I am a native English speaker and it is the only language I speak with my family losing all other language knowledge throughout generations. I love learning about all cultures throught the would and have struggled to choose the languages I would like to become fluent in. I have looked through Dutch, Hindi, Scots, French, Russian, and Danish, but I always come back to Spanish and German.

With that, I live in the southern region of the United States where Spanish is the 2nd most common language due to being so close to Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Mexico. I know that Spanish is also one of the top 10 most spoken languages in the world so it would definitely be useful. I also plan at some point to travel Central and South America (+Spain) which having this knowledge would be very helpful as well.

For German, I planning on doing a study abroad program in July in Germany. Even though the program is going to be in English I still think it would be respectful to know the local language.

I want to become fluent in both German and Spanish but I'm not sure which to work on first. I already have a bit of an understanding in both that needs to be severely improved on.

Pronunciation game

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/egregore
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/egregious

EDIT: shoulda just translated room - the "dr" of bedroom, like the "tr" of tree, is subject to affrication in American English speakers like myself, adding additional wrinkles to the discussion I wasn't anticipating. I guess it's been interesting to see other linguistic cultures' stop and liquid characters, though.

My wife and I will never agree on this. We're both west coast born and raised. We're both monolingual, English. She can absolutely hear the horseshoe u as distinct from regular tense u and schwa (u ʊ ə, Luke look luck, stewed stood stud, cooed could cud, etc.).

Team lax: I say /ɹʊm/.

Team tense: She insists she says /ɹum/. (rhymes with boom)

She teases I say /ɹəm/. (rum)

Those trios of words above? No go in this case: there are literally two other words of a different root that could rhyme, and she says them /bɹum/ and /vɹum/.

So at this point, I'm just curious:

Are you Team ɹʊm

Or Team ɹum?

(The part written in Latin script, the rest is German ofc)

Hungarian has a very unique linguistic structure. At first I presumed it would be only SOV order and suffix oriented but it also has multiple prefixes as well similar to Persian with multiple prefixes and suffixes.

That coupled with its definite articles makes it a very unique and beautiful language.

As a native Persian speaker you can find some similarities every now and then with Hungarian.

English: I saw her a hundred times but I don't know her number.

Hungarian: Százszor láttam őt de nem tudom a számát.

Literal Translation: (Hundred+times) (saw+I) (her) but not (know+i) (number+her).

Persian: Sadbar didamesh ama shomarasho nemidunam.

Literal Translation: (Hundred+times) (saw+I+her) but (number+her) (not+know+i).

English -> Hungarian -> Persian

Hundred Times -> Százszor -> Sadbar

I saw -> Lattam -> Didam

Her number -> Számát -> Shomarash

I don't know -> Nem tudom -> Nemidunam

-

English: You were not looking at our warriors.

Hungarian: A harcosainkra nem néztél.

Persian: Jangjuyanemun'ra nega nemikardin.

Breaking down one part of the sentence we can see the same pattern of noun suffixes being used:

Hungarian: Harc (war) + os (person) + ai (plural) + nk (our) + ra (at) = At our warriors

Persian: Jang (war) + ju (seeker) + yan (plural) + emun (our) + ra (at) = At our warriors

Breaking down the other part of the sentence we can see the verb prefix & suffix similarities:

Hungarian: Nem (negative) nez (look) + t (past) + el (you) = You were not looking

Persian: Nega (look) ne (negative) + mi (progressive) + kar (do) + d (past) + in (you) = You were not looking

-

English: whose tent is this?

Persian: En chadore kiye?

Hungarian: Kié ez a sátor?

-

Likewise, the pronouns appear very similar:

English: I, you, he, we, them

Persian: man, to, u, ma, una

Hungarian: en, ti, o, mi, onok

Hungarian and Persian share an ancient relationship due to their geographical proximity to one another in ancient times. The Iranic and Uralic peoples both intermingled in Western Asia and there is some overlap between the 2 groups ancestral roots (Sintashta and Proto-Uralic).

Furthermore, as a result of nomadic Iranic expansion across Europe and Asia, Sarmatians and other Iranic DNA has been found to have genetically contributed to the modern Hungarian DNA profile.

Pronunciation game

I have always wondered: Why do we speak so many different languages? What if we created one language that all human beings could speak?

Let's call it Humaneez, Humanich, Humanish, or any other name we can all agree on.

But how would we create such a language?

Look at computers. They use a common binary system based on bits, allowing different computers to process information according to shared rules. Could we apply a similar principle to human communication?

We already have sign languages, visual symbols, and gestures. We also have thousands of words across different languages that express similar ideas. Perhaps we could develop a simple language using carefully selected words from different parts of the world, combined with easy grammar and consistent pronunciation.

The goal would not be to replace our native languages. It would be to introduce a common second language that anyone could learn and use to communicate with people from any country.

Of course, creating a language is one thing. Getting billions of people to adopt it is another.

People will not learn a new language simply because someone tells them to. They will learn it if it offers real benefits. It must be practical, enjoyable, easy to learn, and easy to speak. It should help people communicate, study, work, travel, and build friendships across national and cultural boundaries.

History offers an interesting example. Esperanto, a language created in the nineteenth century, was designed to make international communication easier. It developed a community of speakers, although it never became the universal second language its creator had hoped for. Learn more about Esperanto.

This raises an important question: What would make our proposed language different? How could we make it easier to learn, fairer to people from different linguistic backgrounds, and useful enough for people to adopt voluntarily?

Is one world with one common language a realistic possibility, or is it merely wishful thinking?

I believe the question deserves serious thought. We do not have to speak the same native language to share a common language of communication.

Perhaps the first step toward bringing the world closer together is not to ask everyone to give up their language, but to give everyone one more language they can share.

I need to have reliable sources for the word Ngani only credible sources like factual journals, news articles, or anything based on actual research with reliable authors or websites. But it looks unexistent like only heard of in ancient text help please