• TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just wait until you look into French numbers.

    How different languages say 97:

    🇬🇧: 90+7 (ok, there is some jank in English numbers - 13-19 are in line with the Germanic pronunciation, i.e. pronounced “right to left”, as a weird hold-over from the more Germanic Old English)

    🇪🇸: 90+7

    🇩🇪: 7+90

    🇫🇷: 4x20+10+7

    And if you think that’s bad, the Danes actually make the French look sane…

    🇩🇰: 7+(-½+5)x20

    Even Danes generally don’t really know why their numbers are like that, they just remember and go along with it.

  • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Me speaking to a French guy last week -

    “We’ve just been the the musée de l’automobile in Mulhouse”

    “Sorry, where?”

    “Mulhouse”

    “Where?”

    “Mulhouse”

    "Aaaaaah I see! It’s pronounced [pronounces Mulhouse *exactly the same FUCKING way I just pronounced it]

    😂 Happens very regularly

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To add to what that other person said, when you grow up your brain gets used to hearing the sounds common to your accent and you can even stop hearing the difference between certain sounds when someone speaks your language with a different accent!

      In Quebec french there’s a big difference between the sound of “pré” and “prè” that doesn’t exist with some of the french accents in France and they’re unable to recreate that difference and might even be unable to hear it!

      • force@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “Pré” and “prè” consistently sound distinctly different in most, dare I say almost all, accents in mainland France. The difference is the same with basically all words spelled with those vowels. “Ê” also sounds like a long “è” in most words for most people. “e” also sounds like “é” when before silent letters except for “t”, and sounds like “è” when before multiple letters or before “x” or before silent “t” or if it’s the last sound except for open monosyllabic words, and it sounds special or is silent elsewhere. “-ent” is always silent too. Obviously doesn’t apply to “en/em”, also special exception for “-er/-es”.

          • force@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The vowel sounds in “près” and “pré” are very clearly different, and the sound in “prêt” changes from “è” to “é” when in liaison because it always sounds like “è” at the end of words (and separately, in closed syllables) and always sounds like “é” in open syllables otherwise (liaison triggers a change in the syllable structure which changes the vowel here). This does not contradict what I said. You said “(pr)é” and “(pr)è” sound the same, nothing about “(pr)ê”.

  • Crass Spektakel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Enter German and Gendering: You can not say Programmer to address all Programmers in the room. You have to call them Programmerin und Programmer or Programmer:in or Programmende. And yes, most of these words aren’t even German but if you don’t use them you are a Grammar Nazi.

    And btw, the fact that we address females with “die” does not mean we want them dead, thank you and have a good day.

    • RedstoneValley@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a little bit worse than that in fact. “Programmiererinnen und Programmierer” or “Programmierer:innen” or “Programmierende”. And if you get it wrong you are not a grammar nazi but more of a regular nazi.

      /s just in case

  • merdaverse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    While gendered nouns are stupid, I at least appreciate Italian because you can just learn the word and get its gender from the end part of the word. In German, however, it’s completely random and you have to learn the gender with the word.

  • hOrni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Polish speaker here. We not only have gendered nouns but also verbs and adjectives.

  • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    intentionally misreading as wholesome - the idea is to subvert the concept of gender.

    “You’ll never be a real woman!”

    “Neither will the chair I’m sitting in but you keep calling it ‘her’ so maybe stfu.”

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Due to the increased acceptance of non-conforming identities, it’s become more prevalent to either ask for pronouns, tell them to a person you meet, or have them somewhere visible in things like gameshows.

    That’s quite as silly to me as this whole “what gender is this washing machine” nonsense is to English-speaking people.

    Here in Finland, we don’t have gendered language. Even with third person pronouns, we usually default to “it” instead of “him/her/they”. Except for pets. They always get the proper pronoun “hän”. It’s just respectful.

    So yeah, just like the English wonder why they have to learn different words for something needlessly gendered in France, I too, as a Finn, wonder why I have to learn different words for something needlessly gendered in English.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Which is why I never do, obviously.

        This is one of those things that, if translated directly, would be really, really bad.

        Now I’ve spoken English for more than a quarter century, so my mouths used to it already, but I remember when learning the language, it was rather hard for the brain to keep switching between “he” and “she”, as it was not a distinction my brain had to make before using English.

        I mean obviously I could differentiate women and men, but having to use different pronouns for both?

        Quite needless.

