-
-
May 16, 2010 at 8:17 am #1474
Right now, you either know a language or you don’t. There should be a middle ground, where you’re able to recognize what language the person’s speaking but still understand nothing. Languages would show up as <Zabrak> instead of <An unfamilar dialect>, followed by the normal gibberish.
This would add a bit of realism, as it’s easy enough for most native English speakers to distinguish German from French and Spanish, because they’ve heard these languages spoken enough to pick up on the common sounds involved. But a typical Briton couldn’t put a name to any of the thousands of tribal African or Native American languages.
In addition to the int/5 languages you can actually ‘learn’, you could research some number of them up to 15%. The number would show up as something like "You can learn 1 more language, and learn to identify 3." Alternatively, it could be picked up automatically after hearing so many characters speak a language.
-
May 17, 2010 at 4:56 pm #14453
I’m all for some kind of middle ground on knowing languages, and this idea seems to have very few things that people who are usually opposed to the concept can object to :p
I like the idea of automatically getting the ability to recognize a language from hearing it around enough. I also think some of the languages ought to be immediately recognizable… mostly Wookiee or Jawa. Languages with very distinctive sounds, particularly ones where the native speakers can’t speak Basic.
-
May 20, 2010 at 12:31 pm #14465
I love the idea, particularly the automatic acquisition; I’m not sure how more difficult that would be to code, though (over, say, a "you can learn to identify <int> languages" approach). My only concern would be people "power-languaging" each other, so I would be more for a "number of people" requirement over a "number of words" (or other measure of simply amount of exposure) requirement.
-
May 22, 2010 at 3:21 pm #14478
That after hearing 30 people speak language Wookiee, you will see <Wookiee> garble garble garble.
Instead of hearing it 30 times, you have to hear 30 different people.
-
May 22, 2010 at 3:45 pm #14479
I like it
But I would want to find a way so if you hear a bothan speaking iktochi you get confused or something. I’m a big fan of false positives etc.
-
May 22, 2010 at 9:14 pm #14486"Ravaus":27i7iiww wrote:I like it
But I would want to find a way so if you hear a bothan speaking iktochi you get confused or something. I’m a big fan of false positives etc.[/quote:27i7iiww]If you’re trying to pick up Bothan, that makes sense. Have it "subtract" from the number of people you’ve heard speaking it. If you already can recognize Bothan or Iktotchi, you ought to realize they’re not speaking their native language.
As for the organic accumulation thing, would there still be a limit on the number you were allowed to recognize? Something like 30 different people speaking the language would probably take quite a while. Even 15 would probably be a lengthy process, except for those languages that are spoken very commonly and by a lot of different people, such as Arkanian this timeline or Hapan in the last one. My only objection to there being a limit is that you can’t choose what language you’ll hear the most of first. That just encourages people to find ways to "power-language", as RJ put it, since they need to learn to recognize the language of their choice before they’re exposed to too much of any other. But if it’s as slow as needing 30 or so people, I don’t see a problem with having it unlimited.
-
May 23, 2010 at 3:23 am #14492
"30 individual people" is probably impossible. Maybe something like a combination of words and unique people. Like.. at least 5 different people have to use at least 100 words each.
-
May 23, 2010 at 4:00 pm #14506
I actually would’ve suggested something like three people. With a five person requirement, the only languages you would recognize would be the languages you speak, such as Jawa (if you’re like 75% of the mud and have 25 INT); races rare enough for you only see one or two of them are the ones that should be "recognizable." Practically everyone in America can recognize Russian; how many can actually speak it? (Something like Spanish would be the Jawa of my earlier statement.)
-
May 23, 2010 at 9:08 pm #14518
There’s a whole lot involved with language families that has to deal with recognizing individual languages.
The reason why most native English speakers can recognize German and French is because the languages are very similar.
If you ask the same person who can recognize the difference between German, French, and English to recognize the differences in Punjabi and other Arabic languages, or even Japanese and other asian languages, they’d be hard pressed to do the same unless they’ve got some familiarity with the language…which not everyone has.
-
May 24, 2010 at 2:57 pm #14536
I can recognize the difference between German, Spanish, French, etc. easily and also the difference between an eastern european dialect and Russian — but good luck recognizing Arabic or chinese dialects even though I know a few words. Though I think accents has a lot to do with recognizing the difference unless you happen to speak one of the languages.
-
May 24, 2010 at 7:45 pm #14539
But even then, I have a feeling you’d get hung up on Portuguese and Spanish.
-
May 25, 2010 at 11:16 pm #14540
Portuguese and spanish are pretty fucking hard to confuse.
<!– m –><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1WciYsqqpk">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1WciYsqqpk</a><!– m –>
<!– m –><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pD2aE_zfHE">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pD2aE_zfHE</a><!– m –>
-
This topic has 19 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 11 months ago by .
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.