Reading in stupid English

>>73049563
(You)

No counterarguments, anglocucks? I knew it!

The primitiveness of the English language is unjustifiable.

we need to boycott English

>>73049563
Your primitive understanding of English gives you a false impression of its limitations. This is understandable since you're a foreigner, but any semi-literate native speaker would run rings around you.

>>73049563

English is a very efficient language that is extremely rich in vocabulary.

To test this I like to take an English song and translate it directly into another language. How many useless syllables are gained when that is done? Odds are a lot. The song usually becomes unsingable in the other language. That's because English is more efficient.

What about the vocabulary? If you do something similar, like take a sentence in English and another language and compare how many different ways you can convey the same message. English usually wins in this too.

I think Mandarin is more efficient than English in terms of syllables used to convey a message, though.

>>73052965
I bet my understanding of English is infinitely greater than yours.

>>73049563
Simple, where English lacks in sentence structure flexibility it makes up for in vocabulary.

>>73053591
when it comes to vocabulary Russian wins hands down

Russian sucks lol
Byala zyala fyala kyala sdruza prozya preljo

File: CLAYMORE129_13.png (182KB, 860x1200px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 860x1200px

>>73049563
Dunno, manga and games are ok. It can depend on particular style.

>>73053591
Rap is not song, silly.

>>73053764
Do they internet in donbass

>>73053640
I think not, moy brat'.

>>73053591
Just ask a foreigner to translate 'cheesy'. And not in the sense of 'cheese'.

>>73055776
PS.

Other untranslatable words include 'gerrymander', 'camp' (in the homosexual sense), and 'gungho'.

>has a language that is highly inflected
>thinks hes not primitive

lmao

File: 5848139+_09c7755af593d9197d8b32e3a50ccf6f.jpg (191KB, 470x595px)

191KB, 470x595px

Inflected languages will go the way of polytheism, inshallah.

>>73049563
>calls language primitive
>compares it to language with no definite or indefinite articles
good post friend

Хopoший вpaч (good doctor)
Хopoшeгo вpaчa (of good doctor)
К хopoшeмy вpaчy (to good doctor)
C хopoшим вpaчoм (with good doctor)
O хopoшeм вpaчe (about good doctor)
Russian is too difficult because of the grammar change. English is the best.

File: 7236303-L.jpg (32KB, 312x400px)

32KB, 312x400px

Reminder: Anglos invented analytic philosophy because English is the most logical language

>>73056088
>no genders
>no declension
>only 26 letters

File: i can see through you lies.jpg (260KB, 900x900px)

260KB, 900x900px

>>73049563

File: 1490145967566.jpg (6KB, 250x201px)

6KB, 250x201px

>>73056276
>no useless arcane bullshit

Cool

>>73056360
>articles
>gerund
>implying not useless shit

>>73056276
>no genders
>implying there is anything remotely bad about that

>>73056276
> no genders
There are genders.

> no declension
There is declension.

> only 26 letters
Italian has fewer.

>>73056423
> articles
Sapir-Whorff hypothesis. As you have grown up not using articles, you cannot fundamentally understand their uses and nuances. The difference between 'beauty', 'the beauty', and 'a beauty' is massive in English.

> gerund
Your misunderstanding of their use does not mean that they're useless.

>>73056276
Fuck genders. Highly fusional morphology and free word orders are the shit.

>>73056568
>Sapir-Whorff hypothesis
Is bullshit.

>>73056568
>There are genders.
In English? Nice joke.

Also, no cases.

>>73056728
> He is bad. She is good.
See? Genders.

> no cases
There are cases: two of them.

File: error-identification-7-screw-ups-7-638.jpg (57KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 638x479px

>>73056728
English has cases, it's just not fully inflected anymore

File: 1490191531516.png (81KB, 308x302px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 308x302px

>>73056815
>See? Genders.

>>73056815
>There are cases: two of them.

Nah, they are too simplified and primitive.

>>73056913
Whoever made this picture should be hung: my/mine, etc., are not pronouns.

>>73057037
*hanged

Also they absolutely are pronouns

:^)

>>73056815
>See? Genders.
Is that still April 1 in the UK?
Cool.
What about nouns, verbs and adjectives? They also have genders?

>>73057030
Compared to your mess of a language, perhaps.

