Comment by hackyhacky
3 days ago
You're missing the point. Your categories are irrelevant. It's like if I announced proudly "All cars can be divided three categories: those with rear lights angled up, those with rear lights angled down, and those with rear lights straight." True but useless.
But if you're going to categorize, your categorization is wrong. Just because a language puts a qualifier first in no way means that it is qualifier focused.
The categorizes are useful for understand how people perceive a language. It's a human psychology category, and just because you think it is "irrelevant" misunderstands why I made the categorical distinctions in the first place.
People actually talk this way about languages, and they already have this conception.
And I've just realized what your psychological hang-up is now too, the word "focused". I originally didn't use this term when I wrote the article in 2018, but a friend suggested the term instead because it was probably a little more "neutral". I honestly cannot remember what I used before now since I have just absorbed this arbitrary term "focused", even if the distinctions are useful.
You might not think this way about languages. I know I don't when I program. But I know this is how others things, and that's the entire aspect of design. Design is just so much about understanding humans. How they function, mentally and physically. Perception, psychology, sociology, physiology, ergonomics, needs, desires, etc. It's all about being able to put yourself in other people's shoes, more than making _the thing_.
And that's what I've been trying to understand and that categorization has been helpful for understand other people. I don't care if you think the categorizes are "irrelevant" but you are not "everyone".