The idea of the North/South Aryan/Dravidian continuum is pretty shaky tbh. I feel like I really does depend on the specific region, language and even caste-specific dialect in a lot of cases. Plus a lot of people (mostly racist Northerners) use this idea to justify their lack of Dravidian heritage which is simply not true.
Don't Hungarian case endings have to be bound morphemes? Since they can't be written as prepositions, they can't really be read as prepositions. Simples.
=Phonology of "Middle English"= ==Consonants== Plosives: p b t d k ɡ Affricates: tʃ dʒ Fricatives: f v θ ð s z ʃ ʒ h Nasals: m n ŋ Approximants: ɹ l j w ==Vowels== Close: i ɪ u Close-Mid: ø Mid: ə Open-Mid: ɛ Open: æ ɑ Diphthongs: aɪ eɪ ɔi aʊ oʊ ju =Phonology of Modern English= =Consonants= Plosives: p b t d k g Affricates: ts tʃ dʒ Fricatives: f v θ s z ʃ ʒ ç ɣʷ Nasals: m n ŋ Approximants: ɹ l j w =Vowels= Close: i ɪ u Close-Mid: e ẽ ø o Mid: ə Open-Mid: ɛ ɜ Open: æ æː ɑ =Example= Middle English: /ðis is ə fɹeɪz in ɪŋɡliʃ/ Modern English: /dis is ə fɹez in ɪnɡliʃ/
The last sentence "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi bo jest lepsze dla ich lwów". There is a mistake. Actually there are two but one is understandable. It should be "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi, bo są lepsze dla ich lwów". - jest -> są: The subject of the second part ("bo są lepsze dla ich lwów") is inferred "they" ("one": "bo <one> są lepsze dla ich lwów") and is a reference to those doors. The verb is "to be" ("są"). The noun "drzwi" is plural, "one" is plural so the verb "to be" needs to be plural. There is only one plural present tense form of "to be" and it is "są". The subject and the verb has to agree with respect to number and grammatical gender. If the subject is in its nominative form (almost always) there are no exceptions. - a comma: In Polish there are very strict rules about placing a comma. In this case it is needed. The rules are base on the function and the structure but are often simplified to "what is connecting the sentences?". In case of "bo" ("because") the comma is always there. - "ich" cannot be replaced with "swoich" here, both mean "their": The whole thing is a complex sentence that is constructed from two simple sentences. The part "bo są lepsze dla ich lwów" answers the question "why did they do it?". The subject of this sentence is the door. "ich" is in a different sentence than the people who did it. "Nasi koledzy oczyścili ceglane drzwi dla swoich lwów" - "Our friends cleaned the brick door for their lions" is a single simple sentence so we use "swoich" because we are referencing the subject and "ich" would be wrong.
Thanks. a lot, very good. A couple of quibbles: Catalan has a dark /l/ too; maybe it would be more accurate to see Catalan is between Ibero Romance and Gallo Romance, although it can be quite similar to Langadocien, (less so Provençal or Gascon). BTW, my Andalusian parents in law actually pronounced the /h/ in words like "harina."
The comments saying american and brittish english would not diverge (due to internet, television , radio etc) are interesting. On the one hand I can see where the argument comes form; on the other, international radio and TV have been a thing since the early 20th century; American actors purposefuly adopted the "trans-atlantic" accent, which was designed to be somewhat in between american and british english in terms of pronunciation. But as we know now, this did not stick, and instead American and Brittish English have since then diverged more, not become more alike. So I do think the two will continue to diverge; I just think American English will be or become the more popular and international one of the two.
In Houston, TX here. The move towards AAVE is certainly happening not only in the phonetic sense, but in the dropping of the “apostrophe s” for possession: “Mama’s House” is becoming “Mama House”. Also, “they are doing that” is more frequently spoken as “they be doing that”. When my 11YO talks with his friends, I hear new things that to my ears are Latin-inspired: the “L” in vaLid is becoming softer, more like the “L” in the Spanish word “Loco”.
I’ve heard many Arabic speakers use Arabic sounds in words like Qatar, Quran, etc when speaking English which I always find annoying (not just with Arabic but also other languages). What’s the reason they (and, I must say, disappointingly, you) do it. If you’re speaking English, reverting to foreign phonology sounds unnatural and makes my brain focus on those sounds rather than the message
Italian io is /i.o/, not /jo/. It's on the side of languages that kept a syllabic initial e, though in standard Italian it raised to /i/ (but didn't in many dialects).
cincisprezece is not a good example: it doesn't come from quindecim, but was remade later from the numerals cinci (< cinque, Vulgar form of quinque) and zece (<decem)
I sort of said this in the beginning, but they didn’t differentiate between V and U originally, u was just a curvier V used when lowercase became a thing. So you haven’t seen it since you’ve probably only ever seen it in all caps, VITA
@@cosettapessa6417 there’s a Linguriosa video about this somewhere (I think it’s “La H sirve por más que lo que piensas” or something like that) where she explains that the H exists in words like “hueso” because they were the same letter as late as Old Spanish, and they were definitely using lowercase by then, so, capital V, lowercase u
Using the phonology of Brazilian Portuguese and American Spanish on porpuse? Because it might relate better to old versions of the languages? Or just to piss off Europeans haha?
/ʁ/ is also relatively recent to french circa 18th c around paris, 19-20th c in rural france (due to standardisation/radio/cultural pressures on other french languages). see Contribution à l'histoire de la consonne R en français
its not /x/ in european portuguese its /ʀ̝/ or /ʁ/ and rarely trilled. in brazilian portuguese its /x/ or /χ/ or /h/ or /ʁ/ and rarely trilled in some small communities.
A language that does not differentiate between young and new is Greek, which can use "νέος" ['ne̞.o̞s̠] for both a new thing and a young person or animal. However, there are words that can only be used for new objects, such as "καινούριος" [ce̞.'nuɾ.ʝo̞s̠], and others that can only be used for young people, such as "νεαρός" [ne̞.a.'ɾo̞s̠].
17:19 The word "blanc" does exist in Romanian, but it's mainly used in writing, as in "blank space". Also, worth mentioning that the word "țară" means country now in Romanian, and that hour is "oră". "oară" is "time" as in 1st, 2nd, xth time ("prima oară", "a doua oară", etc.) Still great video, keep it up!
Wait, 7:48 what about "rozmawiać"? e.g: "I was talking to him" is "rozmawiałem z nim" but "I was telling him" is "mówiłem mu" and in perfective "I talked to him" is "porozmawiałem z nim" but "I told him" is "powiedziałem mu" I would say Polish makes the distinction but as rozmawiać/mówić, which you didn't mention
