Languages oscillate between becoming more analytical and more synthetic throughout history, and this occurs so that more vocabulary is created and then reduced to more basic words, but each of these processes simplifies the language in a sense; there is never a simplification in general.
Languages that become more synthetic tend to be more capable of summarizing a sentence to one word, making communication more compact and specific. A language that becomes more analytical divides the word into more basic terms, but in many cases requires the speaker to understand the specific context in the composition of the words.
Mandarin, for example, is one of the most analytical languages , but it is necessary to understand what the union of different terms comes to mean, something that, in addition to the writing of the language itself, makes it difficult for other populations to learn.
That said, English is undoubtedly an excellent language for computing and logical questions, as it uses few graphic symbols, short words, a reduced basic vocabulary and rigid syntax, but this ends up making it lose the expressiveness, emotionality and poetry that Latin languages have (with more derivations in words and greater syntactic flexibility). This expressiveness is also perceived by the fact that Latin languages in general have more vowel words than consonant ones, have more variations, prefixes and suffixes, and have more prosody, characteristics that allowed for a long time, and even today, the Latin culture and alphabet to spread throughout the world and even shaped much of modern English.
You're making an entirely separate point.
No, it remains within my initial point.
I just illustrated it with more elements to make it easier to clarify. Reread the first paragraph of the previous text and the first paragraph of my first response to you.
In any case, everything I needed to say has already been said. It's up to you to allow yourself to interpret it 👍
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
