Is english the most efficient language in the world?

Practise your Japanese please. Your construction is grammatically incorrect. What you said isn't "it's actually Japanese" but a nondescript "this is Japanese" (in context it can be easily mistaken as saying that your image of Mugi is the Japanese language, just an example to point out how wrong it is).

I couldn't disagree more. I speak an agglutinative language (Turkish), and perfectly equivalent sentences aggl. languages are usually much shorter, making them more efficient by definition.

I can speak four different languages, and from my personal experience English tends to more vague and equivocal due to the lack of cases and other complex grammatical features, whereas other languages are usually more precise.

Modern Turkish is an artificial language, you should be, if your language was 'organic' be speaking an almost Arabic dialect.

Since language exists to communicate information, that must be what you are referring to as being the most efficient. Yes, English is the most efficient language to communicate information. This image shows a ranking of this, the higher the number the more efficient the language. Source is the, "University of Lyon".

I would say its also one of the easiest to learn the rules to as well. Using tenses, constructing sentences is pretty easy. There are some weird exceptions that could be confusing to new learners, but there are just outliers.

Not the roach, but you are retarded.

You do know there was a reform from Ottoman Turkish, which was basically Arabic, to modern Turkish right? Because if not, you're the only retard here, wannabe roach.

No, that would be Ithkuil.

>Turkic language
>a semitic language
You do know that the reform was about the writing system, not the language itself, right? Plenty of languages have changed their writing systems.

Moron.

>thinks language = vocabulary

The sample size for that "study" was 59. So thank you for the garbage data user.

>During the peak of Ottoman power, Persian and Arabic vocabulary accounted for up to 88% of its vocabulary,[3] while words of Arabic origins heavily outnumbered native Turkish words.[4]
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Turkish_language
Ah yeah, totally isn't Arabic. :^)

>Consequently, Ottoman Turkish was largely unintelligible to the less-educated lower-class and rural Turks, who continued to use kaba Türkçe ("raw/vulgar Turkish", as in Vulgar Latin), which used far fewer foreign loanwords and is the basis of the modern Turkish language.
>>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Turkish_language

Actually, you're in the wrong here. It's pretty obvious what he's referring to, and there isn't anything grammatically incorrect about the sentence. Please learn what "grammatically" means.

>Peasants matter
Sorry for amusing that was part of the intelligentsia, I just guess he's one of the many posers on Veeky Forums. Who knew? :^)

>the majority of the words in English have a latin origin (either as proper latinate or as indirect imports through some other Romance language, chiefly French)
>therefore English is a Romance language
This is how retarded you are.

>*amusing = assuming

It's obvious you don't know a lick of Japanese.so don't opine on it.

ottoman turkish was a jargon, not a separate language.

>the majority of the words in English have a latin origin
No they don't...
This is how retarded you are.

It's obvious you don't know a lick of Japanese, so don't opine on it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_conquest_of_England#Language

You really are a clueless dumb-ass.
wp.stolaf.edu/japanese/ressource-projects/genki-i-ii-grammar-index/kore-sore-are-dore-genki-i-chapter-2/

Not true. Upper-class Ottoman Turkish was heavily influenced by Arabic (in terms of vocabulary, grammar remained virtually unaffected), but the average Turkish persons' speech back in the day was still way more Turkish than Arabic.

Atatürk got rid of many Arabic and Persian words, true, but that doesn't mean that Turkish is an "artificial language" at all. Most "new" Turkish words already existed but were considered archaic. Some words were made-up but they incorporated roots from other existing words.

Atatürk only replaced a thousand words, at best.

So, how exactly is Turkish an artificial language?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_language_influences_in_English

That'll be all words, e.g. all Latin scientific words. Words commonly spoken I think are still mostly Germanic.

>No they don't...

>Words commonly spoken I think are still mostly Germanic.
The same was true of Turkish.

>He doesn't know what a majority is
Why don't we try one with actual numbers?
Oh look, I was right. That is unless, you don't actually know what majority is.
>This is how retarded you are.

And what's this supposed to prove? Where does it say his sentence is grammatically incorrect? Also, genki is a textbook, not a grammar guide. I'm done discussing with you.

