The Neolithic Hypothesis (Standardization)

[JoatSimeon at aol.com]

>X99Lynx at aol.com writes:

>Even someone like William of Nassyngton (1300's), an advocate of English over
>Latin and French, clearly states that Latin is spoken by the educated

-- that's what I said.  It was a secondary language of the literate, used
primarily for writing, and secondarily to communicate with people who spoke a
different mother tongue in ordinary life.

>[ Moderator's comment: However, *all* of the examples of speakers of Latin
>are drawn from the educated classes, so your point is unproven. --rma ]

-- precisely.

>The need for a common language in international diplomacy, law and trade was
>an obvious one.

-- note that the 9th-century treaty between the descendants of Charlemagne
dividing his dominions was written in early versions of French and German,
respectively -- because that particular one had to be understood by their
noblemen and retainers.  (Charlemagne never learned to write, himself, by the
way; it was an uncommon accomplishment for anyone but clerics in his day.)

>Another one was that the early native tongues  of Northern Europe were
>simply inadequate in communicating reliably in  detail.

-- this is a meaningless statement.  All languages are perfectly adequate for
ordinary communication.  You're taking a medieval scholastic prejudice
literally.

By the way, you have heard of the Anglo-Saxon chronicle, haven't you?  The
vernacular tongue was generally used in pre-Norman England for written
documents, such as charters.

>But a language none the less.

>[ Moderator continues:   A second language differs greatly in internal
>processing from a first, and is  used *consciously*, unlike a first.  Thus,
>change in a second language will be different in kind from a first
>language. --rma ]

-- precisely my point; thank you.

>And totally illiterate before the arrival of Latin.

-- see above re Anglo-Saxon England.  For that matter, the pre-Christian
Scandinavians wrote in runic and the equivalent Irish Celts in Ogham.

>since they had to be able  to use the Latin alphabet and transpose its
>sounds to become literate.

-- you are aware that the vernacular was also written in the Latin alphabet
(which is what we're using here) aren't you?  And that an alphabet is not a
language?

>So therefore the following comparison by you is meaningless, because those
>spellings are not to be trusted.

-- I said the spelling was phonetic in the 16th century; where did you get
this "not to be trusted" bit?

The spelling of English has changed less than the actual spoken language.
This is what happens with actual, living languages, ones not learned
primarily from books.

(Note that in India, where English _is_ primarily a 'book-language', many
archaic forms are still in common use.)

>Look what you are saying here.  If kids learn language from their parents,
>then that language changes.  All of creation disagrees with you.  Getting it
>passed on from your parents is supposed to be what passes it on unchanged.>>

>[ Moderator continues:   What he said is that languages learned naturally,
>which is to say as first languages, change in ways that differ greatly from
>languages learned by intentional schooling.  And *of course* languages
>change when children learn them from their parents--this is one of the
>tenets of historical linguistics!  --rma ]

-- precisely.  Some people have difficulty grasping this concept, it seems.

>So QED mothers are the cause of change in language.  And the reason Latin
>doesn't change is because it isn't taught by mothers.  All of creation still
>disagrees with you.

>[ Moderator's conclusion:   You are being argumentative for the sake of
>argumentation.

-- I'm glad that's obvious... 8-).

>Mothers are not  the cause of language change, children--well, young
>people--are.  And the reason that Latin does not change is that children do
>not learn it in the
>same way that they learn their first languages. --rma ]

-- precisely.

Nobody in Medieval Europe shouted "**it!" in Latin when they hit their thumb
with a hammer.