      • Verat@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think they maybe meant the gender neutral they/them, which we turn to “it” for the inanimate?

        Edit: on second read I’m not sure

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I do mean that we Finns use “se” very often in everyday speech to refer yo other human beings, and “se” would translate as “it.”

          Ofc I’m aware how horrible using “it” when referring yo people would be in English.

          But if someone asked me to translate a sentence like “mihin se [a person] meni”, I would ofc not use a direct translation because of how offensive and wrong it would be.

          I respect the distinctions languages have for genders, but I’m happy I grew up with one which didn’t have them. Language shapes thought. We don’t think of people as “it”, it’s just the colloquial form of the language.

          In Finnish, if you had to give a formal speech or something, most people realise to default to “hän”, the 3rd person singular.

          And if you’re doing customer service or addressing someone with the sort of respect you’d use titles with in English. Then you’d address the person in the second person plural instead of the second person singular.

          Just like English did hundreds of years ago, and it worked so well that in the end, English left the second person singular out of the language altogether. It still exists, but isn’t really used unless thou wants to pretend being from Elizabethan Britain.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I don’t see anyone accepting being called “it” in English; that’s how you refer to farm animals bound for slaughter or undesirable ethnicities you’re going to exterminate.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Why would anyone ever want to try using “it” for people in English unless they’re purposefully trying to demean someone… ?

        Sorry, I wasn’t trying to say that’s what English should do. I was describing what Finnish does.

        I’m pointing out that lots of languages have less gender distinctions than English, so English calling French out on gendered nouns is rather silly.

        My point is that despite Finland having a perfectly good third person singular for people, we usually use the even more general one, which is just for anything. Except when talking to and about pets, because then somehow everyone uses less colloquial language.

        While English has a perfectly good second person singular, but doesn’t even use it anymore.

        You can’t have more third person singulars before you finish your second person singulars, that’s the rule. Now open up!

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou

    • Gabu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You speak an uralic language, brother. Gender orno gender, having to learn a billion rules for conjugation is the problem there

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        First, I’d like to identify Finnish as a Finno-Ugric language, more than a uralic one, because “uralic” is very broad, just like, say, “Indo-European languages”. There’s several distinction within both groups.

        But yeah, there are quite a lot of grammatical cases, I can see that yeah. I wouldn’t bother learning Finnish if I wasn’t born with it, lol.

        My point is rather that English calling French out on something linguistic. English is three languages in a trenchcoat masquerading as one.

        But also, getting the conjugation wrong won’t really be offensive to anyone, whereas confusing he/she just because your brain is unused to having to specify such things and your mouth is unused to the “sh” sound in she, and ending up misgendering someone, could be. Even accidentally.

        “She sells seashells on the seashore” is a very challenging tongue twister for Finns.

        Also, note how I can write a sentence like “hän menee kirjastoon”, meaning “[3rd person nongendered singular] goes to the library”, but if you run that through a translator to English, the translator will have to make up a gender. And not surprisingly, the default is the masculine one. (Down with the patriarchy and all that.)

        Although this also means you’ll lose information when translating to Finnish. Ups and downs.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Technically so does did English, we just stopped using the male gendered pronoun sometime in the Renaissance, Early Modern Period, or Victorian Period, I don’t know when. a ton of freaking words that I got mixed up back in Old English

      Back in Shakespeare’s day, woman = female, man = gender neutral, (kinda like the word “Dude” it can be used for both women and wifmen,) and finally wifman = male.

      Still not sure why the male gendered pronoun fell out of common parlance.

      Haven’t read Shakespeare in 2 decades, sorry.

      • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Shakespeare was known to use archaic language for his plays but by his time this was largely codified into what we would recognize as modern usage. You are thinking of old English. It also goes beyond just man (used more or less like we would use the word human) , other gendered words originally had specific meaning independent of gender. You also got it a bit backwards. Wifman is female, wereman is male. Others include.

        Boy : knave or troublemaker

        Girl : Neutral word for young child. Basically like “kid”

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Thanks! No wonder his plays were so hard to read. I haven’t read Shakespeare in a good 20 years so it’s no surprise that I’ve mixed up the words and usages.

          • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            He is an interesting literary figure. And in personal opinion quite frankly kind of a hack. You got to appreciate the audacity of someone who tries to use “Dost” nearly two centuries out of date and then just out of the blue makes up wholesale complete words from scratch to fit iambic pentameter.

