Note: Bizarrely enough, the PC headcases have accused this post, a Linguistics post of all things, of racism. See here for my position statement on racism.
Caution: This post is very long! It runs to 88 pages on the Web.
We did a post on this earlier, but it looks like we only scratched the surface. There are many of webpages on this topic, and one could read about the subject for a long time, but after a while, things start getting repetitive.
This post is very good. There are more in various places on the Web.
For starters, before we do our own analysis, let’s look at what some other people came up with. This post is very good. They did a survey, and the post describes the results of the survey.
According to the survey, the nine hardest languages to learn overall were Mandarin, Hungarian, Finnish, Polish, Arabic, Hindi, Icelandic, German and Swedish.
The eight hardest languages to speak (or to pronounce correctly, specifically) were French, Mandarin, Polish, Korean, Hungarian, Arabic, Basque and Hindi.
The nine hardest languages to write were Arabic, Mandarin, Polish, French, Serbo-Croatian, Japanese, Russian, Basque and English.
How does that survey line up with the facts? Surveys are just opinions of L2 learners, and carry variant validity. For starters, let’s throw Swedish off the list altogether, as it actually seems to be a pretty easy language to learn. It’s interesting that some people find it hard, but the weight of the evidence suggests that more folks find it easy than difficult.
Mandarin, Arabic, Japanese and Russian of course use different alphabets and this is why they were rated as hard to write.
Method. A literature survey, combined with interviews of various L2 language learners was conducted. In addition, 100 years of surveys on the question by language instructors was reviewed. The US military’s School of Languages in Monterey’s ratings system for difficulty of learning various languages was analyzed.
Results were collated in an impressionistic manner along a majority rules line in order to form final opinions. For example, a minority said that Portuguese or Spanish were very hard to learn, but the consensus view was that they were quite easy. In this case, the minority opinion was rejected and the consensus view was adopted. The work received a tremendous amount of criticism after publication, and many changes were made to the text.
Clearly, such a project will necessarily be more impressionistic than scientific. Scientific tests of the relative difficulty of learning different languages will have to await the development of algorithms specifically designed to measure such things. And even then, surely there will be legions of “We can’t prove anything” naysayers, as this is the heyday of the “We can’t prove anything” School of Physics Envy in Linguistics.
One common criticism was that, “In Linguistics, the standard view is that there is no such thing as an easy or difficult language to learn. All languages are equally difficult or easy to learn.” Unless we are talking about children learning an L1 (and even then that’s a dubious assertion) this statement was rejected as simply untrue and exemplar of the sort of soft science (“We can’t prove anything about anything”) mushiness that has overtaken Linguistics in recent years.
Sociolinguistics and Applied Linguistics have long been nearly ruined by soft science mushiness, and in recent years, soft science “We can’t prove anything” muddleheadedness has overtaken Historical Linguistics in a horrible way. Bizarrely enough, this epidemic of Physics Envy has been clouded, as one might suspect, in claims of rigorous application of the scientific method.
But hard sciences prove things all the time. Whenever a field claims that almost nothing in the field is provable, you’re heading in the realms of Politically Correct soft science Humanities brain mush.
Results. A ratings system was designed in terms of how difficult it would be for an English-language speaker to learn the language. In the case of English, English was judged according to how hard it would be for a non-English speaker to learn the language. Speaking, reading and writing were all considered.
Ratings. Languages were rated 1-5, easiest to hardest. 1 = easiest, 2 = moderately easy to average, 3 = average to moderately difficult, 4 = very to extremely difficult, 5 = most difficult of all.
Time needed. Time needed to learn the language “reasonably well”: Level 1 languages = 3 months-1 year. Level 2 languages = 6 months-1 year. Level 3 languages = 1-2 years. Level 4 languages = 2 years. Level 5 languages = 3-4 years, but some may take longer.
Conclusion. The soft science, Politically Correct mush-speak from the swamps of Sociolinguistics currently in vogue, “All languages are equally difficult or easy for any adult to learn,” was rejected. The results of this study indicate that languages to indeed differ dramatically in how difficult they are for L2 learners.
Indo-European
Indo-Aryan
Indian languages like Kashmiri, Hindi and especially Sanskrit are quite hard, and Sanskrit is legendary for its extreme complexity. Sanskrit grammar is very complicated. There are 8 cases. Sinhala is also difficult.
The Hindi script is quite opaque to Westerners, some of whom say that Chinese script is easier. You speak one way if you are talking to a man or a woman, and you also need to take into account whether you as speaker are male or female. In addition, Hindi has many long words.
Sanskrit is legendary for its difficulty. It has script that goes on for long sequences in which many small individual words may be buried. You have to take apart the sequences to find the small words. However, the words are further masked by tone sandhi running everything together. Once you tease the sandhi apart, you have to deal with hundreds of compound characters in the script. Once you do those two things, you are left with eight cases, nine declensions, dual number and other fun things.
Hindi is rated 3, moderately difficult.
Kashmiri and Sinhala are rated 4, extremely difficult.
Sanskrit is rated 5, the most difficult of all.
Iranian
Persian is easier to learn than its reputation, as some say this is a difficult language to learn. In truth, it’s difficulty is only average. On the plus side, Persian has a very simple grammar. It has no grammatical gender, no case, no articles and adjectives never change form. It is a quite easy language to learn at the entry level, but it is much harder to learn at the advanced level, say Sufi poetry, due to difficulty in untangling subtleties of meaning.
Persian only gets a 3 rating as average to moderately difficult.
Romance
French is pretty easy to learn at a simple level, but it’s not easy to get to an advanced level. For instance, the language is full of idioms, many more than your average language, and it’s often hard to figure them out. French has a grammar that is neither simple nor difficult; that, combined with a syntax is pretty straightforward and a Latin alphabet make it pretty easy to learn for most Westerners.
One problem is pronunciation. There are many nasal vowels, similar to Portuguese. The eu, u and all of the nasal vowels can be Hell for the learner. There is also a strange uvular r. The orthography is also difficult, since there are many sounds that are written but no longer pronounced, as in English. Also similar to English, orthography does not line up with pronunciation. For instance, there are 13 different ways to spell the o sound: o, ot, ots, os, ocs, au, aux, aud, auds, eau, eaux, ho and ö.
In addition, spoken French and written French can be quite different. Spoken French uses words such as fouture and on which you might never see in written French.
The English language, having no Language Committee, at least has an excuse for the frequently irrational nature of its spelling.
The French have no excuse, since they have a committee that is set up in part to keep the language as orthographically irrational as possible. One of their passions is refusing to change the spelling of words even as pronunciation changes, which is the opposite of what occurs in any sane spelling reform. So French is, like English, frozen in time.
Furthermore, to make matters worse, the French are almost as prickly about writing properly as they are about speaking properly, and you know how they are about foreigners mangling their language.
A good case can be made that French is harder to learn than English. Verbs change much more, and it has grammatical gender.
French is one of the toughest languages to learn in the Romance family. A good case can be made that French is harder to learn than Italian in that French children do not learn to write French properly until age 12-13, six years after Italian children.
This is due to the illogical nature of French spelling discussed above such that the spelling of many French words must be memorized as opposed to applying a general sound-symbol correspondence rule. In addition, French uses both acute and grave accents – `´.
French gets a 3 rating for average to moderately difficult.
Italian is said to be easy to learn, especially if you speak a Romance language or English, but learning to order a pizza and really mastering it are two different things. Foreigners usually do not learn Italian at anywhere near a native level.
For instance, Italian has three types of tenses, simple tenses, compound tenses, and indefinite tenses. There are also various moods that combine to take tense forms – four subjunctive moods, two conditional moods, two gerund moods, two infinite moods, two participle moods and one imperative mood.
There are eight tenses in the indicative mood – recent past, remote pluperfect, recent pluperfect, preterite (remote past), imperfect, present, future, future perfect. There are four tenses in the subjunctive mood – present, imperfect, preterite and pluperfect. There are two tenses in the conditional mood – present and preterite.
There is only one tense in the imperative mood – present. Gerund, participle and infinite moods all take only present and perfect tenses. Altogether, using these mood-tense combinations, any Italian verb can decline in up to 21 different ways.
Italian has many irregular verbs. There are many combinations just to make articles and preposition,s and there are 600 irregular verbs with all sorts of different irregularities. Nevertheless, it is a Romance language, and Romance has gotten rid of most of its irregularity. The Slavic languages are much more irregular than Romance.
Counterintuitively, some Italian words are masculine in the singular and feminine in the plural. There are many different ways to say the – il, i, lo, gli , l’ (masculine); la, le, l’ (feminine). Few Italians even write Italian 100% correctly. A problem with Italian is that meaning is inferred via intonation. If you mess up the intonation of your utterance, you’re screwed and will not be understood. However, there is no case in Italian, as in all of Romance.
Italian is still easier to learn than French, for evidence see the research that shows Italian children learning to write Italian properly by age 6, 6-7 years ahead of French children. This is because Italian orthography is quite sensible and coherent, with good sound-symbol correspondence.
Italian gets a 2 rating, moderately easy to average.
Surprisingly enough, Romanian is said to be one of the harder Romance languages to speak or write properly. Even Romanians often get it wrong. One strange thing about Romanian is that the articles are attached to the noun as suffixes. In all the rest of Romance, articles are free words that precede the noun. English: telephone and the telephone; Romanian: telefon and telefonul. Romanian is harder to learn than Spanish or Italian, and possibly harder than French. It has considerable Slavic influence.
Romanian gets a 3 rating as average to moderately hard to learn.
Spanish is often said to be one of the easiest languages to learn, though this is somewhat controversial. Personally, I’ve been learning it off and on since age six and I still have problems, though Spanish speakers say my Spanish is good, but Hispanophones, unlike the French, are generous about these things.
It’s quite logical, though the verbs do decline a lot with tense and number, and there are many irregular verbs, similar to French. Compare English declensions to Spanish declensions of the verb to read.
English
I read
He reads
Spanish
Yo leo
Tu lees
El lee
Nos leemos
Vos leéis
Ellos leen
leí
leeré
leería
leyese
leyésemos
leyéseis
¿leísteis?
leyéremos
leeréis
pudísteis haber leído
hubiéremos ó hubiésemos leído
Nevertheless, Romance grammar is much more regular than, say, Polish, as Romance has junked most of the irregularity. Spanish has the good grace to lack case, spelling is a piece of cake, and words are spoken just as they are written. Nevertheless, Hispanophones say that few foreigners end up speaking like natives.
Rated 1 as easiest of all.
Portuguese, like Spanish, is also very easy to learn, though Portuguese pronunciation is harder due to the unusual vowels such as nasal diphthongs and the strange palatal lateral ʎ, which many English speakers will mistake for an l.
Portuguese gets a 1 rating, easiest of all.
Hellenic
Greek is a difficult language to learn, and it’s rated the second hardest language to learn by language professors. It’s easy to learn to speak simply, but it’s quite hard to get it down like a native. It’s the rare second language learner who attains native competence. Greek grammar is dead simple, but there are problems with writing Greek. Like English, the spelling doesn’t seem to make sense, and you have to memorize many words. Further, there is the unusual alphabet.
Greek gets a 4 rating, extremely difficult to learn.
Classic Greek is worse, with a distinction between aspirated and unaspirated consonants, a pitch accent system and a truly convoluted system of noun and verb inflection.
Classic Greek gets a 5 rating, hardest of all.
Germanic
People often say that English is easy to learn, but that is deceptive. For one thing, English has anywhere from 500,000-1 million words (said to be twice as much as any other language – but there are claims that Dutch and Arabic each have 4 million words), the number increases by the day; furthermore, most people don’t understand more than 50,000. Yet they only use 5,000 at most.
Actually, the average American or Brit uses a mere 2,500 words. As we might expect, our cultivated Continentals in Europe, such as Spaniards and French, probably have twice the regular vocabulary of English speakers and far more colloquial expressions.
In addition, verbal phrases or phrasal verbs are a nightmare. In many cases, phrasal verbs can have more than 10 different antagonistic meanings.
Get down and party down – to have fun and party, yet get down on the floor – to lie prone and remain there. Are you down? – are you ready to do something. Pat down – to frisk. Take down – to tackle. Cook down – to reduce the liquid content in a cooked item. Run down - to run over something, to review a list or to attack someone verbally for a long time. Play down – to de-emphasize. Write down – to write on a sheet of paper, but write up – to write in any form, usually a long piece.
