Timeline for Is there a way to prove one language is more efficient than another language for science?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Apr 5, 2014 at 16:54 | history | suggested | sventechie | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fix word forms for clarity
|
| Apr 5, 2014 at 16:38 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 5, 2014 at 16:54 | |||||
| Nov 1, 2013 at 21:34 | answer | added | a.n.other | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jun 5, 2013 at 16:01 | answer | added | Acornrevolution | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jun 4, 2013 at 15:39 | comment | added | hippietrail | You definitely have to give us a rigorous definition for what you mean by "efficiency" for this question to be meaningful. | |
| Jun 4, 2013 at 15:08 | answer | added | babou | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 9, 2013 at 4:34 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackLinguist/status/310247095351263232 | ||
| Mar 7, 2013 at 20:59 | history | edited | Alenanno | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 80 characters in body
|
| Mar 7, 2013 at 20:10 | history | edited | prash♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 7, 2013 at 9:34 | comment | added | acattle | You cannot prove a language is more efficient than another because it relies too heavily on personal preference. You prefer English to Mandarin when talking about advanced mathematics but that does not make it objectively better for discussing advanced mathematics. If a language is capable of expressing a concept then it is obviously fit to express that concept. However, you may prefer the way it's expressed in a different language but that's subjective. | |
| Mar 7, 2013 at 7:16 | history | edited | Ave Maleficum | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 153 characters in body; edited title
|
| Mar 7, 2013 at 2:39 | answer | added | acattle | timeline score: 7 | |
| S Mar 7, 2013 at 1:09 | history | suggested | sventechie | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarify spelling and grammary
|
| Mar 6, 2013 at 23:13 | comment | added | prash♦ |
The words you mentioned, differentiate, differential, differentiation, and other such terms are nouns, verbs, and adjectives -- all open class words. That means that if a language as complex as Chinese lacks specific words, its speakers are free to invent them. I cannot read Chinese characters. Perhaps you use other marker words to indicate what 微分 means?
|
|
| Mar 6, 2013 at 22:05 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 7, 2013 at 1:09 | |||||
| Mar 6, 2013 at 16:46 | comment | added | edominic | I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment. Could you rephrase it? | |
| Mar 6, 2013 at 15:34 | answer | added | Be Brave Be Like Ukraine | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 6, 2013 at 14:35 | comment | added | Ave Maleficum | @KleinePrins Correct me if I am wrong.I think you can prove a relation between Science and Language it used.For example,what if we continue using Latin in scientific context,there maybe no science explosion. | |
| Mar 6, 2013 at 14:02 | comment | added | edominic | I'm not sure if this question is about linguistics or philosophy of science. Also, I can't see why would you need to prove Chinese unsuitable for science. If you think about your examples, they are words that come from Latin, and they were adapted to English in a scientific context. You don't really need to prove that a language is not suitable for science, What you need is a metalanguage that includes adequate terminology to explain the phenomena you're studying. There are strategies to help any language deal with linguistics: transliteration, coining of new words, paraphrasing, etc. | |
| Mar 6, 2013 at 13:37 | history | asked | Ave Maleficum | CC BY-SA 3.0 |