Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
> Yes, and "bahasa" is not the name of a language. As Khaled pointed > out, it is almost the exact equivalent of extracting the word "language" > out of the phrase "English language", and expect things to work. Had you said that in the first place, rather than the very confrontational 'why do you expect "bahasa" to work at all ?', I would not have felt any need to contribute to the discussion. You argued initially that "bahasa is at best ambiguous", and I therefore challenged your justification on the basis that English is equally ambiguous. Had you argued instead that bahasa is a Sanskrit-derived word meaning language, there would have been no cause for disagreement. Philip Taylor