Drink up and drink down mean roughly the same thing, as do slip up and slip down. Light up – to torch. Mess up, slip up – to fail. Cook up – to prepare a meal. Vacuum up – to vacuum. Wash up – to wash. Brush up – to go over a previously learned skill. Bone up – to study hard. Play up – to dramatize. Read up – to read intensively as in studying. Stay up – to not go to bed. Come up – to approach closely, to occur suddenly or to overflow. Patch up – to put together a broken thing or relationship.
Make up – to make amends, to apply cosmetics to one’s face or to invent a story. Burn up – burn completely or to be made very angry, burn down – reduce s.t. to ashes, like a structure. Turn up – to increase volume or to appear suddenly somewhere. Run up – to tally a big bill or approach s.t. quickly. Dry up – to dessicate. Take up - to develop a new skill, to bring something to a higher elevation, to cook something at a high heat to where it is assimilated. Blow up – to explode.
Dress up – to dress oneself in formal attire. Shake up – to upset a paradigm, to upset emotionally. Hit up - to visit someone casually or to ask for a favor or gift, usually small amounts of money. Wake up – to awaken. Stir up – stir rapidly, upset a calm surrounding or scene or upset a paradigm. Cheer up – to elevate one’s mood. Talk up – to try to convince someone of something by discussing it dramatically and intensively.
Chat up – to talk casually with a goal in mind, usually seduction or at least flirtation. Hang up – to place on a hanger or a wall, to end a phone call. Trip up – to stumble mentally over s.t. confusing. Mop up – mop a floor or finish off the remains of an enemy army or finalize a military operation. Clean up – to make an area thoroughly tidy. Pick up – to grasp an object and lift it higher, to seduce someone sexually or to acquire a new skill, usually rapidly.
Put up – to hang, to tolerate, often grudgingly, or to put forward a new image. Tear up – to shred. Ring up – to telephone someone. Cut up – to shred or to make jokes, often of a slapstick variety. Meet up – to meet someone or a group for a get meeting or date of some sort. Start up – to initialize an engine or a program, to open a new business to go back to something that had been terminated previously, often a fight; a recrudescence. Crank up - elevate the volume.
Rev up – to turn the RPM’s higher on a stationary engine. Shoot up – to inject, usually illegal drugs, or to fire many projectiles into a place with a gun. Drum up – to charge someone with wrongdoing, usually criminal, usually by a state actor, usually for false reasons.
Kiss up – to mend a relationship after a fight. Wait up – to ask other parties to wait for someone who is coming in a hurry. Whip up – to cook a meal quickly or for winds to blow wildly. Touch up – to apply the final aspects of a work nearly finished.
Suck up – to ingratiate oneself, often in an obsequious fashion. Stop up – to block the flow of liquids with some object(s). Suit up – to get dressed in a uniform, often for athletics. Pass up - to miss an opportunity, often a good one. Pop up – for s.t. to appear suddenly, often out of nowhere.
Own up – to confess to one’s sins under pressure and reluctantly. Live up – to enjoy life. Lighten up – to reduce the downcast or hostile seriousness of the mood of a person or setting. Knock up – to impregnate. Beat up – to defeat someone thoroughly in a violent physical fight.
Listen up – imperative – to order someone to pay attention, often with threats of aggression if they don’t comply. Man up – to elevate oneself to manly behaviors when one is slacking and behaving in an unmanly fashion. Lock up – to lock securely, often locking various locks, or to imprison, or for an object or computer program to be frozen or jammed and unable to function. Mix up – to confuse, or to disarrange contents in a scattered fashion so that it does not resemble the original.
Measure up – in a competition, for an entity to match the competition. Mark up – to raise the price of s.t. Move up – to elevate the status of a person or entity in competition with other entities- to move up in the world. Hook up – to have a casual sexual encounter or to meet casually for a social encounter, often in a public place; also to connect together a mechanical devise or plug something in.
Hurry up - imperative, usually an order to quit delaying and join the general group or another person in some activity, often when they are leaving to go to another place. Face up – to quit avoiding your problems and meet them head on. End up – to arrive at some destination after a long winding, often convoluted journey either in space or in time. Clear up – for a storm to dissipate, for a rash to go away, for a confusing matter to become understandable.
Close up – to close, also to end business hours for a public business. Cheer up – to change from a downcast mood to a more positive one. Curl up – to rest in a curled body position, either alone or with another being. Crack up – to laugh, often heartily. Back up – to go in reverse, often in a vehicle, or to go back over something previously dealt with that was poorly understood in order to understand it better. Bruise up – to receive multiple bruises, often serious ones.
Break up – to break into various pieces, or to end a relationship, either personal or between entitles, also to split a large entity, like a large company or a state. Build up – to build intensively in an area, such as a town or city, from a previously less well-developed state. Buy up – to buy all or most all of something. Catch up – to reach a person or group that one had lagged behind earlier, or to take care of things, often hobbies, that had been put off by lack of time.
Do up – apply makeup to someone, often elaborately. Dream up – to imagine a creative notion, often an elaborate one. Drive up – to drive towards something, and then stop, or to raise the price of something by buying it intensively. Feel up – to grope someone sexually. Get up – to awaken or rise from a prone position. Give up – to surrender, in war or a contest, or to stop doing something trying or unpleasant that is yielding poor results, or to die, as in give up the ghost.
Grow up – to attain an age or maturity or to act like a mature person, often imperative. Hold up – to delay, to ask someone ahead of you to wait, often imperative. Keep up – to maintain on a par with the competition without falling behind. Lay up – to be sidelined due to illness or injury for a time. Let up – to ease off of someone or something, for a storm to dissipate, to stop attacking someone or s.t.
Pay up – to pay, usually a debt, often imperative to demand payment of a debt, to pay all of what one owes so you don’t owe anymore. Rise up – for an oppressed group to arouse and fight back against their oppressors. Run up – to spend a lot of money, often foolishly. Show up – to appear somewhere, often unexpectedly. Shut up – to silence, often imperative, fighting words. Sit up – to sit upright.
Speak up – to begin speaking after listening for a while, often imperative, a request for a silent person to say what they wish to say. Take up – to cohabit with someone – She has taken up with him. Think up – to conjure up a plan, often an elaborate or creative one. Throw up - to vomit. Bid up – to raise the price of something, usually at an auction, by calling out higher and higher bids. Be up – to be in a waking state after having slept. “I’ve been up for three hours.”
There are figures of speech and idioms everywhere (some estimate that up to 20% of casual English speech is idiomatic), and it seems impossible to learn them all. In fact, few second language learners get all the idioms down pat.
The spelling is insane and hardly follows any rules at all. The English spelling system in some ways is frozen at about 1500 or so. The pronunciation has changed but the spelling has not. Careful studies have shown that English-speaking children take longer to read than children speaking other languages (Finnish, Greek and various Romance and other Germanic languages) due to the difficulty of the spelling system. Romance languages were easier to read than Germanic ones.
This may be why English speakers are more likely to be diagnosed dyslexic than speakers of other languages. The dyslexia still exists if you speak a language with good sound-symbol correspondence, but it’s covered up so much by the ease of the orthography that it seems invisible and the person can often function well. But for a dyslexic, trying to read English is like walking into a minefield.
The rules governing the use of the indefinite, definite and zero article are opaque and possibly don’t even exist. There are synonyms for almost every word in a sentence, and the various shades of meaning can be difficult to discern. In addition, quite a few words have many different meanings. There are strange situations like read and read, which are pronounced differently and mean two different things.
However, English verbs generally have few forms in their normal paradigm of regular verbs. In this arrangement, there are only five forms of the verb in general use with the overwhelming majority of verbs:
present except 3rd singular steal 3rd person singular steals progressive stealing past stole perfect stolen
Even a language like Spanish has many more basic forms than that.
There are quite a few dialects – over 100 have been recorded in London alone. Letters can make many different sounds, a consequence of the insane spelling system. English prepositions are notoriously hard, and few second language learners get them down right because they seem to obey no discernible rules.
While English seems simple at first – past tense is easy, little or no case, no grammatical gender, little mood, etc. – that can be quite deceptive. In European countries like Croatia, it’s hard to find a person who speaks English with even close to native speaker competence.
The problem with English is that it’s a mess! There are languages with very easy grammatical rules like Indonesian and languages with very hard grammatical rules like Arabic. English is one of those languages that is a total mess. There are rules, but there are exceptions everywhere and exceptions to the exceptions. Grammatically, it’s disaster area. It’s hard to know where to start.
However, it is often said that English has no grammatical rules. Even native speakers make this comment because that is how English seems due to its highly irregular nature. Most English native speakers, even highly educated ones, can’t name one English grammatical rule. Just to show you that English does have rules though, I will list some of them.
*Indicates an ungrammatical form.
Adjectives appear before the noun in noun phrases. Small dogs barked. *Dogs small barked.
Adjectives are numerically invariant – the small dog, the small dogs, The dog is small. The dogs are small.
Intensifiers appear before both attributive and predicative adjectives. The very small dog barked. *The small very dog barked. The dog was very small. *The dog was small very.
Attributive adjectives can have complements. The dog was scared. The dog was scared of cats. But predicative adjectives cannot. The scared dog barked. *The scared of cats dog barked.
Articles, quantifiers, etc. appear before the adjective (and any
intensifier) in a noun phrase. The very small dog barked. *Very the small dog barked. *Very small the dog barked. Every very small dog barked. *Very every small dog barked. *Very small every dog barked.
Relative clauses appear after the noun in a noun phrase. The dog that barked. *The that barked dog.
The progressive verb form is the bare form with the suffix -ing, even for the most irregular verbs in the language – being, having, doing; *wasing, *aring, *aming.
The infinitive verb form is to followed by the bare form, even for the most irregular verbs in the language – to be, to have, to do; *to was, *to are, *to am.
The imperative verb form is the bare form, even for the most irregular verb in the language. Be! Have! Do! *Was! *Are! *Am!
All 1st person present, 2nd person present, and plural present verb forms are equivalent to the bare form, except for to be.
All past tense verb forms of a given verb are the same regardless of person and number, except for to be.
Question inversion is optional. You are leaving? Are you leaving? But when inversion does occur in a wh-question, a wh-phrase is required to be fronted. You’re seeing what? What are you seeing? *Are you seeing what?
Wh-fronting is required to affect an entire noun phrase, not just the wh-word. You are going to which Italian restaurant? Which Italian restaurant are you going to? *Which are you going to Italian restaurant? *Which Italian are you going to restaurant? *Which restaurant are you going to Italian?
Wh-fronting only happens once, never more. What are you buying from which store? Which store are you buying what from? *What which store are you buying from? *Which store what are you buying from?
The choice of auxiliary verb in compound past sentences does not depend on the choice of main verb. I have eaten. I have arrived. *I am eaten. *I am arrived. cf. French. J’ai mangé. Je suis arrivé.
English can be seen as an inverted pyramid in terms of ease of learning. The basics are easy, but it gets a lot more difficult as you progress in your learning.
Nevertheless, for a variety of reasons, English only gets a 2 rating as moderately easy to average, mostly because it is relatively easy to speak it well enough to be more or less understandable most of the time.
German’s status is controversial. It’s long been considered hard to learn, but many learn it fairly easily. Pronunciation is straightforward, but there are some problems with the müde, the Ach, and the two ch sounds in Geschichte.
Although the first one is really an sch instead of a ch, English speakers lack an sch, so they will just see that as a ch. Further, there are specific rules about when to use the ss (or sz as Germans say) or hard s. The r in German is quite strange, and of common languages, only French has a similar r.
There are six different forms of the depending on the noun case – der , die, das, den, dem and des – but 16 different slots to put the six forms in, and the gender system is irrational. In a more basic sense and similar to Danish, there are three basic forms of the: der, die and das. Each one goes with a particular noun, and it’s not very clear what the rules are.
One problem with German syntax is that the verb, verbs or parts of verbs doesn’t occur until the end of the sentence.
German also has Schachtelsätze, box clauses, which are like clauses piled into other clauses. The syntax is very rigid but at least very regular. In addition, subclauses use SOV word order . German case is also quite regular. The case exceptions can be almost counted on one hand.
An example of German case (and case in general) is here: The leader of the group gives the boy a dog. In German, the sentence is case marked with the four different German cases: Der Führer (nominative) der Gruppe (genitive) gibt dem Jungen (dative) einen Hund (accusative).
