Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Are some languages easier to learn?

From:Josh Brandt-Young <neonwave7@...>
Date:Saturday, October 17, 1998, 1:08
On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 20:05:55 -0400 Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> writes:

>But why should some languages be harder *inherently* to learn? All >children learn languages in about the same time, suggesting that >there's >no inherent differences in difficulty, and that ease and difficulty >depend purely on your L1, and previous second languages.
Indeed...suddenly I have this sense of deja-vu.
>Well, about a quarter of the world's languages are classified as >ergative, so it's not all that rare. Ergative isn't one of the basic >types, it's more a continuum with accusative on the opposite end. The >four (or three) main types are: isolating, agglutinating, fusional >(AKA >(in)flectional), and polyagglutinative; altho the last is sometimes >considered a subtype of agglutinating.
Wow! Really? That's very cool--I had no idea there were that many ergative languages around. Could you list some? I know of Basque and Georgian, but that's all I can think of. "Polyagglutinative"...I think you mean "polysynthetic," yes? ---------- Josh Brandt-Young <neonwave7@...> "After the tempest, I behold, once more, the weasel." (Mispronunciation of Ancient Greek) ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]