Is English hard to learn?

[neo2407]

Hi, I heard a few years ago that English is one of the hardest languages to learn. Is that true?
If it is I can see why. I mean letters are not always pronounced the same (example: the a in "apple" is pronounced different from the a in "ace") and we have lots of words that are pronounced the same but spelled differently (example: which and witch).

If there are any non-native English speakers here, was it hard to learn or am I just speaking rubbish lol.

[KNH]

For your last question, this thread might be of use.

[Reno]

DARN USE THE SEARCH BUTTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, lol I just want people to understand that sentence

[kanadajin]

As Reno kind of suggested, the search button comes in handy sometimes But I would guess that yeah, english is probably one of the hardest languages.

[Mike Cash]

neo2407 wrote:
Hi, I heard a few years ago that English is one of the hardest languages to learn. Is that true?
If it is I can see why. I mean letters are not always pronounced the same (example: the a in "apple" is pronounced different from the a in "ace") and we have lots of words that are pronounced the same but spelled differently (example: which and witch).

You're conflating the English language and English orthography.

[two_heads_talking]

Mike Cash wrote:


You're conflating the English language and English orthography.

which is what makes English one of the hardest languages to learn..

[keatonatron]

Mike Cash wrote:
You're conflating the English language and English orthography.

I want a special Cash->English Rikaichan just for Mike's posts...

[Mike Cash]

two_heads_talking wrote:

Mike Cash wrote:


You're conflating the English language and English orthography.

which is what makes English one of the hardest languages to learn..

A screwy orthography doesn't make the language hard to learn; it makes the orthography hard to learn.

[two_heads_talking]

the orthography is integral to learning the language.. they are inclusive and not exclusive..

[Mike Cash]

two_heads_talking wrote:
the orthography is integral to learning the language.. they are inclusive and not exclusive..

You're right. I forgot that blind people can't learn English and that babies learn to read English concurrent with learning to speak it.

[Tspoonami]

Even if you ignore spelling, English is still crazy...

English grammar is pretty screwy. There are rules and all that... But I personally think it's easier to understand a language where you have all the stuff at the front of a sentence, and then you are told what happens with them. I guess that's because I learned Tamil before I learned English (though I have forgotten most of it) and it has a SOV sentence structure.

A good thing about English is that there are *tons* of cliches/set phrases, depending on where you are. I am aware that this occurs in other languages, but English is often a gem in the rocks when it comes to cliches that make no sense unless you have been using them for a long time, or you really think about their meaning. 'Up a creek without a paddle,' for instance. If you break it down, it makes sense, but if you were learning English... It probably wouldn't make sense for a bit of time.

Verbs to match nouns are also crazy... You 'get' an allowance, 'get' sick, but you don't 'become' an allowance though you 'become' sick. I know that's a pathetic example, but I just want to show how wierd verbs have replaced ones that make more sense. This happens in other languages, too, of course... But English is odd because it is so wide-spread.

Nouns suck. Period. In Hindi (I think), the majority of vegetables end in 'kai/ka' which means -what else?- 'vegetable.' In English, though, you have your 'carrots,' your 'peas,' your 'beans...' In Japanese, school subjects always(?) end in '-gaku,' but in English, they are completely random... 'Physics, Chemistry, Literature, Geography.' The names aren't based on one language, but rather a medley of languages. Actually, I think English is odd because it's a huge melting pot of other languages...

(If I made any mistakes in judgement, please don't flame me, but rather explain kindly, as I would greatly appreciate that.)

[two_heads_talking]

Mike Cash wrote:

two_heads_talking wrote:
the orthography is integral to learning the language.. they are inclusive and not exclusive..

You're right. I forgot that blind people can't learn English and that babies learn to read English concurrent with learning to speak it.

and you also forgot that those who are deaf and mute can't tell the difference either. of course you are arguing from the specific to the general and that is never a good debate.. you pigeon-hole your idea and then try to splatter it on everything else.

there are many ways to argue this.. consider you and I in disagreement. and i am perfectly fine with that.

[Mike Cash]

two_heads_talking wrote:

Mike Cash wrote:

two_heads_talking wrote:
the orthography is integral to learning the language.. they are inclusive and not exclusive..

You're right. I forgot that blind people can't learn English and that babies learn to read English concurrent with learning to speak it.

and you also forgot that those who are deaf and mute can't tell the difference either. of course you are arguing from the specific to the general and that is never a good debate.. you pigeon-hole your idea and then try to splatter it on everything else.

I also forgot generations of both native and non-native speakers who have learned English prior to literacy being anywhere near common.

there are many ways to argue this.. consider you and I in disagreement. and i am perfectly fine with that.

The chief way to argue this is that you made an asinine statement without giving it sufficient thought prior to hitting "Post Reply"

[Sunken]

Oh, come on, Mike. We're not talking about native language learning here, but language *study*. And since almost any method of studying a foreign language (just the language, mind you!) makes use of texts the point isn't irrelevant. I'd say any language entirely without a written mode will be more difficult to learn, since you can't make use of the connections in the language that can only be seen in writing, nor can use native written material readily for studies. The same goes for learning any foreign language if you're blind, I'd wager. Not nearly impossible, of course, but more difficult - in practice.

Maybe you can talk about what languages are harder to learn if you remove all textual elements from your studies, but that's hardly a realistic notion.

[richvh]

I have heard that, orthography aside, English phrasal verbs cause many difficulties for non-native speakers. You know, the difference between "put in", "put out", "put up", "put up with", "put down", etc.