There are three genders, masculine, feminine and neutral. Yet female – (das Weib) is neutral, and petticoat is masculine! Any given noun inflects into the four cases and the three genders. Furthermore, the genders change between masculine and feminine in the same noun for no logical reason.
Phonology also changes strangely as the number of the noun changes – Haus – house is singular – Haeuser – houses, is plural with umlaut. But to change the noun to a diminutive, you add -chen – Haueschen, which is singular, yet has the umlaut of the plural.
German also has a vast vocabulary, the fourth largest in the world. This is either positive or negative depending on your viewpoint. Language learners often complain about learning languages with huge vocabularies, but as a native English speaker, I’m happy to speak a language with a million words. There’s a word for just about everything you want to say about anything, and then some!
On the plus side, word formation is quite regular. Pollution is Umweltverschmutzung. It consists, logically, of two words, Umwelt and Verschmutzung, which mean environment and dirtying. In English, you have three words, environment, dirtying and pollution, the third one, the combination of the first two, has no relation to its semantic roots in the first two words.
Nevertheless, this has its problems, since it’s not simple to figure out how the words are stuck together into bigger words, and meanings of morphemes can take years to figure out.
Learning German can be seen as a pyramid. It is very difficult to grasp the basics, but once you do that, it gets increasingly easy as the language follows relatively simple rules and many words are created from other words via compound words, prefixes and suffixes.
On the plus side, German is not very inflected, and the inflection that it does take is more regular than many other languages. Furthermore, German orthography is phonetic, and there are no silent letters.
German gets a 3 rating, average to moderately difficult.
Icelandic is very hard to learn, much harder than Norwegian, German or Swedish. Part of the problem is pronunciation. The grammar is harder than German grammar, and there are almost no Latin-based words in it. The vocabulary is quite archaic.
There are four cases – nominative, accusative, genitive, and dative – as in German, and there are many exceptions to the case rules, or “quirky case,” as it is called. Verbs are modified for tense, person and number, as in many other IE languages (this is almost gone from English).
Icelandic also modifies verbs for voice – active, passive and medial. Furthermore, there are four different kinds of verbs – strong, weak, reduplicating and irregular, with several conjugation categories in each division. Many verbs just have to be memorized.
Icelandic gets a 5 rating, hardest of all to learn.
Faroese is said to be even harder to learn than Icelandic, with some very strange vowels not found in other North Germanic languages.
Faroese gets a 5 rating, hardest of all.
Norwegian and Swedish are both easy to learn, and Norwegian is sometimes touted as the easiest language on Earth to learn. This is confusing because Danish is described below as a more difficult language to learn, and critics say that Danish and Norwegian are the same, so they should have equal difficulty. But only one Norwegian writing system is almost the same as Danish the Danish writing system.
Danish pronunciation is quite a bit different from Norwegian, and this is where the problems come in.
Nevertheless, Norwegian dialects can be a problem. Foreigners get off the plane having learned a bit of Norwegian and are immediately struck by the strangeness of the multiplicity of dialects, which for the most part are easy for Norwegians to understand, but can be hard for foreigners. There is also the problematic en and et alternation, as discussed with Danish.
Swedish does have the disadvantage of having hundreds of irregular verbs. Swedish also has some difficult phonemes, especially vowels. since Swedish has nine vowels, not including diphthongs. Pronunciation of the ö and å (and sometimes ä, which has different sounds) can be difficult . Words can take either an -en or an -ett ending, and there don’t seem to be any rules about which one to use. The same word can have a number of different meanings.
Swedish can be compared to a tube in terms of ease of learning. The basics are harder to learn than in English, but instead of getting more difficult as one progresses as in English, the difficulty of Swedish stays more or less the same from basics to the most complicated.
But learning to speak Swedish is easy enough compared to other languages. Where Swedish gets difficult is learning how to write it, since the spelling seems illogical, like in English.
Swedish and Norwegian get 1 ratings, very easy to learn.
Danish is a harder language to learn than one might think. It’s not that hard to read or even write, but it’s quite hard to speak. However, like English, Danish has a non-phonetic orthography, so this can be problematic.
For one, there are a huge number of dialects. Denmark is a group of cool to cold islands (depending on the season) with a freezing cold ocean in between them. People generally stayed on their islands and didn’t move around much. Each island has its own dialect, and the dialects can be quite baffling for second language learners. There are eight major dialects, and countless minor ones subsumed under them.
In addition, there are d words where the d is silent and other d words where it is pronounced, and though the rules are straightforward, it’s often hard for foreigners. The d in hund is silent, for instance.
There are three strange vowels that are not in English, represented by the letters æ, ø and å. Two of them (one each) are also present in Swedish and Icelandic, but most foreigners have problems with them.
One advantage of all of the Scandinavian languages is that their basic vocabulary is fairly limited. This is in contrast to Chinese, where you have to learn a lot of vocabulary just to converse at a basic level.
As with Maltese and Gaelic, there is little correlation between how a Danish word is written and how it is pronounced. Pronunciation of Danish is difficult. Speech is very fast and comes out in a continuous stream that elides entire words. Vowels in the middle and at the end of words are seldom expressed.
There are nine vowel characters, and each one can be pronounced in five or six different ways. There is also a strange phonetic element called a stød, which is a very short pause slightly before the vowel(s) in a word. This element is very hard for foreigners to get right. Just about any word has at least four meanings, and can serve as noun, verb, adjective or adverb.
Suggesting that Danish may be harder to learn than Swedish or Norwegian, it’s said that Danish children speak later than Swedish or Norwegian children. One study comparing Danish children to Croatian tots found that the Croat children had learned over twice as many words by 15 months as the Danes. According to the study:
The University of Southern Denmark study shows that at 15 months, the average Danish toddler has mastered just 80 words, whereas a Croatian tot of the same age has a vocabulary of up to 200 terms.
[...] According to the study, the primary reason Danish children lag behind in language comprehension is because single words are difficult to extract from Danish’s slurring together of words in sentences. Danish is also one of the languages with the most vowel sounds, which leads to a ‘mushier’ pronunciation of words in everyday conversation.
Danish gets a 3 rating, average to moderately hard to learn.
Dutch is harder to learn than English due to the large number of rules used in both speaking and writing. The Dutch say that few foreigners learn to speak Dutch well. Part of the problem is that some words have no meaning at all in isolation (meaning is only derived via a phrase or sentence). Word order is somewhat difficult, as foreigners often seem to get the relatively lax Dutch rules about word order wrong in long sentences.
Dutch gets a 3 rating, average to moderately hard to learn.
Celtic
Any Gaelic language is tough. Irish students take Irish for 13 years, and some take French for five years. These students typically know French better than Irish. There are inflections for the inflections of the inflections, a convoluted aspiration system, and no words for yes or no. The system of initial consonant mutation is quite baffling.
Welsh and Scottish Gaelic are also very hard to learn, some say harder than Irish, although Welsh has no case compared to Irish’s two cases. And the Welsh has a mere five irregular verbs. Gaelic languages are harder to learn than German or Russian. Both Scots Gaelic and Irish Gaelic are written with non-phonetic spelling that is even more convoluted and irrational than English.
Scottish Gaelic, Welsh and Irish get 5 ratings, hardest of all.
Armenian
An obscure branch of Indo-European, Armenian, is very hard to learn. Armenian is a difficult language in terms of grammar and phonetics, not to mention the very odd alphabet.
Rated 5, hardest of all.
Albanian
Albanian is another obscure branch of Indo-European. Similarly to Gaelic, Albanian is even harder to learn than either German or Russian. Albanian may be even harder to learn than Polish.
Rated 5, hardest of all.
Slavic
Czech and Slovak are notoriously hard to learn; in fact, all Slavic languages are. Language professors rate the Slavic languages the third hardest to learn on Earth. Czech is in the Guinness Book of World Records as the hardest language to learn.
It’s sometimes said that even Czechs never learn to speak their language correctly, and there is actually some truth to that. They spend nine years in school studying Czech grammar, but some rules are learned only at university. Immigrants never seem to learn Czech well.
Czech is full of exceptions and exceptions to the exceptions. It is said that there are more exceptions than there are rules.
Czech has seven cases in singular and seven more cases in plural for nouns, for a total of 59 different “modes” of declension. There are also words that swing back and forth between “modes.” Adjectives and pronouns also have seven cases in the singular and plural. There are lots of exceptions, too.
There are six genders, three in the singular and three in the plural. Verbs also decline. When you put all that together, each noun can decline in 59 different ways. Further, these 59 different types of nouns each have 14 different forms depending on case.
The verbs have both perfective and imperfective and have 45 different conjugation patterns.
Truth is that almost every word in the language is subject to declension.
One of the problems with Czech is that not only nouns but also verbs take gender, but they only do so in the past tense. In addition, Czech has a complicated aspect system that is often quite irregular and simply must be memorized to be learned. This conjugation is fairly regular:
viděl continuous past – he saw
uviděl punctual – once he suddenly saw
vídával repetitive – he used to see (somebody/something) repeatedly
Others are less regular:
jedl continuous – he ate
snědl, ujedl, pojedl, dojedl – he ate it all up
ujedl has the slightly different meaning of he ate a bit of it
pojedl has the slightly different meaning of he finished eating
jídával repetitive – he used to eat repeatedly
As with other Slavic languages like Russian, it has the added problem of fairly loose word order. In addition, there are significant differences between casual and formal speech.
Slovak is said to be even harder than Czech, but that’s a tough call. These two languages are the only ones with seven cases (nominative, accusative, genitive, locative, dative, instrumental and vocative). There is also a hard and soft i which is hard to figure out.
The suffixes on nouns and verbs change all the time in strange ways. It’s also full of words that don’t seem to have vowels. There are some difficult consonants such as š, č, ť, ž, ľ, ď, dz, dž, ĺ and ŕ.
Some say that Slovak is even harder than Polish, but, it’s probably a toss-up between Czech/Slovak and Polish.
Czech and Slovak both get 5 ratings, hardest of all.
Polish is similar to Czech and Slovak in having words that seem to have no vowels, but in Polish at least there are invisible vowels. That’s not so obviously the case with Czech. Nevertheless, try these sentences: Strč prst skrz krk or Mlž pln skvrn zlvh. Or these: Szczebrzeszynie chrząszcz brzmi w trzcinie i Szczebrzeszyn z tego słynie. Wyindywidualizowaliśmy się z rozentuzjazmowanego tłumu.
I and y, s and z, je and ě alternate at the ends of some words, but the rules governing when to do this, if they exist, don’t seem sensible. The letters ř and ť are very hard to pronounce, and the ř exists in no other language. There are nasal vowels as in Portuguese. The ą, ć, ę, ł, ń, ó, sz, cz, dz, dź, dż sounds are hard for foreigners to make. There are sounds that it is even hard for native speakers to make, as they require a lot tongue movements.
Polish written to spoken pronunciation makes little sense, as in English – h and ch are one sound, and ó, u and ł are one sound. Polish orthography, while being regular, is very complex.
Further, native speakers speak so fast it’s hard for non-natives to understand them. Due to the consonant-ridden nature of Polish, it is harder to pronounce than most Asian languages. Listening comprehension is made difficult by all of the sh and ch like sounds. Furthermore, since few foreigners learn Polish, Poles are not used to hearing their language mangled by second-language learners. Therefore, foreigners’ Polish will seldom be understood.
Polish grammar is much more difficult than Russian grammar.
Polish has seven cases, and case declension is very irregular, unlike German. It also has seven genders, five in the singular and two in the plural. The genders of nouns cause the adjectives modifying them to inflect differently.
Noun matka mother (female gender) ojciec father (male gender) dziecko child (neuter gender) Modifying Adjective brzydki - ugly Singular brzydka matka ugly mother brzydki ojciec ugly father brzydkie dziecko ugly child Plural brzydkie matki ugly mothers brzydcy ojcowie ugly fathers brzydkie dzieci ugly children
Gender even effects verbs.
I ate (female speaker) – Ja zjadłam
I ate (male speaker) – Ja zjadłem
I killed – zabiłem/zabiłam
We killed – zabiliśmy/zabiłyśmy
They killed – zabili/zabiły
There are two different forms of the verb kill depending on whether the 1st person singular and plural and 2nd person plural killers are males or females.
kupować - to buy Singular Simple Past Imperfect I (f.) kupiłam kupowałam I (m.) kupiłem kupowałem you (f.) kupiłaś kupowałaś you (m.) kupiłeś kupowałeś he kupił kupował she kupiła kupowała it kupiło kupowało we (f.) kupiłyśmy kupowałyśmy we (m.) kupiliśmy kupowaliśmy you (f.) kupiłyście kupowałyścieyou you (m.) kupiliście kupowaliście they (f.) kupiły kupowały they (m.) kupili kupowali
The verb above forms an incredible 28 different forms in the perfect and imperfect past tense alone.
