Ah I get it. I remember reading a story about a frog who lived in a well and did not know what lay beyond.
No idea how you made that leap. That, sir, is another ad hominem for which you have no basis.
I have stated many times in this forum that English isn't my first language. That's not the issue though. The issue is people making statements that cannot be proven, citing a false statement as fact because it was regurgitated by Mr Google.
it's true that I make mistakes like anyone one else.
Questioning your claim does not make me a pedant. Every time a thread like this comes up, people bring up the usual hood/bonnet kind of words. I provided examples that required description. You may find my posts boring.
Moreover, it's not easy to be a pedant for one who relies on google alone, or is prone to making assertions about what they are used to. I have rarely heard people making such an assertion about a language other than their own.
When you learn a language very different from your mother tongue, you appreciate the good and the bad better.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Studying and speaking other languages does give one a better understanding of his native tongue in addition to the more readily apparent benefits.
Give me some credit my friend when I can cite examples, contradicting claims made by native speakers. Dismissing my words because I am not a native speaker is what? Ad hominen. Which, is what I am charged with.
You have completely misrepresented what i wrote. I wrote that I was giving you the benefit of the doubt because I suspected English is not your native tongue.
if your assertion was that German propensity to form long compound makes a language the most expressive, there is at least language with compounds much longer than you can imagine.
My assertion was no such thing. Please reread it if you have any interest.
Your assertion that English is the most expressive language is without any foundation, and is simply your opinion. If that makes you suffer, a pedant, I am sorry. When one makes an absolute statement without foundation, another who sees the folly, is bound to question your assertion(s).
Certainly it's my opinion. So what? It was not, however, unsupported and was for the simple purpose of refuting a statement you made about the inadequacy of the Roman alphabet. You chose to ignore the substance of the argument and focus on the vehicle with which it was made. I might do the same were the fallacy of my logic similarly pointed out. Or I might just try to engage on the substance.
English is the most widely spoken language without a doubt. A native claiming superiority of their mother tongue, their nation, their religion or anything else, is hardly a new phenomenon.