The difficulty of a language, isn't absolute, it's relative. There isn't a grammar that would be seen as easiest by everyone, because everyone bases easiness on the similarity to their own language. For example, a Serb would find Russian much easier than say someone who speaks Vietnamese due to the huge difference in grammar.orangeban said:Not too sure what best means, but he was saying that English is the best language and I think Latin is easiest to learn, and frankly that's my only qualification for a good language (also, Latin depends less on finicky punctuation and word order)megamanenm said:Uh, is Latin supposed to be the best language again? What does "best" even mean?orangeban said:Hip hip for this dude, just jumping on to the bandwagon here to say stuff you Versuvius with your "British Isles can join in if they want." Dude, Scotland (and Ireland and Wales) have just as much claim to English as England. And frankly I think we should all revert to Latin if we're talking about the "best" language (though the number system would need changing up, it lacks a zero) because it definetly seems the easiest language.megamanenm said:First of all I never said that language should evolve (that would make the job of linguists SO much easier), I just said that it does. Anyway it's clear that you just hate the US for some unknown reason, and that you are looking for ways to justify that. As long as you understand that change isn't bad (as humans like to thing with EVERYTHING), then my job here is done.Versuvius said:Its 50/50. Yes i believe language should evolve but i do find americanisms infuriating, coupled with the godawful, ear raping accents i feel im obliged to be opposed to this nonsense infiltrating the nation through wank US media. It should evolve. Just not from the US brand of change. I guess i just dont like the USmegamanenm said:... wow. I really hope you're trolling here. Do you think that people sit around a table and decide how language evolves or something? Of course not, it just happens. When a group of people split off, they evolve their languages in different ways, this is how dialects arise. It happens to Dutch (Afrikaans) and it happened to Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese for example). And grammaticality isn't based on "logic" in any language, if you want logic then use math, if you want to communicate then use language.Versuvius said:Because America is bastardising the language in illogical ways. Should it not be up to ENGLAND (And possibly the british isles if they want to join in) to evolve the language? Not colonists who didn't like our taxes and dumped tea in the ocean? I mean the Boston Tea Party by law means that the US has no right to actually evolve a language they just borrowed because lets face it, it is the best.megamanenm said:I refer you back to the post I made before this. Language evolves, it doesn't devolve, that's would make no sense, is the English of the 13th century wrong? Which "version" of English is best? No version is the best, and here we can back to the word "different".Versuvius said:I refer you back to an earlier quote of the Queen. "Dear Mr. Jobs: There's no such thing as 'american english', just english.... and mistakes"megamanenm said:Nobody is getting anything wrong, they're just differences. Why can't people understand that differences between English dialects (or any language) aren't good or bad?Versuvius said:The chips vs fries and chips vs crisps thing irritates me to no end. Damn Americans can't even get that right.![]()