In addition, there is an animate-inanimate distinction in gender. Look at some words:
hat – kapelusz
computer – komputer
dog – pies
student – uczen
All are masculine gender, but computer and hat are inanimate and student and dog are animate, so they inflect differently.
I see a new hat – Widze nowy kapelusz
I see a new student – Widze nowego ucznia .
Notice how the now- form changed.
For instance, English has one word for the genitive case of the 1st person singular – my. In Polish, depending on the context, you can have the following 11 forms, and actually there are even more than 11:
mój
moje
moja
moją
mojego
mojemu
mojej
moim
moi
moich
moimi
English has one word for the number 2 – two. Polish has 21 words for two (however, only 5-6 of them are in common use):
dwa
dwaj
dwie
dwoje
dwóch
dwom
dwóm
dwu
dwoma
dwiema
dwojga
dwojgu
dwójką
dwójkę
dwójki
dwójce
dwójko
dwojgiem
dwójkach
dwójek
dwója
dwójkami
Polish, like Hungarian and Finnish, can also have very long word. For instance, pięćsetdwadzieściajedenmiliardówdwieścieczterdzieścisiedemmiloionów-trzystaosiemdzisiątpięćtysięcyczterystadziewięćdziesięciopięcioletni is a word in Polish (There is no dash in the word – I was just dividing the line).
A single noun can change in many ways and take many different forms. Compare przyjaciel – friend
singular plural who is my friend przyjaciel przyjaciele who is not my friend przyjaciela przyjaciół friend who I give s.t. to przyjacielowi przyjaciołom friend who I see przyjaciela przyjaciół friend who I go with z przyajcielem z przyjaciółmi friend who I dream of o przyjacielu o przyjaciołach Oh my friend! Przyajcielu! Przyjaciele!
There are 12 different forms of the noun friend above.
Polish has perfective and imperfective verbs, but that is the least of the problem. The problem is that each verb is in effect a separate verb altogether, instead of just being conjugated differently. The verb to see has two completely different verbs in Polish: widziec and zobaczyc . Widziałem – I saw (repeatedly in the past, like I saw the sun come up every morning). Zobaczyłem – I saw (only once; I saw the sun come up yesterday).
This is not a tense difference – the very verbs themselves are different! So for every verb in the language, you effectively have to learn two different verbs.
In addition, the future perfect and future imperfect often conjugate completely differently, though the past forms usually conjugate in the same way – note the -em endings above. There is no present perfect as in English, since in Polish the action must be completed, and you can’t be doing something at this precise moment and at the same time have just finished doing it. 95% of verbs have these maddening dual forms, but for 5% of verbs that lack a perfective version, you only have one form.
Plurals change based on number. In English, the plural of telephone is telephones, whether you have two or 1000 of them. In Polish, you use different words depending on how many phones you have: two, three or four telefony, but five telefonów. Sometimes, this radically changes the word, as in hands: four ręce, but five rąk.
It’s often said that one of the advantages of Polish is that there are only three tenses, but this is not really case, as there are at least eight tenses:
Indicative – grac – to play.
Present – gram – I play
Past – gralem – I played
Conditional – gralbym – I would play
Future – będę grać – I will play
Continuous future – będę grał – I will be playing
Perfective future – bogram – Implies you will finish the action – I will have played
Perfective conditional – pogralbym – I would have played
There is also an aspectual distinction made when referring to the past. Different forms are used based on whether or not the action has been completed.
In addition, like Serbo-Croatian, Polish can use multiple negation in a sentence. You can use up to five negatives in a perfectly grammatical sentence: Nikt nikomu nigdy nic nie powiedzia – Nobody ever said anything to anyone.
Whereas in English we use one word for go no matter what mode of transportation we are using to get from one place to another, in Polish, you use different verbs if you are going by foot, by car, by plane, by boat or by other means of transportation.
Like Russian, there are multiple different ways to say the same thing in Polish. In English, you can say Ann has a cat, but you can’t mix the words up and mean the same thing. In Polish you can say Ann has a cat five different ways:
Ania ma kota
Kota ma Ania
Ma Ania kota
Kota Ania ma
Ma kota Ania.
The first one is the most common, but the other five can certainly be used.
A major problem with Polish grammar is that it is not regular at all. There are probably more exceptions than there are rules. Even more importantly, what rules there are so complex and numerous that it is hard to figure them all out.
It is said English-speaking children reach full adult competency in the language (reading, writing, speaking, spelling) at age 12. Polish children do not reach this milestone until age 16. Even adult Poles make a lot of mistakes in speaking and writing Polish properly. However, most Poles are quite proud of their difficult language (though a few hate it), and even take pride in its difficult nature.
On the positive side, in Polish, the stress is fixed, there are no short or long vowels or vowel harmony, there are no tones and it uses a Latin alphabet.
Polish gets a 5 rating, hardest of all.
It’s controversial whether Bulgarian is an easy or hard language to learn, but the truth is it probably has average difficulty. Though it is close to Russian, there are Russians who have been living there for 20 years and still can’t understand it well. It has few cases compared to the rest of Slavic – only three, but no Western Slavic language is easy to learn.
Mood is very complicated. There are different ways to say the same idea depending on how you know of the event. If you know about it historically, you mark the sentence with a particular mood. If you doubt the event, you mark with another mood.
If you know it historically but doubt it, you use yet another mood. And there are more than that. These forms are rare in world languages. One is Yamana, a Patagonian language that has only one speaker left. Bulgarian is probably the easiest Slavic language to learn.
Bulgarian gets a 3 rating, average to moderately hard to learn.
Slovenian is also a very hard language to learn, probably on a par with Serbo-Croatian. It has three number distinctions, singular, dual and plural. It’s the only European language that has retained the dual. In addition, there are six cases. There are 18 different declensions of the word son, but five of them are identical, so there are really only 13 different forms.
Singular Dual Plural 1. Sin Sina Sini 2. Sina Sinov Sinov 3. Sinu Sinovoma Sinovom 4. Sina Sinova Sinove 5. O sinu O sinovoma O sinovih 6. S sinom Z sinovoma Z sini
There are seven different ways that nouns decline depending on gender, but there are exceptions to all of the gender rules.
Slovenian gets a 5 rating, hardest of all to learn.
Serbo-Croatian, similar to Czech, has seven cases in the singular and seven in the plural, plus there are several different declensions. There 15 different types of declensions: seven tenses, three genders, three moods and two aspects. Whereas English has one word for the number 2 – two, Serbo-Croatian has 17 words.
Case abbreviations below:
N = NAV – nominative, accusative, vocative
G = Genitive
D = Dative
L =Locative
I = Instrumental
Masculine inanimate gender
N dva
G dvaju
D L I dvama
Feminine gender
N dve
G dveju
D L I dvema
Mixed gender
N dvoje
G dvoga
D L I dvoma
Masculine animate gender
N dvojica
G dvojice
D L dvojici
I dvojicom
“Twosome”
N dvojka
G dvojke
D L dvojci
I dvojkom
The grammar is incredibly complex. There are imperfective and perfective verbs, but when you try to figure out how to build one from the other, it seems irregular. This is the hardest part of Serbo-Croatian grammar, and foreigners not familiar with other Slavic tongues usually never get it right.
As in English, there are many different ways to say the same thing. Pronouns are so rarely used that some learners are surprised that they exist, since pronimalization is marked on the verb as person and number. Word order is almost free or at least seems arbitrary, similar to Russian.
Serbo-Croatian, like Lithuanian, has pitch accent – low-rising, low-falling, short-rising and short-falling. It’s not the same as tone, but it’s similar. In addition to the pitch accent differentiating words, you also have an accented syllable somewhere in the word, which as in English, is unmarked.
And when the word conjugates or declines, the pitch accent jumps around in the word to another syllable and even changes its type in unpredictable ways. It’s almost impossible for foreigners to get this pitch-accent right.
However, Serbo-Croatian does benefit from a phonetic orthography. The “hard” ch sound is written č, while the “soft” ch sound is written ć.
Serbo-Croatian is probably not quite as hard as Polish, but it’s harder than Russian.
Serbo-Croatian gets a 5 rating, hardest of all.
People are divided on the difficulty of Russian, but language teachers say it’s one of the hardest to learn. Even after a couple of years of study, some learners find it hard to speak even a simple sentence correctly.
It has seven cases, but the grammar is fairly easy for a Slavic language. The problem comes with the variability in pronunciation. The adjectives and endings can be difficult. In addition, Russian has gender and lots of declinations. The adjectives change form if the nouns they describe have different endings. Adjectives also take case somehow. Verbs have different forms depending on the pronouns that precede them.
Word order is pretty free. For instance, you can say I love you by saying I love you, You love I, Love you I, I you love, Love I you and You I love.
Pronunciation is strange, with one vowel that is between an ü and i. Many consonants are quite strange, and every consonant has a palatalized counterpart, which will be difficult to speakers whose languages lack phonemic palatalized consonants. Stress is quite difficult in Russian since it seems arbitrary and does not appear to follow obvious rules: дóма – at home, but домá – buildings. One problem is that accent, generally not written out, changes the way the vowel is pronounced.
Like German, Russian builds morphemes into larger words. Again like German, this is worse than it sounds since the rules are not so obvious. In addition, there is the strange Cyrillic alphabet, which is nevertheless easier than Arabic or Chinese. Russian also uses prepositions to combine with verbs to form the nightmare of phrasal verbs, but whereas English puts the preposition after the verb, Russian puts it in front of the verb.
On the plus side, while Russian grammar has what seems like an avalanche of rules, those rules have few exceptions.
Russian gets a 4 rating, very hard to learn.
Baltic
Lithuanian, an archaic Indo-European Baltic tongue, is extremely difficult to learn. There are many dialects, which is interesting for such a small country, and the grammar is very difficult, with many rules. There is grammatical gender for nouns, and in addition, even numerals have gender in all cases. The language is heavily inflectional such that you can almost speak without using prepositions.
A single verb has 13 participial forms, and that is just using masculine gender for the participles. You can also add feminine forms to that verb. There are five classes of verbs and five modes of declension for nouns. However, Lithuanian tense is quite regular. You only need to remember infinitive, 3rd person present and 3rd person past, and after that, all of the conjugations are regular.
There are two genders, but telling them apart is easier than in German where you often have to memorize which noun takes which gender. Lithuanian is similar to Spanish in that the ending will often give you a hint about which gender the noun takes.
Here is an example of the sort of convolutions you have to go through to attach the adjective good to a noun.
geras – good
Masculine Feminine
Singular Plural Singular Plural
Nominative geras geri gera geros
Genitive gero gerų geros gerų
Dative geram geriems gerai geroms
Accusative gerą gerus gerą geras
Instrumental geru gerais gera geromis
Locative gerame geruose geroje gerose
Furthermore, while it does not have lexical tone per se, it does have pitch accent – there are three different pitches, which sound like tones but are not tones. It’s almost impossible for foreigners to get the accent right, and the accents tend to move around a lot across words during declension/conjugation such that the rules are opaque if they exist at all. Often you need a dictionary to figure out where the accent should be on a word. Lithuanian pronunciation is also difficult.
Try these words and phrases: šalna, šąla šiandien, ačiū už skanią vakarienę, pasikiškiakopūsteliaudamasis , ūkis, malūnas, čežėti šiauduose.
Or this paragraph: Labas, kaip šiandien sekasi? Aš esu iš Lietuvos, kur gyvenu visą savo gyvenimą. Lietuvių kalba yra sunkiausia iš visų pasaulyje. Ačiū už dėmesį .
Lithuanian is an archaic IE language that has preserved a lot of forms that the others have lost.
In spite of all of that, picking up the basics of Lithuanian may be easier than it seems, and while foreigners usually never get the pitch-accent down, the actual rules are fairly sensible. All in all, Lithuanian may not be as difficult as it appears at first. Also, Lithuanian is very phonetic, words are pronounced how they are spelled.
Learning Lithuanian is similar to learning Latin. If you’ve been able to learn Latin, Lithuanian should not be too hard. Some languages that are similar to English, like Norwegian and Dutch, can be learned to a certain extent simply by learning words and ignoring grammar. I know Spanish and have been able to learn a fair amount of Portuguese, French and Italian without learning a bit of grammar in any of them.
