Re: Optimum number of symbols,

En réponse à John Cowan <jcowan@...>:

>
> I agree that it's impossible to count vocabulary in a cross-linguistic
> way, but I do think that English has a large vocabulary as languages
> go,
> because of its mixed Germanic and Romance lexicon, and its incredibly
> subtle if rather pointless lexical distinctions.  A member of this
> list,
You could say it, it was me :)) .

> whose English is normally very good, used "grab" a while back where
> "grasp" would have been the Right Thing.  I wrote privately pointing
> this out, and got a reply to the effect of, I do appreciate the help,
> but I will never be able to remember this distinction: it is too
> subtle
> (and pointless)!
Actually I didn't say that. I just said that the words were too close
phonologically and by spelling for me to remember which one is which. It's not
that I could not remember the distinction, but that I tend to forget which verb
has which meaning. So I can very easily remember the distinction, however
subtle it may be (not very much in my opinion), but the verbs are so similar
that I constantly swap their roles. If the verbs were more different, probably
I wouldn't have this problem.

  (Another example: "I do appreciate" sounds sincere,
> whereas a simple "I appreciate" might be sincere or sarcastic.  Who's
> to
> know these things outside the L1 community?)
>
True.

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.