¿Alguien sabe cualquier español las palabras que comienzan con I?
does any1 know any Spanish words that begin with the letter "I"'''''
30 Answers
Valerie said:
samdie said:
lazarus1907 said:
Samdie:You're gonna love this: supposedly, the language that it is grammatically mastered at the earliest possible age is... Turkish! (and the latest one, Arabic). Do you know anyting about Turkish? It is not supposed to be an easy language, but then, psycholinguistically speaking it seems to be the easiest for the young human brain. Interesting, uh?
I have a record (one side of) which has Turkish folk songs. I also spent several days in Istanbul (as a stopover on the way to Japan) but this was a "touristy" experience not a language experience.If memory serves, at the "Army Language School" (or more accurately, "The Defense Language Institute"), Turkish is a 1-year course (as are Arabic [which I studied] and the far eastern languages). Western European languages, on the other hand, are 6-month courses and Eastern European languages usually 9-month courses.I didn't find Arabic structure all that difficult but 1) they taught almost no grammar, per se. It was a strictly conversational approach 2) we studied only _modern_ Arabic (I wouldn't be at all surprised if classical Arabic {e.g. the Koran] were much more complicated) and 3) the courses were meant to establish a _foundation_ (for further study). Nobody thought that graduating students were fluent (even when that word is interpreted quite liberally).On the subject of pronunciation (rather than grammatical problems), the weirdest story I ever heard was about Finnish (I'm pretty sure it was Finnish but it might have been something like an Aleut language). The article claimed that there was some sound unique to the language and that a child had to learn it in the first few _months_ of his life or he'd never learn to produce it properly.
I read something similar. I think it was Aleut. That some of the vowel sounds were indistinguishable by non-native speakers, but clear to infants. I can bear witness that 5-year olds whose first language is Cambodian can clearly hear differences in vowel sounds which I can barely distinguish at all. Some of you experts, isn't there also research that children learn languages easiest below a certain age? (I'm thinking it's 5 or 7)
I did see a documentary about early age and it reported that generally we learn more, not just languages, in the first seven years of out life than we learn in the rest of it.
By the way, Lazarus, I should have explicitly acknowledged that your comment was about _initial_ language acquisition while my comment (digression') about the DLI applies to the learning of a 2nd language (which, in many ways, is a wholly different problem).
P.S. If you happen to remember, do you have any idea what sorts of time frames were being suggested for acquiring Turkish/Arabic'
samdie said:
lazarus1907 said:
Samdie: You're gonna love this: supposedly, the language that it is grammatically mastered at the earliest possible age is... Turkish! (and the latest one, Arabic). Do you know anyting about Turkish? It is not supposed to be an easy language, but then, psycholinguistically speaking it seems to be the easiest for the young human brain. Interesting, uh?
I have a record (one side of) which has Turkish folk songs. I also spent several days in Istanbul (as a stopover on the way to Japan) but this was a "touristy" experience not a language experience.
If memory serves, at the "Army Language School" (or more accurately, "The Defense Language Institute"), Turkish is a 1-year course (as are Arabic [which I studied] and the far eastern languages). Western European languages, on the other hand, are 6-month courses and Eastern European languages usually 9-month courses.
I didn't find Arabic structure all that difficult but 1) they taught almost no grammar, per se. It was a strictly conversational approach 2) we studied only _modern_ Arabic (I wouldn't be at all surprised if classical Arabic {e.g. the Koran] were much more complicated) and 3) the courses were meant to establish a _foundation_ (for further study). Nobody thought that graduating students were fluent (even when that word is interpreted quite liberally).
On the subject of pronunciation (rather than grammatical problems), the weirdest story I ever heard was about Finnish (I'm pretty sure it was Finnish but it might have been something like an Aleut language). The article claimed that there was some sound unique to the language and that a child had to learn it in the first few _months_ of his life or he'd never learn to produce it properly.
I read something similar. I think it was Aleut. That some of the vowel sounds were indistinguishable by non-native speakers, but clear to infants. I can bear witness that 5-year olds whose first language is Cambodian can clearly hear differences in vowel sounds which I can barely distinguish at all. Some of you experts, isn't there also research that children learn languages easiest below a certain age? (I'm thinking it's 5 or 7)
lazarus1907 said:
Samdie:
You're gonna love this: supposedly, the language that it is grammatically mastered at the earliest possible age is... Turkish! (and the latest one, Arabic). Do you know anyting about Turkish? It is not supposed to be an easy language, but then, psycholinguistically speaking it seems to be the easiest for the young human brain. Interesting, uh?
I have a record (one side of) which has Turkish folk songs. I also spent several days in Istanbul (as a stopover on the way to Japan) but this was a "touristy" experience not a language experience.
If memory serves, at the "Army Language School" (or more accurately, "The Defense Language Institute"), Turkish is a 1-year course (as are Arabic [which I studied] and the far eastern languages). Western European languages, on the other hand, are 6-month courses and Eastern European languages usually 9-month courses.
