Re: way-OT: regularity of german v. english [was: Re: OT - Programming Languages w/o English Syntax]
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 06:18:47 +0100,
Wilko Fokken <email@example.com> wrote in message
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 04:52:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 14:37, Tom wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 12:11:49PM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
> These ancient languages were known for their terse, concentrated legal
> terminology: "Frisia non cantat, Frisia ratiocinatur" (Frisia doesn't
> sing, Frisia counsels). The other linguistic root, the Latin language,
> was equally well adjusted to legislation; the "Roman Law" is still
> being studied by law-students.
> (As both linguistic ancestors proved inclined rather to legal
> terminologies, I wonder how far the English musical culture might be
> based on Celtic influences.)
> Legal terminology requires defining rock solid linguistic terms in
> order to stay firm to legal disputing. On the other hand, legal terms
> must be flexible in a certain way, to be able to cover individual
> cases through generalized rules. In legislation, the real, practical
> social life is condensed to an abstract model - quite similar to
> computing, I guess.
> Another benefit to the English language may have been the long
> seafaring history of the British nation. Sailing in rough weather
> condtions tends to shorten clumsy words (the big ones get lost), an
> effect one can find in the Dutch language, too.
..interesting. Which legal tradition named THingvellir, Iceland? ;-)
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.