|
 |
Vietnamese: how hard is it? | ||
Tags: Vietnamese | Difficulty | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| Stolan Senior Member United States Joined 4033 days ago 274 posts - 368 votes  Speaks: English* Studies: Thai, Lowland Scots Studies: Arabic (classical), Cantonese | Message 17 of 31 06 June 2014 at 1:57am | IP Logged | ||
|
So derivation is possible without adding syllables?
A language that distinguishes adverbs, adjectives, wh words, and verbs covers more discernible ground. One could only say "I ride bus go house" in Isan which is ambiguous. I ride in a bus to go home? I went home using a bus? I ride the bus of the act of going to my house? Etc. The lack of adpositions, mandatory aspect/tense, word order rules, and coverbal devices is strange. It is not that it is analytical but that it doesn't even use free morphemes ( which never change at all or have strict placement like clitics) to even express those categories. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4708 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish | Message 18 of 31 06 June 2014 at 2:04pm | IP Logged | ||
To be honest I couldn't give a damn how many linguistic terms you need to express something, or how many derivations you need. I only care that the message gets across, because that is what language does. So if a Hebrew speaker says the equivalent of I professor, I work in-university, that's how I say it. 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4708 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish | Message 19 of 31 06 June 2014 at 2:05pm | IP Logged | ||
To be honest I couldn't give a damn how many linguistic terms you need to express something, or how many derivations you need. I only care that the message gets across, because that is what language does. So if a Hebrew speaker says the equivalent of I professor, I work in-university, that's how I say it. Even better, means I have to remember less words :) 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7157 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 20 of 31 06 June 2014 at 6:06pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Stolan, when you want to argue a point about linguistics, it's not enough to bandy languages that few if anyone on this board have heard of or couch your arguments with linguists' jargon (unless you're trying to overlay some semblance of authority or objectivity on what seem at heart to be value judgements).
What's the point of starting or getting involved in such "discussions"? You don't seem to be convincing a lot of people with your arguments. If anything, your posts are most remarkable for coming off as streams of consciousness or monologues laced with linguistic trivia. 8 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Stolan Senior Member United States Joined 4033 days ago 274 posts - 368 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Thai, Lowland Scots Studies: Arabic (classical), Cantonese | Message 21 of 31 07 June 2014 at 12:30am | IP Logged | ||
|
But have I ever said anything that was proven wrong? I admit, I ramble, but what I have been saying is true.
Languages are clearly at different levels when it comes to complexity. It is not the morphology, but the syntax. Vietnamese is (and its neighbors) tok pisin except with a gigantic vowel inventory and tones. Edited by Stolan on 07 June 2014 at 12:52am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7157 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 22 of 31 07 June 2014 at 12:51am | IP Logged | ||
|
Buddy, you're missing the point. The facts that you throw about aren't (usually) wrong. Their (ir)relevance for whatever points you're trying to make is what's getting you into trouble.
If I kept flooding a debate with irrefutable but ultimately irrelevant facts (and sometimes even drawing idiosyncratic conclusions drawn on linguistic trivia), would that mean that my views are unassailable? 6 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Stolan Senior Member United States Joined 4033 days ago 274 posts - 368 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Thai, Lowland Scots Studies: Arabic (classical), Cantonese | Message 23 of 31 07 June 2014 at 1:06am | IP Logged | ||
|
How is what I said irrelevant to my claim that Vietnamese and similar languages are not able to cover or distinguish
the same level of detail compared to western languages due to their grammars? And that the source is all those things I said. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| hrhenry Octoglot Senior Member United States languagehopper.blogs Joined 5131 days ago 1871 posts - 3642 votes Speaks: English*, SpanishC2, ItalianC2, Norwegian, Catalan, Galician, Turkish, Portuguese Studies: Polish, Indonesian, Ojibwe | Message 24 of 31 07 June 2014 at 1:20am | IP Logged | ||
Quick question: Do you speak Vietnamese? Or are you relying on Wikipedia for your information? You seem to be getting bogged down in details that really don't pertain to the original question. To ghostunit: If you are interested in the language, go for it. Don't listen to all the "OMG! It's SO hard!" rhetoric. It's unhelpful to everyone. If you have a genuine interest in the language, you'll eventually learn it. R. == 4 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