I didn't find Arabic structure all that difficult but 1) they taught almost no grammar, per se. It was a strictly conversational approach 2) we studied only _modern_ Arabic (I wouldn't be at all surprised if classical Arabic {e.g. the Koran] were much more complicated) and 3) the courses were meant to establish a _foundation_ (for further study). Nobody thought that graduating students were fluent (even when that word is interpreted quite liberally).
On the subject of pronunciation (rather than grammatical problems), the weirdest story I ever heard was about Finnish (I'm pretty sure it was Finnish but it might have been something like an Aleut language). The article claimed that there was some sound unique to the language and that a child had to learn it in the first few _months_ of his life or he'd never learn to produce it properly.
samdie,
you might be interested in this
Samdie:
You're gonna love this: supposedly, the language that it is grammatically mastered at the earliest possible age is... Turkish! (and the latest one, Arabic). Do you know anyting about Turkish? It is not supposed to be an easy language, but then, psycholinguistically speaking it seems to be the easiest for the young human brain. Interesting, uh'
This is the first time that I've seen the idea expressed as a poem but, yes! The basic thought is a fundamental belief of linguists everywhere. Usually it is explained in answer to the question "Is language X more (less) difficult than language Y. The answer from linguists is always "No!. There is no such thing as a hard (or easy) language." As proof, they always point out that, no matter what the country/language, by the age of (about) ten everyone raised speaking a language is fluent in that language. (Admittedly, their speech may be less literary/sophisticated than that of an adult but they have no problem expressing their own ideas nor in understanding [except for possible problems of vocabulary] what others say. In other words, they know how the language _works_
. Why this is true may be open to debate (for example Chomsky's theory of _innate_ grammar) but nobody (who is seriously interested in languages) doubts that it _is_ true.
Note, however, that this truism is a statement only about ones _first_ language. (Brief aside: the humor of the poem, of course, depends precisely on the [intentional] confusing of the difference between learning a 1st and a 2nd language.) For 2nd, 3rd, etc. languages it is usually helpful that the "new" language be related to a language that one already knows. There can still be problems (slightly technically, known as "interference") with similar languages but these problems are minor compared with learning a vocabulary that bears _no_ relation to any language that one knows or with grammar patterns that are totally outside the range of ones experience. For example, I've read descriptions of the Hopi (American Indian) language that say that they have nothing that corresponds to "our" notion of past/present/future. Whatever it is that they say in Hopi, is, apparently, based on a totally different way of looking at the world. If I had the time and energy (which I don't), I might be tempted to spend a few years learning Hopi (just to understand what all the discussion was about and to see how a language can work without the tenses that are so familiar to me).
Marisa said:
No, it's okay. I was acting very lazy. I have learned from that now, so other people will not view me that way. Thank you for letting me know.
There is a beautiful poem in spanish that is interesting for the subject:
SABER SIN ESTUDIAR (Nicolás Fernández de Moratín)
Admiróse un portugués
de ver que en su tierna infancia
todos los niños en Francia
supiesen hablar francés.
«Arte diabólica es»
dijo, torciendo el mostacho,
«que para hablar en gabacho,
un fidalgo en Portugal
llega a viejo, y lo habla mal;
y aquí lo parla un muchacho.»
Aclaraciones:
mostacho = mustache
gabacho = french
fidalgo = noble man
parla = speaks
Añado algunos adjetivos más a la lista:
imberbe, inmaculado, insolente, intolerante, inigualable, impertérrito, insulso, irreverente, iletrado, impoluto.
carolina said:
there is alot of words with this letter ; iguana, igual , inevitable, inadvertido, inpropio, inadacuado, ipocrita, intolerante, inadecuado, iguldad, inadvertido ,impecable, inestable,
Con todo cariño:
impropio
Hipócrita
there is alot of words with this letter ; iguana, igual , inevitable, inadvertido, inpropio, inadacuado, ipocrita, intolerante, inadecuado, iguldad, inadvertido ,impecable, inestable,
Marco and valerie, I thought the same.
marco said:
lente, luz, lámpara, lucha, lento, lamer, lata, luciérnaga, latosa, locura, lucirse, lima, limón, lenteja, latosa, lugar, lento, luego, lo, las, etc, etc, etc
Marco, I thought it was an L, too... I had a whole list of them, but I deleted it. 
Marisa said:
You're right, I'm sorry for being so lazy. I should also use correct spelling. I am thoroughly capable of doing both of these things myself. I'm really sorry for bothering all of you, I feel really bad. Anyways, thank you so much for letting me know how to improve myself as a person; I will no longer use abbreviations and be more independent.
independent: independiente, there is another one
irresponsable, irascible, increíble, irracional
there are lots!
individual, introvertido, intelligente, intelectual, insegura, impresionante