Have a good day.

see and enjoy getting BTFO.

not sure if you are trolling or really retarted

see .
see .
BTFOing half of Veeky Forums over here, fun times.

do you realise that french is a latin language?

>Latin + French = 58%
Do you even know what "majority" means, moron? Probably not, since it comes from French.

not true. that only applied to the ottoman elite. "normal" people used way fewer arabic words, elite ottoman turkish was even unintelligible to them.

see , I apologize for assuming well of the user and should've just taken him as a Turkish hick.

You do realize that still doesn't make it Latin, just like Turkish isn't Arabic for the same reason.

see and still get BTFO, like a German U-boat.

you do realise that this was how the argument started?

No one said it it, cretin. On the contrary, the argument was how English isn't a Romance language in spite of the majority of its vocabulary being of latin origin.

french descends from latin. turkish doesn't descend from arabic. turkish isn't even related to arabic, both languages belong to completely different language families. not only has turkish's grammar nothing to do with arabic, its vocabulary is also not really that much influenced by arabic.

>English was a mistake

Kek, so French is Latin when you want it to be, but Turkish isn't Arabic for the same reasons? Lol the fucking hypocrisy of Veeky Forums sophists is disgusting. Check and fucking mate you pricks.

shit nobody knows who claims what.

vocabulary =/= language

english is not a romance language
turkish is not arabic

/thread

>the cretin is a frogposter
The influx of mentally handicapped normalfags from /pol/ (and other sites) really ruined this board.

>Says a hypocrite
Suck a dick.

Go back to moron.

This whole thread was a mess.

I very much doubt you know what "hypocrite" means.

Pretty hilarious coming from the faggots who can't argue a consistent point.

You and your ilk, Q.E.D.

is it like hypotenuse?

No, it's closer to hippopotamus.

@9350222
The point was clear from the start and consistently argued for. It's just that you're retarded.

Its the universal language but its far from being efficient. German for example is more efficient because of its use of contractions to convey specific meanings for instance.

No, it wasn't. That's the funny thing, you claimed my mostly jocular point about Ottoman Turkish was so drastically wrong, simply because of vocabulary and then tried to claim English was a Romance language for the same reasons you riled against me.
That's the fucking definition of hypocrisy, you prissy little puke.

wrong

at least offer an argument to support your point otherwise your opinion holds no weight here.

Something something something Nazis.

Seems to be more data than you are bringing to the table, user. You are welcome for that.

that's a shit study. 5 out 7 languages are european and related to each other, and show little variation in grammar (relatively speaking). a conclusive study would have examined morelanguages that aren't relate at all, like european languages, arabic, korean, finnish, turkish, etc.

>tried to claim English was a Romance language
It was a sort of reductio ad absurdum. I was attributing that argument to you, to illustrate how dumb it is.
>my mostly jocular point
>TL: I was only pretending to be retarded
I believe you.

It used only the top most spoken languages. Do you have another study that includes a larger sample size and more languages?

Garbage data is worse than no data. The rest of the methodology was also pretty inadequate actually comparing speech rapidity, not what the authors purport (the density of the information conveyed). It's an apples vs oranges comparison.
Shit study.

German words are much longer on average than english, using more letters to convey the same message. Not very efficient. They do have words for very specific thoughts though.

source: ravi.io/language-word-lengths

exceept it doesn't. hindustani, bengali, arabic, portuguese, russian, etc. are more spoken than some of the languages in that study, yet weren't featured at all.

>Do you have another study that includes a larger sample size and more languages?

I don't. I merely said that study isn't really conclusive. I made no other claims.

that's misleading because german words can be combined. e.g. a table leg is called TIschbein (Tisch + Bein = Tischbein). In German it's counted as a singular word, English thinks it's two separate words.

Same syllables, same amount of letters in that case. coefficient of letter efficiency is 1

um, didn't you understand my argument at all? the average length of german words is longer precisely because german words can be combined.

here's an example: Hausfrau, Wandfarbe

in Englisch gold paper, wall colour

--> english words are shorter because they are not combined.

meant to write Goldpapier, not Hausfrau.

Yes because all the rich white people speak it.

Grammar and spelling are less important for a native english speaker to understand you. Sure it will sound weird but it rarely becomes incomprehensible. This is a direct consequence of all its other flaws, it's a very forgiving language. Makes sense it's the go-to shared language of the globe honestly.