Lithuanian won’t work that way because due to case, base words change form all the time, so it will seem like you are always running into new words, when it fact it’s the same base word declining in various case forms. There’s no shortcut with Latin and Lithuanian. You need to learn the case grammar first, or little of it will make sense.
Lithuanian gets a 5 rating, hardest of all.
Latvian is another Baltic language that is somewhat similar to Lithuanian. It’s also hard to learn. Try this: Sveiki, esmu no Latvijas, un mūsu valoda ir skanīga, skaista un ar ļoti sarežģītu gramatisko sistēmu. Latvian and Lithuanian are definitely harder to learn than Russian. They both have aspects like in Russian but have more cases than Russian, plus a lot more irregular verbs.
Some say that the Baltic languages are even harder to learn than the hardest Slavic languages like Polish, Czech and Serbo-Croatian, but I’m not sure if that’s true, especially for Polish.
Latvian gets a 5 rating, hardest of all.
References
- Seymour, Philip H. K., Aro, Mikko, Erskine, Jane M. and the COST Action A8 Network. 2003. Foundation Literacy Acquisition in European Orthographies. British Journal of Psychology 94:143–174.
Interesting post. Linguistics are extremely fascinating.
Thx man. The weird thing is, the post is just getting started! I had to cut it off partway because I already spent enough time on it. And I spent a LOT of time on that post!
I didn’t put it in there, but it was generally agreed that most of the Romance languages were fairly easy, especially Spanish and Portuguese.
Dear Robert
Just one brief comment for now. German does NOT have 12 words for the. It has only 6: der, die, das, den, dem and des. Some actually mean to the and of the. To be able to use them, however, you have to know in which one of the 16 slots it falls. Here is the scheme.
Nom Accu Dat Gen
Masc der den dem des
Neut das das dem des
Fem die die der der
Plu die die den der
As you can see, there is considerable overlap, which makes it makes it important to know the gender in German. That is not true for the Latin languages. Take the following sentence:
Der Fortschritt der Menschheit verdankt der Kunst sehr wenig. = Der Kunst verdankt der Fortschritt der Menschheit sehr wenig. = The progress of mankind owes very little to art.
That sentences means what it means because Fortschritt is masculine and Kunst is feminine. If it were the other way around, then the sentence would mean: Art owes very little to the progress of mankind.
Have a good day. James
What language is the most efficient? If I say something like, I want to drive my car to the grocery store to get groceries, which language could convey the accurate meaning in writing with the shortest amount of words? Same goes with speaking–what language would require the shortest amount of syllables?
It seems to me that picture languages (e.g. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc., are the least efficient. Words are literally almost paintings!).
Esperanto a recent language , somewhat like Spanish I hear, but from maybe not much better–I don’t know.
It takes about the same amount of time to write a sentence in Chinese as it does in English or some Romanized language.
Esperanto and the constructed languages are absolutely brilliant, and they can be learned in general much faster than most real languages. You can also get very fluent in these languages very fast. They were designed from the ground up to be completely rational in every way. You can learn more Esperanto in a year than you can English in five years.
So how much of a market is there if I publish my book in Esperanto?
It’s their idiosyncrasies and irrationalities that give organic languages their character and soul. You can learn an enormous amount about the history of a culture by studying its language.
Didn’t the story of the Tower of Babel warn us about “universal languages”? I bet the guy who created Esperanto was a One Worlder.
I’m sorry, sir, but you are ignorant as to how Japanese and Korean work.
In Japanese, you have two alphabets, Katakana and Hiragana, that share the same syllable sounds. Japanese borrows Chinese characters for verbs, nouns, and various other facets.
Korean, on the other hand, has one alphabet: Hangul. Hangul is composed of roughly half consonants and half vowels which are combined to make characters that make up certain sounds. Since the fall of “Old Korean” in the 14th century, Hangul has been free of Chinese script in common use, and knowledge of Chinese is not requierd for ANY use of Korean.
Please do not comment so haphazardly on languages and their nature.
You are right, and this is why I consider the Japanese language as the most artificial one, and one I would never consider to learn. It is said that he Japanese language has developed isolated from the influence of other languages. Right, look today, 3/4 of its vocabulary comes from English and Chinese.
What about Hanja?
hey buddy, don’t call the ignorant kettle black. Chinese constitutes like 65% of Korean words, and anybody who want to become a badass in Korean society has to learn a shitload of ‘han-ja’ ( 한자: 漢字), which is equivalent to Japanese’s kanji (漢字). Booya!
When you say Chinese is the least efficient in conveying a message, you are confusing difficulty with efficiency. In fact, I would say Chinese is the most efficient. In classical Chinese, an idiom of 4 characters can convey a whole paragraph if written in English.
For example, the Three Character Classic – each verse is written in 3 characters, but it would take a mouth for each verse to be translated into modern Chinese, or English.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Character_Classic
When I was in high school I took Spanish because I thought it was easy. I really wish I took Russian or German though instead.
I am also wondering, which language sounds the harshest? In my estimation it is Klingon, but in reality, German sounds harsh, and it is not just because Hollywood made it so, after WW2; there is a heavy use of consonants.
I cannot stand some sounds in the Hebrew (or is it Georgian?) language where it sounds like someone is clearing their throat; whoever decided that would be part of a word made a mistake.
Hebrew and Georgian both have a lot of glottalized consonants. Hebrew also has laryngeals and uvulars. I think it’s the laryngeals that sound like you are clearing your throat.
I really do not know which language is the most efficient. That’s a good question. German is a harsh sounding language for sure.
Depends on who’s doing the speaking. As a kid in Switzerland, I found the German spoken there harsh-sounding. Since then, I’ve heard others speak it smooth as Ex Lax. It’s probably a regional thing.
Take “ich” for example. Some Germans pronounce it “ick,” which is kinda harsh, while others pronounce it as a nice smooth “ish.”
The sound is somewhere in between, where I learned it.
German, a “harsh” language? In the mouths of some German speakers yes. But when it is sung, for some reason it produces some of the loveliest sounds known to Man. I’m thinking in particular of the lieder of Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Brahms, Wolf, Mahler and Strauss.
When you listen to a lied like Schubert’s “Auf dem Wasser zu singen” (sung by a soprano) the sheer beauty of the vowel sounds almost takes your breath away.
Even the language’s harsher aspects can be utilised to almost hypnotic effect by an orator like Joseph Goebbels or a composer like Richard Wagner.
No, German is great.
Sorbian is very endangered, isn’t it? Have the experts ever established how close the Sorbs are to the Serbs?
Sorbian is not that endangered, but it might go extinct in 100 years or so. It’s actually 2 separate languages, North and South.
I’m not sure how close the Sorbs are to the Serbs, but some Ashkenazi Jews are mostly Sorbian. Sorbs are probably closer to say Belorussians I would think.
Things like 12 versions of “the” and the various cases of nouns and tenses of verbs are the LAST things a person learns in one’s own language. The teaching of foreign languages gets bogged down by moving them up to first. I remember in eighth grade, we were learning about a certain verb tense in English (my native language) class for the first time in my life, and learning about it also in first-year French class. In an academic environment, it’s more important to say things grammatically correctly than to say them at all.
If you don’t mind saying the German equivalent of “He be speak not nothing I understand”, how hard is THAT for an English speaker to learn?
What I found is that if you really want to understand what people are saying in another language you MUST learn all that tedious grammar.
You have to force yourself to study it. Go over it and over it, and you will be amazed at how much of it you will actually absorb. You will recognize it when it is used by native speakers.
This has worked for me in studying some Romance languages. But if there are shortcuts, I would love to know about them.
Dear Robert
It isn’t necessary to speak like a native in order to be perfectly understood by a native. As long as an accent does not become outright mispronunciation, it will not hinder effective communication. I doubt that there is a single English consonant that I pronounce exactly like you do, but the Canadians don’t seem to misunderstand me, except sometimes with words that have an th, a sound that is very hard for me.
I know a Polish doctor who has a tremendous English vocabulary and is very articulate, but she still often gets her articles wrong, either using them when they are not required or not using them when they are. It doesn’t really make a difference. A lot of grammar is semantically vacuous. They are like table manners, not like utensils, arbitrary and useless.
To speak intelligibly is not the same as to speak correctly. Take the folowing sentences:
I shooted two deers.
I catched ten fishes.
I selled my sheeps.
My sister have four childs.
The above sentences are perfectly intelligible, even though they aren’t correct. Foreigners should at first try to speak intelligibly. Maybe the correctness will come later.
There is also a difference between speaking correctly and speaking idiomatically. If somone outside an elevator asks, “Is the elevator ascending or descending?”, then we can be sure that he is not a native English-speaker, even though his question is grammatically and semantically correct.
You didn’t mention that one of the difficulties of Germanic languages is that words often undergo vowel changes. We have for instance: foul and filth, tell and tale, long – length, full – fill, hot – heat, do – does.
In English they aren’t that frequent, but in German they are all over the place. Dutch occupies an intermediate position.
In German we have for instance: krank = sick, kränker = sicker, kränklich = sickly, krankhaft = pathological, kranken an = to suffer from, kränken = to hurt, kränkeln = to be ailing, erkranken = to fall ill.
We have: gut = good, Güte = goodness, Gut = a good, Güter = goods, gütig = kind, gütlich = amicable.
Regards. James
hey alpha, you might like this link…just saw your comment seeking shortcuts to learning a language.
there’s some self-help/productivity guy Tim Fenriss…I read his blog for a little while, this one post I thought was really cool. “how to learn (but not master) a language in 1 hour” link is here: http://bit.ly/83QSwv
i’ve never MASTERED a foreign language, i almost had German in the bag but did not make it overseas to get that full immersion required to master a language.
i studied Sanskrit for a year as well. a very small class with a professor who was probably not qualified to teach it. but it was real interesting. a singular, plural, and DUAL case for all nouns. an alphabet so regular and methodical that there are a couple of “theoretical” letters used in only one (or a handful) of words. the neutral vowel ‘a’ (uh) is omitted in written Sanskrit. i think this language used to be more popular and is known as a language for linguists.
robert…i thought this post was a bit long…maybe break it up into parts. i love the topic but i get overloaded.
Thanks for that link, randy.
Ok Randy, I split it in two, IE and non-IE. Is that better? Let me know…
This was another one of my magnum opuses.
Pingback: More On The Hardest Languages To Learn – Non-Indo-European Languages « Robert Lindsay
Dear Robert
Your claim that nearly all Dutch words have several meanings is nonsense. In Dutch, there are no verbs like get or move, which have to be translated by about a dozen verbs in Dutch.
What makes Dutch hard for English-speakers is the word order. Long sentences in Dutch often allow many word orders, but the one that English-speakers are inclined to use is usually the wrong one.
As to Italian grammar, it is about as hard as Spanish. Italian plural is fairly straitforward: o > i, e > i, a > e. Those vowel modifications cover more than 99% of Italian words that end in an unstressed vowel. Words that end in a stressed vowel or a consonant have no plural form in Italian.
What makes Italian harder than Spanish is that the fit between spelling and pronunciation is not as close as in Spanish. Apart from that, I would put them at about the same level of difficulty.
Have a good day. James
I can’t find where you’ve covered the Macedonian Slav language controversy in which Bulgarian, Serbian, Greek and a host of other interests and experts seem to disagree. Some ultra-nationalists go so far as to claim certain Macedonian villages have direct ties to ancient Macedonians with limited admixture with even Slav invaders, but I’m not sure even they deny the similarity of “Macedonian” with Bulgarian when it comes to language. Greeks are wont to claim the average Macedonian Slav Christian is really a Serbian whom Tito indoctrinated into a seperate ethnic identity for his own purposes.
Sorbs are also called “Wends.” I’m not ready to accept -or deny- the Khazar-Ashkenazi-Slav-Sorb theory. It is historical fact when empowered, the Nazis suppressed Sorbian culture, but I don’t believe German scientists ever linked them to Jews, although of course Nazis are not the last word on such matters.
It is good to see that bulgarian has scored 3. Try learning bulgarian from the experts.
