3 ms·

your comment on the surface seems right but let's be real, languages are created (or evolved in the case of natural languages) to suit a purpose. The Eskimos h

your comment on the surface seems right but let's be real, languages are created (or evolved in the case of natural languages) to suit a purpose. The Eskimos have 50 different words for snow, so when conversing about snow I'd say using the Eskimo language makes you much more intelligent or at least more articulate... now I'd also image that the amount of content that went into evolving a language differs from language to language and given this obvious fact some are more "smart" than others ... now I am not on the side of any one language, just making an observation.

Chris2048 9y ago
The basis of your observation isn't True: https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/no-the-inuit-dont-have-100-words-for-snow https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/no-the-inuit-dont-have-1... However, even if there were a language that specialised in snow, that's an entirely different thing to one language being 'smarter' than another. In this case, why would French be any more evolved in general than English?
- thedatamonger 9y ago
  One good link deserves another. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/there-really-are-50-eskimo-words-for-snow/2013/01/14/e0e3f4e0-59a0-11e2-beee-6e38f5215402_story.html?utm_term=.0ff0107504ae https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/there... The point I was trying to make is the same. Some languages are more descriptive about a given domain in a shorter space and thus can convey an idea in vastly less time than another language. Now you could do some hand waiving and say we use prefixes and suffixes all the time and you could make up words till the end of time but the important fact here is that people speaking a given language actually USE those words, because of their need to be descriptive within a given domain, and WITHIN that domain I'd say they are smarter by my definition of smart. More articulate, more succinct, more versed (within a given domain), and more experienced. Every profession has it's own language, and rightly so, because time is precious and we need to convey meaning quickly. Words created and collected for a given purpose are still words, just look at a medical dictionary.

Chris2048 9y ago

The basis of your observation isn't True: https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/no-the-inuit-dont-have-100-words-for-snow https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/no-the-inuit-dont-have-1... However, even if there were a language that specialised in snow, that's an entirely different thing to one language being 'smarter' than another. In this case, why would French be any more evolved in general than English?

thedatamonger 9y ago
One good link deserves another. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/there-really-are-50-eskimo-words-for-snow/2013/01/14/e0e3f4e0-59a0-11e2-beee-6e38f5215402_story.html?utm_term=.0ff0107504ae https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/there... The point I was trying to make is the same. Some languages are more descriptive about a given domain in a shorter space and thus can convey an idea in vastly less time than another language. Now you could do some hand waiving and say we use prefixes and suffixes all the time and you could make up words till the end of time but the important fact here is that people speaking a given language actually USE those words, because of their need to be descriptive within a given domain, and WITHIN that domain I'd say they are smarter by my definition of smart. More articulate, more succinct, more versed (within a given domain), and more experienced. Every profession has it's own language, and rightly so, because time is precious and we need to convey meaning quickly. Words created and collected for a given purpose are still words, just look at a medical dictionary.