Daniel44 wrote:
>Hei Andreas,
>Hyvatko? (How are you?)
>You are absolutely correct to say that quantifying a language's relative
>difficulty is very hard indeed. That said, you are also correct to point
>that Finnish is understood by non-Finns to be an extremely difficult
>language to master.

Actually, I didn't say the later. It's probably true, tho'.

>Lapsi, however, is different to Finnish. No consonant gradation, no strict
>vowel harmony rules, no myriad (and often obscure) cases and case usage.
>Adjectives have a prescribed ending (mostly -inen), as do abstract nouns
>(-jan), tools (-oje), diminutive (-een), verb infinitive (-taa) etc. Tense
>is also very regular in Lapsi, even more so than Finnish (for example, even
>the verb 'ontaa' - to be is regular in Lapsi).

Well, that's what one'd expect from an IAL, isn't it?

But I wasn't commenting on the relative virtues of Lapsi (I don't believe
much in the idea of IALs actually, but let's not get down into that
discussion again). I questioned the relevancy of the swift competense
acquisition of Finnish schoolchildren, and I tried to point out that what
makes the written form of your native lang easy to learn (eg good
orthography and little difference between spoken and written language)
aren't the same as those that make an IAL easy to learn for people who have
another native language (eg regular grammar and unexotic phonemic


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at