Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site scc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!lsuc!pesnta!scc!steiny
From: steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re:  Re: Easy languages
Message-ID: <609@scc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-Jan-86 23:54:35 EST
Article-I.D.: scc.609
Posted: Mon Jan 20 23:54:35 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 21-Jan-86 09:07:37 EST
References: <10132@tardis.UUCP> <771@spar.UUCP> <130@calma.UUCP> <879@h-sc1.UUCP>
Organization: Don Steiny Software
Lines: 31

In article <879@h-sc1.UUCP>, breuel@h-sc1.UUCP (thomas breuel) writes:
>
> English grammar has been simplified a lot as compared to, say,
> German grammar. The English language has simply evolved other
> (non-grammatical) means for expressing concepts for which
> a German speaker would use grammar. One of these non-grammatical
> means is, I would postulate, the immense vocabulary that the
> English language has evolved over the centuries.
> 
	You are kidding, right?   That is why it is good idea to use
smiley faces with jokes if the could be interpreted as serious
statements.

	1) Vocabulary (the lexicon of a language) is part of its
	   grammar.

	2) English expresses reltionships like "subject," "object,"
	   and so on by word order and not inflections like German
	   does.   How could you say that simplifies the grammar?
	   Even stranger is your claim that it is "non-grammatical."
	   I have found it is easier to write parsers for inflected
	   languages than for ones that depend on word order to
	   express grammatical relationships (like English and Chinese).


-- 
scc!steiny
Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software 
109 Torrey Pine Terrace
Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060
(408) 425-0382