I don’t think that gaelic should be considered a very hard language to learn, the aspirations really don’t matter when you talking beacause there is so many different ways to say things that you have a good chance of getting it right. There is also almost no declensions in Gaelic, so it seems easy to me. I started learning russian and im having trouble cause im not used to all these declensions
I’m going to stick up for Lithuanian here a bit as I’ve tried it out myself and have found it to be much easier than a lot of other languages, especially Slavic ones. A course here written by a Lithuanian I know makes learning the basics quite simple:
http://labs.ikindalikelanguages.com/courses.php?id=16
He also wrote a few comments in another post here on the difficulty of the language:
http://www.pagef30.com/2009/09/how-difficult-is-it-for-speakers-of.html
Also, the stress apparently isn’t as irregular as it may seem; according to this site each word is stressed according to one of four paradigms, not necessarily completely randomly as is often thought.
http://www.debeselis.net/lesson101.php
Thanks! I love your website BTW! Feel free to write this post up if you want, but it’s getting torn to bits by packs of hyenas.
The notion that Lithuanian was hard came from Lithuanian speakers. They were competing with speakers of other Euro languages, mostly Polish, Czech, Slovak and Serbo-Croatian, for who hard the hardest language to learn.
Would you say it deserves a 4 instead of a 5 rating?
Thanks, I love this website too. It’s almost like it was written by me if I had grown up somewhere else and ended up learning other languages first instead.
Yeah, I’d say 4 might be better. It also only has two genders which is another plus, and you can identify the gender most of the time by the ending (-as is always male for example, -ė always female). Only a few types can’t be recognized straight away by the ending.
I should also mention that Lithuanian Out Loud is an absolutely excellent podcast for learning Lithuanian. Often smaller languages are tough to learn simply due to the lack of good content online but thanks to them that problem doesn’t exist for Lithuanian anymore.
Hello,
there is no word “fouture” in french but you might have thought of “foutre”. “c’est foutu” means , for instance, the job will not be done.
Originaly, this slang adjective would not be written but today it is used every day and does not mean anymore what it meant in 1700.
foutre meant “to fuck”…and “le foutre” was the sperm !
There is no such forms in Polish as:
dwojkiem
dwójgę
dwójkiem
dwójgo
dwójna (could be ‘podwójna’ == double)
dwójkom
Do you have any thoughts on the relationships between the difficulty of a language and present/past national character? For instance, seems like in American English we like to make grammar simpler and speaking quicker — are we lazy/efficient/quick speakers & writers? Does this correspond with other aspects of being American?
(I found this blog post after entering the search term “kupiła vs kupowała polish,” as I work through Rosetta Stone Polish. It’s always nice to find cribs on Polish )
I found this article interesting, but the casual xenophobia put me off. Calling the Greek alphabet “weird” (sure, it’s odd to English eyes, but it’s not “weird”, especially if you consider that the Latin alphabet is derived from it) or claiming that one of the aims of the Acadamie Française is to “keep the language as stupid as possible” borders on being insulting.
the grammar of Polish seems very similar to Urdo in some ways except some of the suffixes are used individually.
I agree with stach’s corrections of the Polish versions of the number 2.
Also, all these words mean “second” (2nd), not “two” (2):
drugi
druga
drugie
drugiemu
drugiej
drugiego
drugim
drugą
Regardless, there are about 5-7 forms that are in common use; the other dozen are so are exceedingly rarely used, usually only correctly used in literature. It’s like future perfect (“I will have completed it by Friday”) in English; most will avoid using the correct form and instead default to a simpler form (“I’ll complete it by Friday”).
Thx, fixed it.
“English only gets a 2 rating as moderately easy to average, mostly because it is relatively easy to speak it well enough to be more or less understandable most of the time.”
I disagree very strongly. I didn’t count but I suspect there are more vowel phonemes in English (including diphtongs, triphtongs, and r-colored) than all phonemes in the dreaded Polish (my 1L). You know, it’s not just those clusters of voiceless stops and fricatives that can possibly be difficult to pronounce. I’ve been a 2L English speaker for over 20 years and I still can’t render “rarely” (really? rally?) or “rural” (rule? roll?) accurately enough to be understood by natives. I believe English deserves a 3.
Also while I am not objecting to the rating of 5 for Polish
, I must point out that the long word example is somewhat unfair. This is just a number-and-measure adjective like German “zweijahrig”, only with a large number. These words can be arbitrarily long but it doesn’t say anything about the frequency of long words in Polish in general.
The changes in plurals depending on the number are not a separate inflection but simply case declension. Numbers ending with 2,3,4 (except teen-ending numbers) go with plural nominative, all other numbers go with plural genitive. Numerals for 5+ and teen-ending numbers are noun-ish, a bit like English “pair” in “a pair of telephones” – hence the genitive.
Hmm. I will wait for more feedback before I up the English to 3. We have tons of L2 English speakers in this town I live in, mostly Hispanics but also Punjabis, Chinese and Arabs. Truth is that most of them are quite understandable to me and I to them most of the time. Sure, sometimes I don’t understand a given word they might be trying to say, but that’s not the same thing as being unintelligible.
“Hmm. I will wait for more feedback before I up the English to 3. We have tons of L2 English speakers in this town I live in, mostly Hispanics but also Punjabis, Chinese and Arabs. Truth is that most of them are quite understandable to me and I to them most of the time. Sure, sometimes I don’t understand a given word they might be trying to say, but that’s not the same thing as being unintelligible.”
I think the ease people have of learning English has more to do with its ubiquitousness than any inherent quality. Most countries in the world receive lots of Anglophone media, whereas the same cannot be said for the Anglophone world in relation to other cultures. That being said, people who immerse themselves in a given non-English language *do* manage to learn it. For example, in India there are 100s of millions of L2 speakers of Hindi due to the popularity of Bollywood, even though you say it’s a hard language! And there are millions of speakers of Dravidian languages that have learned Hindi, so it’s not just a case of similarity (although that does help). Immigrants are forced into a new language environment, so where they don’t form their own enclaves or fall back on a lingua franca for communication of course they’re going to use the local language.
Also, I’m a learner of Serbo-Croat and Hindi-Urdu, and I think you’re wrong about how hard they are. The difference between perfective and imperfective verbs in Serbo-Croatian may not be readily predictable, but there certainly patterns. Furthermore, English expresses the same meanings in the same unpredictable way:
English: to drink, to eat, to drink up, to eat up
Serbian: piti, jesti, popiti, pojesti
Why is an imperfective prefix inherently more difficult than the phrasal verbs used in English? In fact, I think it’s easier to learn “popiti” given that it’s meaning can almost be inferred if you already know the meaning of “piti” than if it was an entirely different lexical item. In cases where Serbian imperfective verbs are not equivalent to English phrasal verbs, they’re identified by tense at the very least.
The fact that Serbo-Croatian doesn’t usually show pronouns in a sentence is that it’s usually marked in the conjugation. For example, you could say “ja pijem” but that would emphasize the fact that you’re the one drinking, and not someone else. Ja pijem means “*I’M drinking”, whereas “pijem” means “I’m drinking”. “Pijem” only applies to “ja/I”, as the other pronouns have distinct forms. Spanish does the same thing, and yet you’ve given Spanish a difficulty level of 1! Something tells me your approach isn’t very consistent.
Regarding cases, that’s not a major issue. I can tell you from experience that mucking up cases usually does not cause problems in understanding. It’s like using the wrong preposition in English; you can understand sentences like “I live at Brisbane” or “I eat lots food”. Anyway, once you get enough exposure to the language understandings of case just become natural. You can’t just make claims about languages like this when you haven’t tried learning them.Here’s a case-by-case deconstruction of how simple Serbian grammar actually is:
-Cases are almost always easily predictable by the preposition they follow, “s” is instrumental and “na/u” is locative (and only instrumental when talking about more abstract concepts, like language; “na srpskom – in Serbian”).
-The genitive case is usually just the equivalent of English “of” (To je pas – that is a dog, bojim se pas*a* – I’m afraid *of* dogs). In a sense, the genitive is practically like learning another set of possesive pronouns, and pronouns are one of the easiest parts of a language. It’s also used with “from”, and I assure you as a foreign learner of Serbian you’ll find it easy to memorize (you’d probably say “Ja sam iz Australije/Amerike/whatever-e/a[depends on gender]” a hell of a lot of times).
-Vocative is hardly even a case, it’s just an ending that you use to call people. It’s almost like nicknames, except you’re grammatically oblidged to use it in appropriate situations. I assure you you will *never* be misunderstood when you don’t use this case and you’re supposed to, even if you will definitely sound weird.
-The distinction between Dative and Accusative is essentially the same as the English distinction between indirect and direct objects. In other words, Marko gave Maria (dative) the book (accusative). Since English makes this very same distinction, just using word order to convey it instead, why on Earth does this make Serbian a hard language?
All in all, there are some case distinctions that you’ll need to learn to become proficient in Serbo-Croatian. But this will happen naturally while learning Serbo-Croatian (if you focus on reading/watching/listening to media in the language and then reinforce your knowledge with conversation practice, rather than focusing on grammar from the very start), and they don’t differ much from the amount of effort you need to put in to learn word order or the use of prepositions in a new language.
Regarding Hindi, there’s no way you can consider the difficulty of Hindi and Mandarin in terms of the script. Devanagari is a phonetic script like Latin, while written Chinese is logographic. That said, even Chinese script can be (and has been) learned by Westerners with enough effort, just relatively more. The grammar is also very similar to European languages, so anyone with familiarity with 2 or more of them will not find many really alien features. Even if you’re a monoglot, if you have the right attitude and learning strategy you can easily learn it given enough time.
“you also need to take into account whether you as speaker are male or female”. So what? Do you have trouble remembering your gender on a daily basis? Why is that harder than say Spanish, which makes you mark your gender when you apply adjectives to yourself? And even if you somehow get it wrong, there’s no way you’ll be misunderstood. This may cause some difficulty in the first few hours or days of learning for the seriously uninitiated in terms of languages (people who honestly have never encountered gender in another language they’ve studied), but even then that’s pretty minimal effort.
You also claim that Hindi has “lot’s of long words”. Do you have any evidence that “long words” are more common in Hindi than in your “easy” languages? In my admittedly limited study of Hindi-Urdu (I didn’t give it up due to difficulty mind you, it was because I wanted to focus on another language for a while; I’m gonna get back into it in November) I haven’t encountered words that are much longer than the other languages I’m familiar with (namely English, Serbian and Spanish).
Sure, Hindi is harder for an English speaker than a Romance or possibly a Germanic language, but only due to a relative lack of cognates (although there certainly are many cognates; both words of Indo-European origin and more direct borrowings). In terms of grammar it’s just as easy as any other language.
There are some factual errors about Polish language. I have no time to point out all them them, but for example ó, u and ł are not the same sound, ó and u are vowels and they indeed sound the same, ł is a consonant and u may form diphthongs where it sounds like ł.
Robert, this is merely tangential to the subject, but on another blogboard (HalfSigma) that sometimes discusses the same issues you do, some threads about teaching early reading, irregular spelling rules, and international languages, motivates the question whether there’s something like Simplified International English that keeps the vocabulary while simplifying spelling, pronunciation, verb tenses and other irregularities. Sort of like Esperanto but with more of an English- than Romance-based vocabulary. (A Google search on “simplified international English” returned only suggestions that such a thing should be developed.)
Do you know of any such thing?
Simple English already exists.
Simple English Wikipedia. It’s not the same thing as what you were talking about though.
Robert, your link points right back to this page.
Should work now.
Hello, I really enjoyed your article, especially the party about the slavic and baltic languages, I only have one little concern:
In the part about German you write that a word changes it gender from singular to plural e.g. das Kind, die Kinder.
I think this is not correct as the article for plural simply is “die” regardless of gender in singular,i.e. there is no gender in plural in the German language.
Brazilian Portuguese is difficult because of diglossia, 18th century Continental Portuguese is used in writing, while Brazilian vernacular is used is speech.
I love you
Amo-te or Amo-o[standard, written]
Eu te amo or Eu amo você[spoken]
We saw them
Vimo-los [standard, written]
A gente viu eles [spoken]
Pierwszy gosc (pytanie):
you
Hello, Do you know maybe something about polish manufacturers of [url=http://baterie.lazienkowe.bialystok.pl]baterie lazienkowe[/url] ?
I wan’t to get some contacts to them. I have some offer
know…
Persian, which enjoyed a long period as the lingua franca of a broad region from the Middle East to Central Asia to South Asia and beyond, is a very easy language at the entry level. However advanced levels such as Sufi poetry can be very difficult because of subtleties of meaning. This would average out to a 3 but it would be better to recongize that the range of difficulty increases from elementary to advanced
Pingback: Danish children speak later than others
Hello,
.
