Newsgroups: talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet,talk.religion.misc,alt.postmodern,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news-server.ncren.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!usenet
From: dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson)
Subject: Re: Languages: Hard, Harder, Hardest
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ara-mac-235.itc.virginia.edu
Message-ID: <Dv5D6x.DnD@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
X-Posted-From: InterNews 1.0.1@ara-mac-235.itc.virginia.edu
Sender: -Not-Authenticated-[9087]
Organization: University of Virginia
References: <DuwsDJ.BAr@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> 
 <4t052p$cm@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcomc <Duys9H.1tB@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> 
 <4t271h$cga@news.ox.ac.uk> <Dv01wK.A8C@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>  
 <4t9heo$m08@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:59:21 GMT
Xdisclaimer: No attempt was made to authenticate the sender's name.
Lines: 20
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:192353 sci.lang:58334

In article <4t9heo$m08@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
matts2@ix.netcom.com (Matt Silberstein) writes:

> I would have thought not. But does the above numbers tell you that
> Russian is more or less complex than Dutch or Maori?


I'm catching on.  This is one of those cute little party games where
you put forward an undefined term and bicker over who's best using it
in some tangential way.  Sort of a pin the tail on the
ontogrammaticism.  Look, if you define "complexity" as written length,
then complexity is written length.  If you define complexity as
vocabulary size, then so it is.  If you define complexity as variations
in a standard verb conjugation, then so it is.  But define the damn
thing, first.  Then ask me about it.


David

"Heideggerian hope comes into question." J.D.