            I love his stuff don’t get me wrong but he wasn’t exactly highbrow entertainment of his day. Still his early modern English is easily legible. Chaucer’s middle english is distinctly more garbled and if you go back to your Old English where these terms originate it’s like trying to read another language entirely. Like this is technically English :

            Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum, þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon, hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon. Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum, monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah, egsode eorlas. Syððan ærest wearð feasceaft funden, he þæs frofre gebad, weox under wolcnum, weorðmyndum þah, oðþæt him æghwylc þara ymbsittendra ofer hronrade hyran scolde, gomban gyldan. þæt wæs god cyning.

      • joel_feila@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technically so does English, we just stopped using the male gendered pronoun sometime in the Renaissance, Early Modern Period, or Victorian Period, I don’t know when.

        around 900 ad.

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        wifman = male

        are you sure you’re not thinking of wǣpnedmann? everything I can find about wifman tells me that it means “woman” and the root derivation is “wife person”.

          • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            wer and wife

            TIL the etymology of how we talk about shapeshifters in folk myth. Dope, thank you!

            “Working late one night in the lab, Guy Fellows was bitten by a radioactive human being. Now he seems like an ordinary person, but under the full moon he undergoes a transformation and become a wereman! All the powers of an adult male human, trapped inside the frail shell of an adult male human, he is Wereman!”

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most gendered languages I know about have three genders. Oh, wait. I got it. Ha!

  • morgan423@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Non-neutral nouns have always struck me as odd. They provide no info gain whatsoever outside of actually providing a gender if you’re referring to a person or animal (for example, in Spanish, gato -> male cat, gata -> female cat). And in those situations, a short sentence can provide instant clarification if needed in a non-gendered language like English.

    It’s a language feature built to be helpful in one use case, whilst simultaneously being worse in about a bazillion others. It’s a very odd choice.

    • Blyfh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There’s an argument to be made that it might help clarifying when speaking to someone. Consider these two German sentences:

      “Der rote Apfel” – the red apple

      “Die rote Ampel” – the red traffic light

      Imagine a noisy environment, a quiet speaker or some other problem and you only understand

      “Die rote A***el” – the red x***xx

      In a language like English, you don’t have enough information to understand the meaning. The German gender system helps to direct your possible matching words (Ampel or Apfel) to the correct one, as “Die rote Apfel” is grammatically incorrect.

      Another point I want to make is that it isn’t “being worse in about a bazillion other” use cases. Native speakers don’t really have an issue with noun class systems. It’s just very unintuitive and tedious for non-native language learners to memorize all the genders of nouns.

      • Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d like to interject for a bit, if I may.

        While german has cases, somewhat more complex verbs and gendered nouns, english also has its peculiarities that make it hard for non-natives to learn. Things like spelling and using the same word in a bazillion contests and methaphor-based idioms come to mind first. There are also simple-to-understand pecularities like its/it’s and paid/payed which not even natives get right sometimes.

        The point being, for all the “hard” and “useless” parts of one language the other language (as it’s always comomparing apoles to oranges) has similarily “hard” and “useless” features itself, so in my opinion it more or less evens out.

        What makes a language “easier” or “harder” to learn is how much of it you already know. In other words that’s usually how similar it is to the languages you know already.

        • aidan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That doesn’t mean that a language can’t have more pointlessly convoluted things than another language. For example, counting in French.

        • Blyfh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mostly agree. Sorry if it came out that way, but my comment was not meant to be stating that English is way easier than German. Just wanted to point out that this “hard” and “useless” feature is not that useless and only hard for language learners.

        • marron12@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And then there’s the different ways to connect verbs in English.

          • I want to go to the movies. (“I want going” is wrong.)
          • I like going to the movies. / I like to go to the movies. (Both ways work.)
          • I despise going to the movies. (“I despise to go” is wrong.)

          There aren’t rules for that, as far as I know. Just very fuzzy guidelines at best. And word stress is pretty random too. Both of those things can be tricky for non-native speakers.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Wait until you hear that sometimes we can use both pronoums with some words but not others.

      We can say “el mar” the(male) sea, or “la mar” the(female) sea. But you would never say “la oceano” it’s only “el oceano” the(male) ocean.

  • spirinolas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Uh? I’m Portuguese and it works in the same in my language. I don’t know what the big deal is. You get the gender by the arti…

    Oh…

  • asudox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    is that like how you have to memorize every single articels (der, die, das) for every word in german?