I think this statement is funnily self-negating: "I already understand grammatical structure, the relationships between subject/object/verb and the uses of prepositions." This guy must be learning Romance languages (e.g. surprise! he's learning Portugese) since languages outside of this family differ in a lot of ways. E.g. all the things here can and do differ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_language#Linguistic_fea...

This sort of euro-centric natural language egalitarianism seems to bleed over into his thoughts about programming languages as well, e.g. those expressed in this statement:

"Learning a new language simply teaches me to communicate the same thoughts and feelings but in a different way."

This is wholly false. Languages differ with respect to their requirements for self-description. These requirements, when propagated into code through the actions of a large community, shape the types of programs that are written and how those programs can be expected to interact.

For instance, part of the reason that Haskell programs can be very short, is that the type system on which Haskell is based is extremely deeply thought out and based on a rich mathematical framework. This framework allows the programs to be self-describing in a consistent and meaningful way and for that self-description to be used to express ideas more clearly.

Ruby is self-reflecting through a sort of imperative set of meta-programming techniques. This allows "conventions" to exist in ruby code which enables a framework like rails.

Etc. etc.

When will people realize that not all languages are created the same? Language shapes culture and culture shapes language. Once you put a stick in the ground and decide where features will be located and how they will be inter-related you are planting the seed for all sorts of complicated emergent behavior.

It's true for natural languages and for programming languages. This guy just seems to have missed the ticket.