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| victor-osorio Diglot Groupie Venezuela Joined 5434 days ago 73 posts - 129 votes Speaks: Spanish*, English Studies: Italian | Message 52 of 52 28 January 2010 at 8:10pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
[QUOTE=Siberiano]
Let me correct your optics information, like you've corrected grammar :) A thin film in glasses doesn't change the optics: your eyes still need to stay at the same focal distance, quite close, less than 1 m. In the wild, eyes frequently switch from one object to another and need to accomodate to new focal distance as well. We force them to move little and focus at the same distance for long periods. What is it like? Try to hold suspended a computer mouse in your hand as long as you can: painful, isn't it? The same thing we do to the eyes' muscles, if I'm not mistaken. So to solve the eye strain problem, we need either lenses, or a new kind of monitors (multilayered or projecting directly in the eye) that would show things at different distances and allow the eyes to accomodate and not stay strained for too long. A film in your glasses, a polaroid I guess, just screens them from periferial reflected light, like sunlight reflected from the water in the pools on the ground. Great explanation. Besides, considering again your supositions about how written language and "reading" technologies should evolve, I think they sound to be right. In my country (and I'm sure in many countries) you can send a text message (an SMS) from your mobile to a home phone. It works like this: you write the message on your phone, send it and the phone at the other person home's will start to ring a usually does. When that person picks up the phone, a machine, a robot-like machine, will read the message for him. The thing is that people HATE that service because the machine makes anything sound so dull: its intonation is totally flat from the beginning to the end. So I agree there must be a writing system which allows future "reading" technologies to intonate sentences in the way they were intended to be intonated. Maybe when new technologies for reading text become available, we will feel the urge to develop such a system. 1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
