Subject:
|
Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Tue, 11 Jan 2000 15:35:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2503 times
|
| |
|
|
On Tue, 11 Jan 2000 05:39:06 GMT, Mr L F Braun
<braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote:
> Your job options would certainly be better--Lord knows there's a lot more call for
> proofreaders for English than proofreaders for Dutch, because a *much* larger percentage
> of the relatively small number of Dutch-speakers are truly fluent in the language.
Yah. Though if you want people who can write Dutch, go to the
Flemings. The Great National Dictation Contest has been won, out of 10
years it's been running yearly, 8 or 9 times by a Belgian.
> list.] As far as proofing English, I'll see if I can pull out some good brain-twisters
> from my own work--the worst part about working with this language is the sheer amount of
> confluence in vocabulary. As I understand it, only Mandarin (classic, not modern standard
> as much) Chinese is as tangled (or snarled, or knotted, or jumbled--all similar words that
> can mean the same thing, or different things, as dictated by context or meter or...).
Jumbled seems to have a bit of a different 'feel' to it than tangled,
though. Jumbled feels more like a bnunch of solid objects, jumbled
together, whereas 'tangled' feels like a bunch of objects, solid or
non, that are not only thrown together in a mish-mash, but also
actually hook into each other.
But that's just my interpretation.
>
> On the other hand, I can't even read Dutch reliably without a dictionary. Otherwise it'll
> just be one big 'ongeluk.' (one of my favourite Dutch words.)
Dutch is a nice language, if I do say so myself.
Jasper
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
86 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