But English manages quite well without inflection. Indeed, English manages to convey more information per syllable than any other language except Mandarin.

>>73056919
'He' is the *masculine* third-person pronoun subjective, 'she' the *feminine*. Gendered pronouns, son.

>>73057119
'Hung' is also fine.

Pronouns stand for ('pro') nouns ('noun') = 'pronoun'. Put 'my' in the place of a noun.

> I read the book.
> I read it (pronoun).
> I read its (not a pronoun).

Sorry, son. They're possessive adjectives.

>>73057127
Some nouns have gender, if they are animate beings with an inherent gender ('mother', 'father'). Most nouns have no gender.

This is only logical. 'Tables' are not 'shes', I'm afraid.

>>73057300
"Mine" can be placed after the noun it represents; for this reason it is a possessive pronoun, not a possessive adjective. Most style guides still prescribe against the usage of 'hung' to mean 'hanged'.

File: 1490797657820.jpg (40KB, 625x626px)

40KB, 625x626px

>>73057300
>son
>Some nouns have gender, if they are animate beings with an inherent gender ('mother', 'father').
This is desperation.

>>73057582
'Desperation' for what?

The English system is obviously superior. Inanimate objects literally have no gender, animates do.

>>73057569
> "Mine" can be placed after the noun it represents
It still represents an adjective: it's called a predicate.

> the book is red (adjective as predicate)
> the book is mine (possessive adjective as predicate)

>>73057811
>animates do.
No.

>>73057939
Of course they do; gender is simply not identified with any declension in English.

>>73058011
u r pig

>>73058011
There's no point in reasoning with you. Learn Russian and you'll see why you're wrong on so many points.

File: 546565465.png (260KB, 1001x596px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1001x596px

>>73057300
>Some nouns have gender, if they are animate beings with an inherent gender ('mother', 'father'). Most nouns have no gender.

This is about grammatical gender (genus), not semantic gender (which is not grammatical anyway). Gender is not only feminine/masculine, it also comes in other forms. Danish for example has commongender and neutralgender. The neutral exists in plenty of other languages (german for example, and latin had one), while the common includes both feminine and masculine.

Semantic gender and grammatical gender are not really related, for example the german word "Mänchen"(means: Girl) is neutralgender, instead of female or common.

Languages without grammatical gender are English, Chinese, Japanese, Esperanto, Hungarian, Turkish, Finnish among others, while the majority of indo-euro languages use grammatical gender. To name a few: Danish, German, Russian, Spanish, French, Slovenian, Norwegian, Polish, Latin, Slovakian, Greek, Arabic etc.

>>73056481
Makes traps more possible :(

>>73058135
>This is about grammatical gender (genus), not semantic gender
They don't even have explicit semantic gender most of the time, this is just a stupid argument.

>It's a "my language has genders because it allows talking about them" episode
fantastic

>>73057037
relative pronouns

>>73058076
I have learnt a little Russian, along with many other languages; I still think that ungendered inanimates is the superior system.

> Haec est mea mensa, ea est rotunda.
> This is my table, she is round.

> Vot moy stol, eto krugliy.
> Here is my table he is round.

Shit's retarded, yo.

>>73058597
'Who' is a pronoun, but 'my', 'your', etc., are not.

File: 1489809531876.png (71KB, 534x372px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 534x372px

>>73058681
Whose would be a relative pronoun I reckon

My, your, mine etc. are called possessive pronouns / also called possessive adjectives. Mine, yours, ours etc. are called Absolute possessive pronouns.

>>73049563
Why don't you just read in your own language instead of someone else's you cuck.

>>73052739
Feel free.

>>73049563
>The word order is so clamped.
Without declination of nouns and adjectives, without conjugation of verbs, without accusative, genitive and dative cases, it became difficult to tell the meanings of the string of words in the sentences.

The typology of English word order was the price paid to separate the romance language rules of grammar from the guttural origins of Anglo-Saxon.

>>73049563
I tried to read "Der Steppenwolf" in English, and boy does it sucked.

>>73060800
>it became difficult to tell the meanings of the string of words in the sentences
A shame the language didn't develop a system of particles, like in Japanese and Korean. They can allow for far more flexibility of the structure of clauses. Oh well.

File: русская нация.jpg (228KB, 500x750px)

228KB, 500x750px

>>73049563
Come on, silly boi, Russian is just oinking and gruntings.