Nooalf Discussion

POSTED BY: m52nickerson
UPDATED: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 13:45
VIEWED: 39366
PAGE 15 of 17

So Id have to write in standardised american dialect to communicate globally. That sucks.

I don't know how many accents you've actually encountered in real life, but they vary significantly. Depending on where people live, seems to be able to determine what they can understand.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I understood most uv the Gourdy and about haf the Scottish gang punk.

I'v been to Newcastle and had no trouble understanding anybody when they were talking to me. But wen they talked to each other they often went full speed completely in their dialect and it wuz hard to follow.

You are both intentionally miskarakterizing the situation. Like relijus zealots protesting agenst teknolojy.

Fear uv chanje.

I suppoze you didnt bother looking it up at Time.com.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

"My point iz that evn if sumwunz local dialect iz so far off that its effectivly a different language, the saturation uv media in American broadcast standard in English speaking countryz iz so hi that you'd hav to be living in a cave to not understand it.

I'v met people who I coudnt understand 1 word from, yet they understood me."

---

Is this not your post?

1) a group of people effectively speaking a different language (local dialect iz so far off that its effectivly a different language)
2) I've met people who I couldn't understand 1 word from

So here we have a group of people whose dialect is SO DIFFERENT many people can't understand them. But when they WRITE the STANDARD written language, magically, they can be widely understood. You propose that they give up the standard written language, and turn their unintelligible spoken language into an unintelligible written one as well.

If their spoken dialect can't be understood, and their written dialect can't be understood either, how do you propose that these people communicate with the larger world?

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Exactly.

The issue is English was phonetic, its just that people spoke differently 100's of years ago.

The K in knive and knight was actually used. 'Kniggit'

English is spoken in vastly different ways all over the world, by people who use it as their first and second language. It has naturally evolved, but the spelling stays the same.

In principle I'm not against some changes being made to standard ENglish spelling so that its somewhat easier. I'm actually not as pernicketty as some around spelling and grammar and I do see that written language needs to evolve just as verbal language itself evolves.

I just don't like your idea of a non standardized phonetically based written language. Written language doesnt have to be phonetic, and there is some advantage in it not being so. Mandarin for example does not reflect either the phonetics or the actual spoken language, and for that reason despite what dialect (not accent) someone speaks in China, they can read the language.

Like 1,2,3,4 etc don't reflect language, but ideas.

I can also see that American phonetics would dominate, something else I object too. You have stated several times that American English is the lingua franca of accents, but that doesn't stop much of the world from not using that kind of accent. You have no answer to the question about how other people from different areas would communicate with Americans, who by reputation have a low tolerance or poor ear for understanding other accents. Which would mean you'd have Glasgow man or Cork man or South African man writing English in an American phonetic manner, something that defeats the purpose of phonetic writing as we may as well keep writing in Middle English phonetics, which is pretty much what we do now.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
So here we have a group of people whose dialect is SO DIFFERENT many people can't understand them.

---

But they can understand the major dialects. And they know their dialect iz unintellijable to most people.

If they know Nooalf spelling, they can rite in wun uv the major dialects if they want everybody to understand them. If they want to get a message to sumwun with their dialect that they dont care or dont want anybody outside their group to understand, they can rite it in their dialect.

Quote:

---

But when they WRITE the STANDARD written language, magically, they can be widely understood.

---

Your mistake iz believing that the ritten word haz to hav no relation to the spoken word in order for this majik to work. A fonetic spelling system duz not preclude a standard spelling.

Another flaw in your lojik iz thinking that there iz no advantaj to a direct fonetic relation between speech & riting. The major advantajez are:

1. Way eazier to learn to read & rite.
2. More efficient to rite and read.
3. Boosts vocabulary aqcuizition efficiency.
4. Continuously promotes lojik on a fundamental level.
5. Enablez riting in dialects, accents, forin languajez, invented languajez.
Especially handy for sifi riterz.

The worst I've heard were 2 co-workerz that I believe were from the Louisiana Bayou swamp land. They pronounced common wordz very differently, hav bunchez uv their own wordz and many odd frazez and expressionz. (I'll try to find sum samplz later)

If wun uv theze backwater Louisiana rubez wuz watching an episode uv Frazier and didnt know wut BRjWo ment, he coud rite it down and look it up later (if there wuz a Nooalf dictionary), or text hiz college graduate buddy and ask.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Doesn't preclude standard spelling?

Isn't this what you think of standard spelling?

---

Thats the problem with the entire way you think. You base everything on authority.

I'm trying to rescue a fellow browncoat, but you are so brainwashed by the system, you run away from anything that looks like it mite damaj the sement in your brain.

Pity the victim.

---

I could quote a whole lot more of that exact opinion about standard spelling YOU POSTED.

So, got any answers that don't involve you having to change your claims?

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
The issue is English was phonetic, its just that people spoke differently 100's of years ago.

---

Not that simple. Therez a great book on the history uv English you shoud read.
http://www.amazon.com/Story-English-Third-Revised/dp/0142002313/ref=sr
_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1390255293&sr=1-1&keywords=the+story+of+english

Quote:

---

I do see that written language needs to evolve just as verbal language itself evolves.

---

Thats the whole problem rite there! The spelling got fossilized 2 to 3 centuryz ago!

Quote:

---

Mandarin for example does not reflect either the phonetics or the actual spoken language, and for that reason despite what dialect (not accent) someone speaks in China, they can read the language.

---

I read sumthing about a court advizor segjesting to the emporor that a fonetic system woud boost literacy in China - this wuz in sum middle age dynasty. The advizor wuz executed. The emporor realized that literacy iz power and that hiz power relied on the weakness uv the general population.

Do you know Chineze?

Quote:

---

Like 1,2,3,4 etc don't reflect language, but ideas.

---

I get wut your saying! Thats wun uv the thingz nobody gets about my name till I explain it. Its not 'sevenfivethree', its 753. Thus it will be siete cinco tres in Spanish, sieben fünf drei in German, etc.

But you are making the same lojik error 1KIKI made above. The number symbolz can reprezent both the spoken word and the consept. Spelling = consept = pronunciation. Wut you are segjesting iz that if spelling = pronunciation, it cant = consept.

Quote:

---

I can also see that American phonetics would dominate, something else I object too.

---

You have an inkling uv how the rest uv the world feelz about English.

I don't think you hav anything to worry about. The BBC iz available everywhere and your musicianz, moviez and TV showz are doing a brisk international bizness.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Way to avoid the questions, dood.

If spelling = phonetics then phonetics = spelling. So, as mentioned a few times already, people with different phonetics will spell things differently, apparently as a result of the bad cement in their thinking dissolving. If they spell their dialect, how will people who don't understand their dialect understand their writings?

I don't think I could make this question any simpler.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Jesus, is this thread still happening?

*facepalm*

Noalf, your "language" and the ensuing discussion make you come off like a pre-teen with a learning disorder. I mean no offense to pre-teens with learning disorders. Actually, they are often more comprehensible than your posts.

Language is not about efficiency, because humans are not machines. Language is about communicating all the varied traits and feelings and thoughts and cultural experiences of human beings. You might want to think about that.

And damn are you not getting it about dialects and accents. Get out some. Not everyone in the universe talks like you.


*-------------------------------------------------------------*
MAL4PREZ: Clearly [The Rap]'s doing nothing but trolling now.
STORYMARK: And not even cleverly.
RAPPY: [My trolling] did its job, did it not? Easiest marks in the 'verse.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=57146
*-------------------------------------------------------------*

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME