Omniglot forum • View topic

Sobekhotep · **Posted:** Thu 28 May 2009 10:19 pm

StorSteg wrote:

Hiya! My name's Michael, and I was signed up on the old forum as HappoKaunis486, I think... well, it was something of the sort with the word Kaunis and the numbers 486.

I'm pretty into linguistics for a middle-school student ^.^ but the art of languages really attracts me. I'm fluent in English (of course), Portuguese, and somewhat Swedish and Cambodian. I have a limited grasp on Danish, Norwegian, French, and Spanish. Right now, I'm in a Finnish phase.

In the old forum, I created a conlang called Melanian, which really didn't seem to go all that well. However, I've made some changes and hopefully brushed off enough dust. So after I put some finishing touches to the grammar and all that jazz, I'll be posting it in the Conlangs section!

Welcome to the Omniglot forum!
Cambodian, eh? I usually call it Khmer.

Jayan · **Posted:** Thu 28 May 2009 11:18 pm

Epp wrote:

StorSteg wrote:

[...] and somewhat Swedish [..] I have a limited grasp on Danish, Norwegian [...]

I would stick to Swedish (or one of the other - Norwegian?

) if I were you - doing all three is like doing both American and British English (not a perfect example, they're not THAT similar, but you get the point), you're doomed to mix them up and end up with some weird hybrid language :lol:

You Danish-hater, you!

Michael, if you're gonna learn a Scandinavian language, do Danish, it's the most interesting (except for maybe Swedish, but that sounds silly to me; Norwegian is Danish for pronunciation wimps

).

by the way, no hard feelings to the numerous Swedes and Norwegians in our midst (unless of course, they malign Danish)

Talib · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 8:22 am Posts:768 Location: Canada

Actually I think Icelandic is more interesting (not technically Scandinavian I know, but North Germanic) but I would rather learn Swedish because it seems the most useful. Norwegian looks okay too but the diglossia might get frustrating.

Sobekhotep · **Posted:** Fri 29 May 2009 7:30 pm

Jayan wrote:

Norwegian is Danish for pronunciation wimps

).

Norwegian pronunciation is not easy! Retroflex consonants, a huge vowel inventory, plus pitch accent equals a tricky phonology.

Epp · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 7:12 am Posts:50 Location: Block 982

Danish has got even more vowels! And don't care too much about the pitch accent - it's not necessary (there are even some dialects without it) and you will with 99,5% certainty never get it right anyway. I've never met a foreigner who used it correctly - even people who have lived in Norway for years. They usually stick to one of the two "tones" and use that one all the time; they are still perfectly intelligible.
I would say all three of the Scandinavian languages are hard to pronounce. Norwegian and Swedish for the reasons Sobekhotep mentioned, and Danish because of the low text-to-speech correspondence and the weird articulation.

@Jayan
I'm not a "Danish-hater", but I do think it would be more useful to learn either Swedish or Norwegian. Swedish has the most speakers, and tests have shown that Norwegians have the least difficulty understanding the two others. But, unless you reach a very high level, speaking a Scandinavian language won't get you anywhere, as the Scandinavians probably speak much better English than you speak Danish/Norwegian/Swedish anyway. I'd say pick the one that appeals to you the most, take it seriously and have fun.

Talib · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 8:22 am Posts:768 Location: Canada

I don't think retroflex consonants or front rounded vowels are hard, but Danish's "stød" (whatever the heck that is) and devoiced stops are really hard for me.

Epp · Joined:Sun 19 Apr 2009 7:12 am Posts:50 Location: Block 982

Talib wrote:

Actually I think Icelandic is more interesting (not technically Scandinavian I know, but North Germanic)

Yes, it is. It belongs to the West Scandinavian branch, which belongs to the North Germanic languages.

Jayan · **Posted:** Sat 30 May 2009 3:08 pm

oh my god I should have kept my mouth shut.

Neqitan · Joined:Fri 17 Apr 2009 9:59 pm Posts:397 Location: Canada

Talib wrote:

Norwegian looks okay too but the diglossia might get frustrating.

قطعا

طالب العربية

‏(استخدام التهكم مسل في اللغة...)

‏

Sobekhotep · **Posted:** Sat 30 May 2009 10:10 pm

Epp wrote:

And don't care too much about the pitch accent - it's not necessary (there are even some dialects without it) and you will with 99,5% certainty never get it right anyway. I've never met a foreigner who used it correctly - even people who have lived in Norway for years.

Really? That's too bad. I wonder if I could master it if I tried...

Neqitan wrote:

Talib wrote:

Norwegian looks okay too but the diglossia might get frustrating.

قطعا

طالب العربية

‏(استخدام التهكم مسل في اللغة...)

I'm guessing this post is highlighting the irony that Arabic, a language with extreme diglossia, is the focus language for Talib.