Comment by zen928 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zen928 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

it's funny that this statement is brought forward as a problem in trying to assert awareness to closed thinking but the reason that this statement is a "problem" is carefully constructed to avoid any social, political or cultural dialog around discussing the "problem" in a closed mind fashion

research and documentation should strive to be the most convenient forms to be accessed and read by others; shifting to outdated romantic languages that tie gender to objects or to region-specialized character heavy ineffecient languages that already rely on english loan words to convey modern ideas doesn't seem like the answer either right? maybe some critique on how outdated other common languages are compared to emerging cultural concepts would provide a better point to how language should evolve instead of becoming frankensteined as a point of cultural prestige?

im down for switching to hangul if it were noted that e.g. conveying ideas and topics we commonly see in scientific research were able to be easier processed and understood, but that's not what the subtle "english bad" tone is trying to convey here

Talk about bad takes. Do you speak any languages other than English?

> shifting to outdated romantic languages that tie gender to objects

Gender in linguistics is better referred to as noun classes and should not be conflated with societal notions of gender. And calling a language outdated is deeply ignorant, and borders on xenophobic.

And Hangul is not a language, it’s a writing system.

wow, real discussion about language!

> Do you speak any languages other than English?

yes

> Gender in linguistics is better referred to as noun classes and should not be conflated with societal notions of gender.

grammatical gender has been referred to as synonymous to noun classes for decades, obviously varies language to language but this isn't a correction but rather your opinion :)

> And calling a language outdated is deeply ignorant, and borders on xenophobic.

what do you mean? im divorcing any notion of region, politics or cultural context to something as broad as a language like the article is doing! i dont REALLY mean anything negative when trying to discuss weaknesses of these classes of languages by making broad statements, im just noting that the field of research would make these choices inappropriate as a comparison to english using the same sterile tone as the article.

> And Hangul is not a language, it’s a writing system.

i meant writing in korean (too implicitly, my mistake), does it change that statement? :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com