I’ll talk about CZECH. You wrote there: “It’s sometimes said that even Czechs never learn to speak their language correctly, but that is probably an exaggeration.”
No. It’s true. I’m from Czech Republic and we don’t know our language perfectly. And for immigrants, learn Czech is catastrophe
We learn our grammar nine years in school, but some rules Czech learns in universities! It’s strange.
So, I’m not surprised, that Czech is a Guinness Record – Hardest Language… I see what I see (I’m common people, not a linguist)
Thx for this…
Dear Robert,
these pages are fascinating, thanks a lot for them!
I am a Czech. I can speak English and also some German, Russian and Spanish. I understand Slovak well and partly Polish and Croatian.
I have a few remarks on Czech language:
- what you say about the language is mostly true. However, there is always something more to be said, of course. For example, the language changes slightly according to who you speak to – if you are on “first names terms” with him/her or not. Also, women use different verb suffixes in past tense from men. This is probably similar to Japanese or Chinese but not so complex.
- Czech is a very difficult language and if it wasn’t my L1, I would never like to learn it. On the other hand, it is nowhere near Navajo or many other non-IE languages. I strongly disagree with the opinion that Czech is the most difficult language in the world. In Europe, it might be in TOP5 – but not in terms of the whole world.
- Czech is extremely difficult for a foreigner to learn – but it is not impossible. I know a few foreigners who speak Czech quickly, fluently and with almost no grammatical mistakes (I mean fewer than 3 mistakes in a half-hour monologue) – they come from the USA, England, Russia, Ukraine, Austria, … There is always some strange accent left so you can always tell they are foreigners – but their grammar is fast and as correct as natives have. Well, I also know one man from Armenia, whose Czech is perfect including the accent. He moved here about 20 years ago and it is totally impossible to distinguish his Czech from mine. I have been friends with him for 4 years and he has never made a slightest mistake. If he hadn’t told me he wasn’t a Czech, I would never have found out.
- I guess that learning Czech is much more about memorizing whole phrases and sentences then about logic and rules.
- most of the facts written about Polish language applies to Czech and Slovak as well – and, I suppose, all Slavic languages.
- There are a few sentences written in Polish section that actually speak about Czech and NOT Polish. For example the letter/sound “ř” is exclusively Czech. Poles, Slovaks, Russians, Germans,… – nobody has it. (Though I heard that maybe it is used in one of Eskimo languages.)
The two sentences (Strč prst skrz krk or Mlž pln skvrn zlvh.) are also Czech and not Polish.
- The letters “r” and “l” are considered “half-vowels” in Czech. (The term in quotes is mine – it’s not the official name). It actually is possible to pronounce them quite easily – that’s why those two sentences do not harm your tongue.
Concerning mistakes in grammar made by natives… – well, it is true, but it is not so bad either. There are native English speakers who make mistakes in English too and that’s probably the case in most languages.
In everyday life, when speaking, most Czechs speak quite correctly unless they run into areas of difficult grammar (see below).
Writing, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter. It is quite hard so just a few Czechs write with no mistakes. In fact, at least a third of the population makes at least one grammatical or spelling mistake in every single sentence they write. (Young generation is generally much worse in this respect as schools now aren’t so strict as they used to be and do not engage drill anymore.)
- Areas where native Czechs make most mistakes when SPEAKING:
(my subjective observation)
* use of the Czech equivalent to English “would” (frequent slight mistakes)
* use of the third conditional (Ex.: “If I’d known it, i wouldn’t have asked.”) (It is not so difficult but most Czechs have given up using it. They use the 2nd conditional instead – thus making the language poorer and unable to distinguish between a condition in the past and in the present.)
* one specific use of the gerund – as in sentences like “She looked at me smiling.” or “He walked along whistling.” or “He was in his bed reading a book.” This is extremely funny because this use is both very simple and very frequent in English. It is not simple in Czech at all! I estimate that only about 3% of Czechs are able to say these sentences correctly. I am a university graduate myself and I cannot do it even though I have tried to learn the rules many times. Instead, Czechs usually divide such sentences in two: “She looked at me and she smiled.” or “He was in his bed and he was reading.”
(I am certain that this must sound ridiculous to an English speaker. On the other hand, there are many other situations in the Czech language where Czech (and not English) is more elegant, more precise and faster.)
Well, one more note: some Czech sounds (mostly “R” and “Ř”) are quite difficult for children to master. Most of the kids learn to pronounce them correctly at the age of 5 or 6 but some native Czechs NEVER learn to say these sounds, even after decades of trying. As you might have guessed, these letters also cause huge problems to foreigners learning Czech. Some of the foreigners eventually suceed and learn to pronounce it, some do not.
If you want an easy Indo-Aryan language, may I suggest Bengali? It uses a variation of the Sanskrit alphabet so it is difficult to learn to read and write, and like all other Indo-Aryan languages on the sub continent it has many phones that are absent in English. However, it lacks grammatical gender, and that one advantage makes it much easier (or so I’ve been told).
I don’t speak Bengali at all, but as an American who has learned Hindi I have noticed my Bengali friends who speak Hindi make the same gender-speaking mistakes that I do.
Punjabi might be more difficult than any other Indo-Aryan language SPOKEN because it is tonal. Otherwise it’s similar to Hindi. I hate tonal languages. I just can’t understand speaking in a prescribed pitch.
All that being said, I never found Hindi difficult. Many of the words in English are related to Hindi because 1) either they’re mutual cognates from Sanskrit or 2) they were borrowed from Hindi. Here are some examples of words in Hindi that you can find in English:
loot — verb meaning to plunder or destroy.
mausaum — season or weather, English equivalent is monsoon
toofan — storm, English equivalent is typhoon
kammarband — something tied around the waist, English equiv. cummerbund
badnaam — literally bad name, means bad reputation. These are both cognates to the English words bad and name.
bangalaa — house, English equivalent bungalow
jangal — jungle
pandit — priest, English equiv. pundit
“Many of the words in English are related to Hindi because 1) either they’re mutual cognates from Sanskrit”
Are you attempting to promote the Out of India theory here? Wouldn’t they actually be cognates because of their common origin in proto-indo-european?
No, I’m not promoting any theory regarding English. I meant that they’re mutual cognates in both languages, with the Hindi ancestors coming over from Sanskrit, not necessarily that the English cognates came directly from Sanskrit. It’s a poorly formed sentence.
I don’t contest that Danish (I find them very hard to understand!) might be harder to learn than Swedish, but the two reasons you list aren’t actually differences between the languages. Swedish also has two different words for ‘a’ (en/ ett; a dog= en hund; a pet= ett husdjur), modify nouns to include ‘the’ by adding different en/et suffixes (hunden; husdjuret), and this determines how adjectives are modified as well. Also, Swedish also has three extra vowels at the end of the alphabet that don’t exist in English (å, ä, ö). They are basically the same extra vowels as in Danish- just written somewhat differently. Thanks for the interesting post though.
Hello Robert,
There seems to be a small error in this page. You have rated Sanskrit both 4 and 5. Which is the correct rating, in your opinion?
If you were to ask me (a native speaker of Sanskrit), then I would say that Sanskrit certainly merits a 5 in difficulty. After 30 years of speaking it routinely and holding a full university education, I still find some places where the grammar is atrociously complex and I end up confused. The language has simply too many grammar features that I have rarely (or never) found in any other language.
The declension of the nouns is based on the letter they end in (for instance, the declension of a noun ending in `a’ would be very different from the declension of a noun that ends in `e’, which are very different from the nouns ending in `u’, and so forth). Then, the masculine, feminine, and neuter genders decline very differently. For each noun, there are eight cases, with three numbers (singular, dual, and plural), so there are 24 forms for each noun. Considering that (between the different endings, and genders), there are roughly 20 different kinds of nouns (some letter endings either do not exist in the language, or exist in so tiny a number that they are negligible), there are 1440 different REGULAR forms of nouns. To add to this, there are some noun cases that have multiple forms. And there are exceptions in addition to this.
The pronouns have the same cases and numbers, but their declension is rather different (particularly, for the `I’ and the `you’ pronouns), but all in all, pronouns are a piece of cake, compared to the nouns.
Then there are verbs, where each verb can exist in 10 different tenses and moods (there is an additional one in Vedic Sanskrit, but it has mercifully fallen out of use). There is one present tense, two future tenses, and three past tenses, an imperative form, a form which expresses doubt, a form which expresses hope (or other positive things like offering benediction), a form which expresses the condition (if only,…, then) form. There are two different conjugations based on who the direct beneficiary of the actions is – oneself or others. And there are ten groups of verbs, all of which conjugate fairly differently. All verbs have different forms in single, dual, and plural forms, and in first, second, and third person.
If you can master all this, then you are ready to take on the real devils in the language, the participals, noun derivatives, and agglutinatives, all three of which are far far more complex. Let me know if you want me to explain those as well.
Regards,
Maidros
no sabia que supieras hablar bien el español para que le dieras el rango de “1″,
1 no mencionas la ortografía, (b=v)(k=c) (s=z)(s=c)(h) la “C” suena como “S” en algunas palabras, igual la “g” suena como “j” aveces tan bien
2 la “H” muda
3 el sonido de la “ñ”, “g”, “i”, “y”, “ll”, “r”, “rr”
4 el “ser” y “estar” = (are) / que sé usa MÁS en el español que en los otras lenguas
5 el “ese”, “este”, “aquel”
6 los 6 tiempos
7 los generos
8 de + el = del
9 (the) = el / las / los / las
……..
y al pobre portugués le distes un miserable punto XD y eso que tiene mas sonidos que el español
Stubmled into your website when doing research about bilingualism for my school paper. I am a Swedish born gal (living in the US) who got a free language (Finnnish) at home, by her Finnish born parents. I was hoping you had touched more on the Finnish language as well. It is said to be the hardest to learn to talk and it indeed is for people who aren’t born into it. It is even hard for us who are born into, but with the percistance by one or both parents,it is doable.
I will come back to your blog and see what more interesting stuff you have here…I hope it is an active blog.
Hello my friend, we talk a lot about Finnish in part 2 to the this post – Non Indo-European languages.
I think that Czech is a little bit harder then Slovak (Yes, I’m from Czech republic). Because Slovak has a more regular grammar and so on. And yes: Czech is full of exceptions
Sometimes it’s hard to remember.
This is an interesting article. I like to read something about other languages. I didn’t know that we have so many different ways of declension. (Sorry for my english if there is something wrong. I tried to write correctly. )
No way is European Portuguese easier than English…
Very interesting. I’d just pick up on a couple of points a) what you say about perfective and imperfective forms of verbs in Polish is also true in Russian b) although the pronunciation in Scots and Irish Gaelic (Q-Celtic) looks irrational to English speakers, it is actually quite regular and consistent .
“Any Gaelic language is tough. Irish students take Irish for 13 years, and some take French for five years. These students typically know French better than Irish. There are inflections for the inflections of the inflections, a convoluted aspiration system, and no words for yes or no. The system of initial consonant mutation is quite baffling.
Welsh and Scottish Gaelic are also very hard to learn, some say harder than Irish, although Welsh has no case compared to Irish’s two cases. And the Welsh has a mere five irregular verbs. Gaelic languages are harder to learn than German or Russian. Both Scots Gaelic and Irish Gaelic are written with non-phonetic spelling that is even more convoluted and irrational than English.
Scottish Gaelic, Welsh and Irish get 5 ratings, hardest of all.”
Woah… have you ever tried to learn any of these languages? The Celtic languages are by far some of the simplest Indo-European languages going. Scottish Gaelic has a completely regular and phonetic spelling system, it has only 3 cases [nom [as normal], dat [add an 'i' for feminine nouns] and gen], it has only 10 irregular verbs [which are regular within themselves], the verbs themselves do not conjugate and the language has gotten rid of 99% of the varied [but completely understandable] mutations of Welsh and Irish [lenition being the only one left]. On top of this, Gaelic has a very systematic approach to working out whether words are masculine or feminine and the language’s syntax is very simplistic if you learn the rules.
The only real issue for non-Scots who are learning Gaelic is the pronunciation – bh, mh, aoi, dh, gh, L, N , R, sh, th all cause great issues.
In conclusion, Hungarian, yes – 5. Celtic languages, no. 2, yes. 3 at a push.