(You)

If we take into totality the conveyence of information and logical order of conveyed information, yes.

Problem with all languages including english is that words lack frame of reference which creates the concept of misunderstanding.
English, however, is the only language that at least attempts to meet the misunderstanding, while every other language creates flawed logic which confuses matters and communication even more and often to the point of driving their cultures to literal retardation.
Asian cultures that use symbol words derived from chinese (or simply just chinese itself) breed fuckhead autistic shitters who spend their lifetimes repeating half of all information spoken to them to make sure they understand which of the gorillion homonyms were just used while studying and learning to write and interpret all the various word characters and combinations which also takes a lifetime, the basic equivalent of if english had 52 more letters that sounded virtually identical to the established 26, with tens of thousands of more words considered common language spelled similarly to existing common words, but with different meanings. Non-synonymous homonyms and non-homonymic synonyms where
every other conversation breaks down to
>"went running and yada yiada blah bl-"
>>"oh you mean like X or...?"
>"yes, X, yada blah blah hit by a car-"
>>"oh my god, like Y? You got hit by a car?"
>"no, like Z, and blah shit yada James"
>>"oh JAMES got hit by a car like W"
>"yes james but no, not W but V"
>>"ah soudesune"
korean is honorific with a reduced typset from hangul in reading and writing, but falls prey to the same fucked up misinterpretation of too-similar pronunciations.

You consider a language that takes on the role of disambiguation, rather than leaving it to the context, to be more efficient? Seriously?
There's a reason we write '1+1=2' instead of Principia Mathematica-sized derivations in the language of set theory, even though the latter has a smaller alphabet.
In what sense is the latter more efficient?

Ne, esperanto estas la plej kompetenta lingvo,

English is 1+1= 2

Other latin languages are 2 = [math]\frac{1}{2}[/math] + 0.5 + 1

Asian languages are 0.999... = ([math]\frac{9}{10}[/math] + [math]\frac{9}{100}[/math])= 0.9 + ([math]\frac{9}{100}[/math] + [math]\frac{9}{1000}[/math])= 0.99 + ([math]\frac{9}{1000}[/math] + [math]\frac{9}{10000}[/math])= 0.999 +
•••

FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING NIGGER BACK TO /leftypol/ or /int/ fuck you and your gay, ugly cultureless, rootless language. Disgusting even looking at it you fucking fiend

Might I suggest reading more?

"Efficient" means getting your intent across quickly?
In that sense, English is more efficient than German. A English sentence translated into German usually requires a larger text-block in German.
On the other hand, Chinese is a more "concise" language than English. One might even argue that Chinese is _too_ concise! It's loaded with homonyms which, when spoken, can often be distinguished by pitch. When written though, the reader has to rely upon context. It's very easy to make puns in Chinese. In fact, it's almost impossible _not to_!

Calm down sweetie

Often. The difference between English and most other languages is that English is based on word order rather than spelling. What this means is that the rules for spelling and conjugation are simple and can often be broken without consequence. Word order rules are much easier to glean through sheer practice. That's why there are so many crappy English speakers who are still intelligible even with the accent.

No
Latin>>>>the rest

Spoken, written, or digital?

Oh i read plenty.

Maybe, but... (((vsauce jingle))) for what...?

There are many languages - colloquial languages, sports languages, mathematical languages, programming languages, and general purpose human to human verbal languages. Some of them are better for certain purposes than others

So is there anything that makes languages unique? Well language is simply a method of information compression and communication between intelligent agents. From this perspective, network protocols are kinds of languages. The IP protocol for instance is very efficient for routing traffic over the internet. The TCP protocol language is great for streaming text which needs error correcting, like websites. The UDP protocol language is great for lossy information whose perfection doesn't matter much, like voice calls

What about body language? Is it a language? What about fashion based language? Signposts and symbols like a red barber shop pole?

Language is everything and nothing at the same time - something invented by us to describe the world

>hurr durr

The Romantic languages are more efficient as modifications of single words allow for more expression.

For example:

English: I eat dinner
Spanish: Cenar

However with longer phrases this efficiency diminishes...

English: I love to speak the Spanish language
Spanish: Me encanta hablar el idioma de Español

Whoops

*English: To have dinner
*Spanish: Cenar