"is the same as"

[Dr. John E. McLaughlin]

> Stanley Friesen

>>  (John McLaughlin wrote) The
>> physical structures which allow complex human language evolved along
>> biological lines, but language change is note like biology.  When two
>> species diverge, they can no longer influence each other.

> Not always true.  Closely related species can often exchange a limited
> amount of genetic material.  Full cross sterility takes time to evolve.
> This means an occasional hybrid can move genes across a species boundary.
> And in prokaryotes, genetic transfers can occur between *distant*
> relatives.

But prokaryotes are EXTREMELY simple creatures.  Language is not simple.
Can a horse and an ass produce a fertile offspring?  Absolutely not, yet
when French mixed with Cree it produced a completely "fertile"
offspring--Michif.  When a stump of English mixed with lots of Papuan
languages, the result was a completely "fertile" offspring--Tok Pisin.  You
mention that a lion and a leopard can interbreed, yet is the offspring
fertile?  Or even capable of surviving to adulthood?  The only instances of
cross-species breeding among complex organisms in any case are man-caused
and artificial.  While cross-species permanent genetic influence is only
found in very limited circumstances among very simple creatures (one-celled)
and is not common, cross-linguistic influence is EXTREMELY common and
languages that don't participate are extremely rare (if any even exist at
all).  It's like saying that there are a couple of Australians who know the
Star-Spangled Banner, and therefore since all Americans know the
Star-Spangled Banner (at least the chorus), Australians are Americans.
Doesn't work that way.

John E. McLaughlin, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
mclasutt at brigham.net

Program Director
Utah State University On-Line Linguistics
http://english.usu.edu/lingnet

English Department
3200 Old Main Hill
Utah State University
Logan, UT  84322-3200

(435) 797-2738 (voice)
(435) 797-3797 (fax)