Celtic languages differ. Welsh is very straight-forward and simple, once you get past two sounds English doesn’t have. It’s been heavily influenced by English in the 20th century, so many idioms are direct translations of English ones. Intitial mutations exist, but written Welsh shows both the original and new letter.
Irish doesn’t show the original one, and it has a more complex grammar, but it’s not a really difficult language. Main problem, I think, is idioms–there are lots, as in English. “Cuir suas de” for example (literally “put up from”) means “to decline, refuse.” “Cuir faoi” (literally “put under”) means “to settle.” Scottish Gaelic is basically an Irish dialect that’s become a seperate language due to political/economid developments after 1600. It’s about the same as Irish, though phonology (I think) is a little more challenging. Breton is more complex than Welsh, (particularly verbal system) and has tons of opaque idioms, like Irish. Cornish is very similar to Breton, but was recorded only partially before its demise as a community language about 1800. Manx, one Celtic scholar has propsed, is almost “baby Irish” learned by mainly-Norse speaking children of Norse fathers (conquerors) and Irish mothers. It’s also written according to a very strange system probably based on written medieval Lowland Scots (English dialect). The discussion so far hasn’t touched on any of the submerged languages of Europe, which are often much more interesting than the regularized plasticized standard languages–Piedmontese, Romansch, Frisian, Galicia, Basque, Occitan, etc. etc.. Traditional rural dialects of standards are often equally interesting.
Just a quick note about English. As a trained ESL professional and linguist I have a little input for English for you. You hit the nail on the head with the phrasal verbs, and that English is actually a difficult language to learn. A quick note about spelling though, spelling was standardized fairly late in English, but before pronunciation had settled a little more, hence differences in orthography and pronunciation. You are however incorrect to say there are no rules. 80% of English orthography does match pronunciation, the other 20% though has high frequency usage which is why we think there is more that doesn’t match some kind of spelling rule. English actually has lots of rules for structure, spelling, and grammar to help the second language learner.
I find it hilarious the pride some people take in the supposed difficulty of their language, as if it is something to be proud of. The seem actually angry if a foreigner manages to master it. Silly people.
I must say is very strange you give one “1″ to Portuguese language. Probably one of the most complicated “Romance” languages. You can’t really imagine how grammatical is complicated. I’m a native and still made some unwanted errors, sometimes it too much to handle even to us. Youth now can’t even write or speech with at least something in a phrase said/wrote be incorrect. Also pronunciation is so complicated and harder to master that even foreign residing in country with more than a decade can’t even get pronunciation right or reach some “perfection” to someone don’t notice that is not native. Even brazilians residing here have hard times understand us, loosing their accents and some difficulty in adaptation. A portuguese in holiday at Brazil have also problems getting and understand the right “brazilian” speech “mood” . TV shows that came from Portugal never succeed in Brazil cause of the slow, clear, not “mellow” pronunciation that brazilians have. Easy? More than English? And Spanish? Certainly a joke. I’m not a good foreign learner and speaker but one thing that continental portugueses are some aptitude is for talk foreign languages. Why? First because of “neutral” accent-free pronunciation. Also because all the rest of european languages seem so much more easy than portuguese.
Hi!
I find your article interesting, though I wouldn’t agree with you on many points. But first, I think that your article is simply not very well organised. You devote ten paragraphs to one language but another one is dwelled on within only a single paragraph. Most of all, I have no idea why you decided to include that awfully long list of English phrasal verbs. That was not the point of your article, was it? Also, sometimes you lack coherence. Let’s take this paragraph:
“I and y, s and z, je and ě alternate at the ends of some words, but the rules governing when to do this, if they exist, don’t seem sensible. The letters ř and ť are very hard to pronounce, and the ř exists in no other language. There are nasal vowels as in Portuguese. The ą, ć, ę, ł, ń, ó, sz, cz, dz, dź, dż sounds are hard for foreigners to make. There are sounds that it is even hard for native speakers to make, as they require a lot tongue movements.”
At this point you are supposed to be talking about Polish yet some of the distinctive letters you mention here are Czech rather than Polish.
I also don’t really understand the criteria you apply conerning a language’s difficulty. Half of those listed are “hardest of all” but there’s hardly any comparison between them. And when you do make a comparison, it’s often kind of strange. If the Baltic languages are so difficult, why compare them to not-so-hard Russian? It’d have been better if you used Polish or Czech here.
There’s another thing that bugs me and that’s the way you treat Spanish, Portuguese, and English. Now, I don’t know a thing about Portuguese but most opinions I heard about it were that it’s hard, definitely harder than Spanish. Like I said: it’s just rumors that I heard but still…
Anyway, I have no idea why Spanish should be graded higher than English. You seem to think that your language’s main problem is the fact that pronounciation often has very little to do with spelling. That’s not the case with qute a handful of European languages, I agree. Another bad thing about it is the number of phrasal verbs that are supposed to be impossible to master.
Well, I think you’re forgetting one very important thing. The thing that in my opinion makes English the easiest language on Earth: its dominance. English is everywhere and, unlike Spanish, it surrounds us on a daily basis, it keeps talking to us whenever we turn on the Internet or leave our homes; no matter what country we live in. I can’t quess the pronounciation on the basis of spelling? Well, I’ll watch a couple movies and sooner or later I’ll get this right. Willy-nilly.
Also, I think you underestimate the value of not having any inflections in your language. Now that’s a HELL of an advantage when it comes to comparing with other languages. Can you show me another in which almost none verb would ever appear in more than five variants, most of which are 100% regular anyway? And uses the Latin alphabet, so that you don’t come up with Chinese.
Whose grammar, by the way, is not as much easier than that of English, as it is commonly believed. I don’t mean it’s hard (grammar is the last thing you ought to be afraid of when it comes to learning Chinese) but it has its peculiarities (like two different ways of negating a sentence).
Don’t take it too personal though.
It’s just my personal notions, that’s all.
Dying light blonde hair reddish blonde or strawberry blonde is as hard as learning Finnish and Hungarian. Dying dark brown or medium brown hair pale blonde or platinum blonde without bleaching it is as difficult as learning Polish and Armenian. But dying light brown or dark blonde hair strawberry blonde is as easy as learning Spanish and Italian.
I read only passage about slavic languages and I do not want to continue, it is not very proffessional. You have a problem to distinguish slavic languages. You put together features of slovak and czech or polish.
Where did you find czech has 6 genders? It has only 3 – masculine, feminine and neutrum, I am sure about that I am a slovak and I can speak and read czech almost as my mothertongue, for me it is just like a different dialect of slovak language.
verbs in both slovac and czech take gender only in past tense
Ok you are banned.
(December 1, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Ok Randy, I split it in two, IE and non-IE. Is that better? Let me know…
This was another one of my magnum opuses.)
Sorry to be pedantic Robert, for this is indeed a magnum opus, but shouldn’t the plural be “magna opera” ?
Magna opera and magnum opuses are both correct.
About french language: “since they have a committee that is set up in part to keep the language as orthographically irrational as possible.”
lol… wrong… something you don’t understand doesnt mean its irrational. French language is connected to the history, to latin etc…you should learn to see beyond. French language is logic when you know a bit about France History.
If french people had to edit dictionnary everytime a guy is pronuncing bad or making gram mistakes, then it would become really irrational. More ever, french isnt frozen in time, new expressions, new words, slang are registred in dictionnary, always evolving. But what is a part of History, stays as it, unchanged. Would you prefer people talk sms language?
Considering Portuguese easier than Spanish is not correct. Portuguese is far harder. Especially if we take into consideration the European variant (Brazilian Portuguese has an easier pronunciation, but European Portuguese strongly omits vowels, and has more sounds per letter than the Brazilian variant). Portuguese has both nasal and open vowels, which Spanish lacks, Standard Portuguese has at least 12 vowel phonemes while Spanish has 5. Also, Portuguese still keeps the primitive Subjunctive Future, which may seem odd and hard to understand for speakers of languages that lack it (like English and any other Romance language). While speaking about the future, in Spanish the phrase “when I am president, I will change the law” is “cuando yo soy presidente, voy a cambiar la ley” using the Present tense just like in English, while in Portuguese this sentence should be “quando eu for presidente, vou mudar a lei”, using the Subjunctive Future which doesn’t exist in English and in any other modern romance language. Also, while Spanish permits the use of the easier-to-remember compound past as in “yo he trabajado”, Portuguese always force you to use the conjugated form which varies among verbs as in “eu trabalhei” because the sentence “eu hei trabalhado” simply doesn’t make any sense in Portuguese. Although Spanish also has some details not present in Portuguese, they are far more insignificant. By the way, I’m a native Brazilian Portuguese speaker who also speaks Spanish, English, Italian, and currently learning German.
Hi Robert, there are many languages which are not commonly taught. Those languages are difficult to learn for many reasons: they are not codified (lack of standardized grammar, lexicon, pronounciation, script…), there are not so many textbooks and other learning materials, number and access to their native speakers (not talking about the proportion of the literate and educated ones) is limited. Say Pashto and look at its recent geo-political importance. It is far more difficult (in grammar, syntax, pronounciation etc.) than Farsi. And it is a fairly big language but still not the most difficult of other tiny surviving Iranian languages. Or Sanskrit. It is a pretty complex language but as the classic Sanskrit is a kind of ideal, artificial language it is very much regular. The next level is Pali or any of Prakrits – that is a challenge! The realm of languages is fascinating, indeed. For me, the answer for the question “which language is the hardest to learn” is simply the language I am not interested in.
Człowieku Polski nie jest językiem germańskim ,nauczy się najpierw a nie że bzdety wypisujesz.Polski to język słowiański a nie jakieś gówno .
You realize of course that he can’t understand you?
I’ve actually found that Polish is quite regular, there are just SO many rules that it gives the impression of irregularity. But behind them all there is a logic.
moreover, Polish orthography is 100% regular, just because there are two ways of saying the ‘h’ sound (ch/h) does not make it irregular as English is, because ch and h will ALWAYS make that sound, likewise ‘u’ and ‘ó’ always make the same sound, so it’s not irregular. It might look intimidating with clusters like ‘szcz’ but once you know the rules it’s actually quite straightforward!
Got to agree with J. S. C. here… the difference between “ch” and “h” in Polish used to be distinctive but is not anymore. Nowadays, only language purists are able to produce the “proper” sound of either of them. For instance, the accurate way of rendering the sound of laughter in Polish would be “cha, cha, cha,” even though 99.9% of the native speakers would write “ha, ha, ha” instead. The same thing goes for “ó” and “u;” it takes a lifetime for a primary school teacher of Polish to explain to their pupils why it should be “kura” (hen) rather than “kóra” as the choice of the letter doesn’t seem to alter the pronounciation in the slightest.
Hi Robert. First, I must say, this is a fantastic article. I found it very informative and interesting!
I am glad you included Romanian, which doesn’t seem to get a lot of attention in many places. I wanted to mention a few things, though.
You said, “However, there is no case in Italian, as in all of Romance.” This is actually incorrect. Romanian has five (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, vocative). However, the vocative is not commonly used, and nom./acc. and gen./dat. are grouped together. I.e. N-A “aeroportul”, G-D “aeroportului.” It’s not quite as confusing as many Slavic languages.
Another thing that makes Romanian tricky is that it has three genders, unlike the other romance languages. It retains the neuter gender from Latin, however neuter words are simply treated as masculine in the singular and feminine in the plural, unlike in languages such as Russian where neuter is treated as a completely different gender.
I think 3 is a good rating for Romanian. I would say it has a lot of grammar that is unusual to the other romance languages (case, articles attached as suffixes as you mentioned, neuter gender) and its pronounciation can be tricky at first as well. I studied Spanish for several years, and this is definitely harder, but still easier than Russian which I am having a difficult time learning.
I think this is a very interesting post so please don’t take offense to my question; but why is inflection always considered more difficult than auxiliary verbs and pronouns? If English used ‘giveshe’, ‘givewe’, ‘givenhavei’, ‘gaveshe’, ‘givingbewillwe’, ‘givenhaveyou’, and ‘givenhasshe’ (instead of ‘we give,’ ‘i have given,’ etc) would it suddenly be more difficult?
English is hardly inflected at all, so, yes, inflected languages are going to be harder to learn for English speakers.
Reblogged this on Dubbedk's Blog.
Very interesting article. Shouldn’t the last two languages on your list be 5′s, not 4′s, as they’re rated as hardest of all? Also, I recall meeting a Spaniard, who said that he found Italian easier to understand than Portuguese.