I always say y'all when i'm in language classes XD (whenever i'm asked to translate a sentence with ustedes/voi/ihr)

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Apr 12 2008, 3:05 pm by Doodle77.

I've always said "You guys." I don't even remember the last time I said "y'all," which means either I'm not conscious of it, or I really don't say it that much (more likely second).

People who say "lol" and "rofl" outside of the internet usually get beat up in school (unless they're part of the nerd herd). It's so freaking stupid.

Oh god! I have relatives from Texas and Kentucky and it seems y'all is all they can say .

Personally, I'm glad we're waging war against the English language. Such a dumb language.

We should all speak Lojban. And I do mean everyone.

No dude, mandarin ftw

Screw world languages. They're all messed up. I'd say Lojban is the best because you could theoretically use it to talk with computers in the future. Good ol' predicate logic.

What about sarcastically?

This.

While I agree that it would be an excellent idea, we would lose a lot of our poetry and wordplay with it. Take, for example, words that sound exactly the same but are spelled differently that can be used as literary devices: Rain/Reign; Son/Sun etc, or even better, words that just have different meanings in context, so that they may be taken ambiguously: Bow ("Take a bow for your performance." / "That is a nice bow in your hair, Leslie." / "He slinged his bow, preparing for battle"). It's the same principal that prevents such poetry in other languages, especially ones syntactically different than English, like Chinese or most other Asian languages, to be translated effectively by a strict word equivalence, or even with a context equivalence too. We would lose a lot of the meaning in literature if devices such as these were excluded, or at least the "feeling" in it.

Maybe. But that "feature" also has its downsides. All said and done, what we'd gain from wrapping our minds around the use of a logic-based language like that would be of far more value than whatever losses it would entail, ultimately.

Especially if we'd get to talk with computers.

You really want to talk to computers, don't you? You could always try a Furby...

But yeah, as far as efficiency goes, Lojban is superior.

Edit: So I've been reading up on this Lojban thing, and it reminds me intensely of the Newspeak from 1984.

Well, if the principal behind Newspeak has merit, then with the notion that language dictates thought, Lojban becomes all the more desirable. If more people put their thinking more into logic, we'd be much better equipped for problem solving and communication in general.

I was thinking along the lines of a root word with modifiers, like the root 'good' in Newspeak, and putting 'un' in front of it makes it 'ungood', meaning bad. Same principle for Lojban, like with feelings. 'iu' (love) + 'nai' (opposite of, or so I've gotten from the lessons) = 'iunai' (hate). There is no intrinsic word for hate, if I'm getting this properly.