MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
How Fast Do Languages Change? (Linguistics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 44, 45, 46
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ishmael wrote:
I was thinking about your proposal last night that the 10-month calendar originally began in March. According to this proposal, July and August would always have been part of the Calendar, and it was January and February that were added.

Something interesting happens when we adopt this proposal.
  1. March
  2. April
  3. May
  4. June
  5. July
  6. AUGUST
  7. September
  8. October
  9. November
  10. December
Notice the highlighted placement of the month of August. It is at the mid-point of the year. When the sun reaches its zenith! It is literally when the sun rises to its most august position.

I consider this definitive.


Yes, but it's both July and August.

Caesar and Augustus.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Seven of the World’s Oldest Language Still Spoken
https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/7-of-the-worlds-oldest-languages-still-spoken-today-cdae8121ad09

Obviously I was drawn to this to find out, knowing what we know, i.e. what we don’t know, but I was still taken aback. This is the list

Basque
Tamil
Aramaic
Chinese
Arabic
Icelandic
Persian


I had to eliminate Chinese and Arabic on the grounds that if they are languages at all, they are modern constructs. I knocked out Tamil on the grounds of ignorance (oh, yes, there are still pockets) and ironically, according to me, Icelandic is the youngest language in the world since it is a spoken form of the alphabetically-constructed language of Old Norse.

But just starting with Basque one can see where the real problems lie. How old is Basque? Nobody knows. So it must be relative. Relative to what? No other languages are related to it so that doesn’t seem a very promising avenue. It's rather the reverse surely: the older the language the more likely it is to have related languages.

All right, what about relative to the other languages around it. Like Spanish. Even if you believe the orthodox version it is not possible to say Basque is older than Spanish since Spanish is supposed to be evolved Latin so where has that got you? You can say Latin is a different language from Spanish but then, since we don’t know the history of Basque, who’s to say that Old Basque is a different language and not as old as Old Spanish i.e. Latin. But then you just run into the oldest-anything problem where evolutionary trees are involved – everything is exactly as old as everything else and it’s just a question of arbitrarily cutting off a portion and saying, that’s different from that.

But as we know – and as this writer and the editors of medium.com and the let’s-count-the-chromosomal-mutations brigade seem not to know – the whole thing’s potty. Doesn't stop them erecting entire academic subjects on it though.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

One of our big themes is that languages don't change much -- it's an application of our 'The truth is always boring' doctrine -- but as we know academics hate this because it doesn't leave them much to do. One of linguists' favourite pastimes is the construction of proto-languages which they do by taking similarities in present day languages and piecing it all together. They then create evolutionary trees to show how present day languages are related by dint of their common descent from the the proto-languages which they have just made up. It may be an entirely circular exercise but it is an exercise and it can be taught to burgeoning classes of fresh linguists. After a couple of generations everyone has forgotten the 'making up' bit and everyone assumes it's a settled matter: that's the way the world is (or was).

We just say one language gradually morphs into the next door language and it's just a matter of finding which one came first (which unfortunately has been doing it own morphing during that time). It is true, we would have to concede, that the vast and complex variety of the world's languages does require some lengthy chains in order to come into existence but how that happened, we would also argue, is a matter for cryptologically-inclined mathematicians rather than crossword addicts to solve.

But anyway I was quite glad to come across a list here https://ctruth.today/2020/01/22/list-of-proto-languages/ of proto-languages our crossword aficionados have compiled. As I say, they like to keep busy

Africa
1. Proto-Afroasiatic 1.a. Proto-Semitic 1.b. Proto-Berber
2. Proto-Bantu

Europe, Near East, and Caucasus
1. Proto-Northwest Causcasian 1.a. Proto-Abazgi 1.b. Proto-Circassian
2. Proto-Kartvelian 2.a. Proto-Georgian-Zan
3. Proto-Basque
4. Proto-Indo-European 4.a. Proto-Anatolian 4.b. Proto-Albanian 4.c. Proto-Greek 4.d. Proto-Armenian 4.e. Proto-Indo-Iranian 4.e.a. Proto-Indo-Aryan 4.e.b. Proto-Iranian 4.f. Proto-Baltic-Slavic 4.f.a. Proto-Baltic 4.f.b. Proto-Slavic 4.g. Proto-Celtic 4.h. Proto-Germanic 4.h.a. Proto-Norse 4.i. Proto-Italic

North Asia
1. Proto-Turkic
2. Proto-Mongolic
3. Proto-Korean
4. Proto-Japonic
5. Proto-Uralic 5.a. Proto-Finno-Ugric 5.b. Proto-Finnic 5.c. Proto-Mordvinic 5.d. Proto-Permic 5.e. Proto-Samic 5.f. Proto-Mansi 5.g. Proto-Khanty 5.h. Proto-Samoyed
6. Proto-Chukotko-Kamchatkan
7. Proto-Indo-European 7.a. Proto-Tocharian

South Asia
1. Proto-Dravidian
2. Proto-Indo-European 2.a. Proto-Indo-Iranian 2.a.a. Proto-Indo-Aryan

Pacific Rim
1. Proto-Pama-Nyungan
2. Proto-Trans-New Guinea
3. Proto-Austronesian 3.a. Proto-Malayo-Polynesian 3.a.a. Proto-Philippine 3.a.b. Proto-Oceanic 3.a.b.a. Proto-Polynesian
4. Proto-Kra-Dai 4.a. Proto-Kra 4.b. Proto-Kam-Sui 4.c. Proto-Tai 4.d. Proto-Hlai
5. Proto-Sino-Tibetan 5.a. Proto-Tibeto-Burman 5.a.a. Proto-Loloish
6. Proto-Hmong-Mien
7. Proto-Austroasiatic 7.a. Proto-Aslian 7.b. Proto-Khmeric

