COLOURS ARE FUCKING COLOURS. WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING, FRANCE?!

  • Lumidaub@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    I know you’re not speaking English while complaining about irregular grammar in other languages, I just know.

  • flango@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    The change is due to the gender Le manteau (masculine “le”) La veste (feminine “la”). Many languages have the same concordance between gender and adjectives.

    • balsoft@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      I think it’s more about how this doesn’t follow the usual rule for adjective agreement. By that rule it would be le manteau blanc / la veste blance, but that sounds weird and un-French I suppose so “blanche” it is. (I don’t know French very well so take this all with a grain of salt)

  • Caveman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    Next topic: When and when not to pronounce a consonant as schwa /ə/.

    Spoiler: It depends

  • pseudo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    That regular. This lesson is just written by someone who barely knows french.

    The regular feminin form for adjectif ended in -c in the masculin form is to end either in -che [ʃ] or [k] .

    Blan-c / blan-che Se-c / se-che Fran-c / fran-che

  • Hlodwig@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Bruh its like spanish with -a or -o suffixes…

    In french you just add -e at the end (like brun/brune), in this case you have to add an h cause blance is ugly, so its blanche, and every word ending with a c is the same (sec/sèche for example). Pretty normal…

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    Big complaints from someone with a language where the connection between the written text and its pronunciation can only be described as rather weak.

      • Siegfried@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        It is the same word

        Edit: i still understand being puzzled by this, but the thing is, learning a language partially forces you to learn how the native speakers think… i would even argue that is the final milestone on learning a language.

        Spanish found a way to supress the subject from it’s sentences

        Germans speak as if they were assembling a puzzle

        Japanese looks like a programming language… pretty neat

        Russian has two different plurals and the quantity that makes a word fall in the first one or the second one is “arbitrary”.

        I know this looks like a gigantic mountain to climb, but i assure you that as you advance, things will progressively make more sense

        spoiler

        That does not apply to the numbers… it feels like a toddler forgot how to count and started making up shit. What really bothers me is not that but the amiguity… 4 20 sounds exactly as 80

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 days ago

          Estonians found a way to communicate without sex, future, articles or prepositions. Oh, sounds like a super easy language to learn with fewer things in it, right? Fuck you, we have 14 cases so we could tell foreigners from native speakers by how they confuse genitive and partitive, two of the most basic cases. And then most cities, towns, villages you’d go to use illative (“into”) to say “I’m going to X”, but some will be allative (“onto”) and there’s no rule for it, so people from other parts of the country might not know it and it’ll sound super weird.

          And I still find English to be the weird language. Just look at the different words written as “lead”. Why are they pronounced so differently?! Nothing is pronounced as written.

        • Peacepath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 days ago

          It is not an ambiguity, it is a remaining from a popular way to count. Just as you may count per hundreds and 4 100 sounds like 400, and means it. But you may also count things by dozen (most likely for eggs…).

          Yet you may use “octante” (beligum) or “huitante” (swiss) instead of “quatre-vingt”.

          • Siegfried@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            12 days ago

            You are right… i never paid attention to it cause spanish does not have this until 1000

            4 (cuatro), 100 (cien), 400 (cuatrocientos)

            4, 1000 (mil), 4000 (cuatromil)

            Thanks, this helps me

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    Its counter intuitive but a certain amount of irregularity helps languages. By far the easiest rated languages are isolating and lightly inflecting langauges, and from my experience this is even true if your native language is agglutinative. What a lot of these “easy” languages have in common is that theyre not inherently regular, they have irregular word endings and totally arbritary ways of constructing sentences in a way to convey meaning. On the other hand you have of course the languages that are just so irregular that theres no vibe you can go off of like in romance languages(theyre extremely easy to learn if you move to place where theyre spoken) like navajo. Many words go from “i mean that “s” or “a” fits there” to “why is the word form changing completely in this one specific case”, on other words you loose all grounding. But i believe the reason a lot of people struggle with highly synthetic languages is the exact opposite, you have to specify everything in the right way or your sentence wont make sense. In highly irregular languages any piece of a sentence could be very important to the meaning, in a highly regular language every piece of the sentence is important to the meaning and right in the middle are languages that mostly follow rules but not always. Also in very regular languages its often not possible to make the reductions which humans love to do. You might have to specify a piece of information over and over in different ways without it leading to the sentence being more understandable. Idk these are my two cents as a definitely native speaker of hungarian and kinda sorta native english speaker.