Americas
1. Proto-Eskimo-Aleut 1.a. Proto-Eskimo
2. Proto-Algic 2.a. Proto-Algonquian
3. Proto-Iroquoian
4. Proto-Uto-Aztecan 4.a. Proto-Nahuan
5. Proto-Mayan
6. Proto-Oto-Manguean
7. Proto-Tupian

So now you know.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

While checking this over for spacing and typos (an irritating habit of mine) I noticed that the only language that gets double-counted (indeed, triple-counted) is proto-Indo-European. Hatty, can you find out which proto-language the forefathers of the founding fathers of linguistics spoke?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

While double-checking for typos etc etc I couldn't find any reference to the largest group of language-speakers in the world, the Han Chinese. In fact I couldn't find where they are in the world since South Asia, North Asia and Pacific Rim doesn't quite cover them. Unless Han Chinese is the descendant of proto-Loloish which is descended from Proto-Tibetan-Burman which is descended from Proto-Sino-Tibetan. I hope not, that means it's curtains for Tibetan independence.

Hatty, while you are about it, can you find out which language is spoken by anybody who might be currently threatening the dominance of the other lot you're researching? You know, the people who brought us linguistics.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

There's an old (by AE standards) AE Rule called "never judge by results". The reason for this is if you're presented with a pint pot there's an irresistible desire to cram a quart into it if it's the only pot around. In linguistics there are precious few pots on account of pots not having been invented at the time.

Linguistic Detective Work What can language tell us about history? https://historyofyesterday.com/linguistic-detective-work-d5fe4d2edf6f Adam M Wakeling

Suppose you needed to figure out where English speakers originally came from, but you knew absolutely nothing about European or American history and had no access to a book or any other written source (a strange hypothetical, I know). How could you do it?

Read as far as you can before your personal limit is reached. I got as far as Brooklyn.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It is our contention that languages don't change very much at all. An application of The Truth Is Always Boring. Linguists, in order for there to be much of a call for linguists, insist they rocket around like media billionaires. Anglo-Saxon for instance hardly seems to have changed for the (alleged) five hundred years of its literary existence so I was amused to receive notice of this

A HISTORY OF OLD ENGLISH LITERATURE
R D Fulk and Christipher M Cain with a chapter on saints’ legends by Rachel S Anderson
358 pages

Strewth, I thought, since there is so much uncertainty about what was written when, they're going to be hard-pushed to get 358 pages getting a history of it. I underestimated them. They've already gone a lot further than that

With this study we hope to serve the needs of those students and teachers who feel particularly committed to the changes that have characterized our field in recent years. The renewed emphasis on historicism and the decline of formalist aestheticism in medieval studies have rendered it desirable to have a literary history that attends more singularly to the material and social contexts and uses of Old English texts.

Since the material and social context comes overwhelmingly from the texts, they really will be disappearing up their own bottoms long before 358 pages are covered. Again I was underestimating them

Although the need is greater than this volume can really satisfy, we hope that the present study will nonetheless prove useful to those who, like us, see literature’s relation to history and culture as our field’s area of chief pedagogical interest, and the respect in which it has most to offer literary studies at large.

If you can do all this with the meagre pickings of Anglo-Saxon literature, there's no limit to this new 'historicism' that's been let loose. Ooh, there are companion volumes

A History of Middle English Literature Andrew Galloway

Good luck defining that. And when you have, good luck trying to make a history out of what you're left with.

A History of English Renaissance Literature Donna Hamilton

An odd phrase. England famously doesn't have a Renaissance. It goes from nothing to Shakespeare. I wonder if he's included.

A History of Seventeenth-Century English Literature Thomas N. Corns

I wonder if Shakespeare is included. Still plenty to get your teeth into, Tommy. Apparently fifty times as much gets you the same gig as fifty times less.

A History of Romanticism Gary Kelly

I must protest. I don't mind historicism being historic i.e. this period or that period, but when you can pick and choose on the basis of what you call Romantic -- absolutely nobody agrees what that is -- then kindly call it something else. Like this for instance

A History of Victorian Literature James Eli Adams

But definitely not like this

A History of Modernist Literature: The British, Irish, and Anglo-American Traditions Molly Hite

Are you kidding? Everybody has their own idea of what 'modernism' is but but nobody would attach the word 'tradition' to any part of it.

A History of Irish Literature in English Terence Brown

As opposed to Irish literature in Swahili? They sure as hell can't mean Gaelic, can they? Flann O'Brien or Cú Chulainn? Anyway, not the other 000.1%

A History of Postcolonial Commonwealth Literature 1947–2000

Dear God. I'll leave this one for Barry McKenzie to chunder over.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ortho might have hit on something interesting here, there are similarities between the "runic" and "punic" alphabet.

https://phys.org/news/2020-07-shillings-gods-runes-clues-language.html

That won't get traction around here, but Wiley has noticed he needs an explanation for runic symbols on A/S coins. Often it's the name of the "moneyer."

Languages change slowly.

Runes are marking systems that change quickly. There are continual new issues like coinage.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 44, 45, 46

Jump to:  
Page 46 of 46

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group