13.3193, Disc: Roger Bacon Quote

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-13-3193. Thu Dec 5 2002. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 13.3193, Disc: Roger Bacon Quote

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Simin Karimi, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Consulting Editor:
        Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Editors (linguist at linguistlist.org):
	Karen Milligan, WSU 		Naomi Ogasawara, Arizona U.
	James Yuells, EMU		Marie Klopfenstein, WSU
	Michael Appleby, EMU		Heather Taylor, EMU
	Ljuba Veselinova, Stockholm U.	Richard John Harvey, EMU
	Dina Kapetangianni, EMU		Renee Galvis, WSU
	Karolina Owczarzak, EMU		Anita Huang, EMU
	Tomoko Okuno, EMU		Steve Moran, EMU
	Lakshmi Narayanan, EMU		Sarah Murray, WSU
	Marisa Ferrara, EMU

Software: Gayathri Sriram, E. Michigan U. <gayatri at linguistlist.org>
          Zhenwei Chen, E. Michigan U. <chen at linguistlist.org>
	  Prashant Nagaraja, E. Michigan U. <prashant at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.



Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:09:32 +0200
From:  "Mark Chamberlin" <malichii at mail.com>
Subject:  Disc: Roger Bacon

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Thu, 05 Dec 2002 10:09:32 +0200
From:  "Mark Chamberlin" <malichii at mail.com>
Subject:  Disc: Roger Bacon


Subject:  Disc: Roger Bacon

Re:  LINGUIST List: 13.3192

	In addition to the broader scope of major language awarness in
Bacon's times should be added the sense that the map of nations and
the divisions of language were much less monolithic than those refered
to in this discussion.  He would have most probably had an awareness
of a wide range of brogues, patois, and creoles which he might have
considered different enough in structure as to have had their own
grammars.
	
	For example, one of the complications of modern English is
that it is not only a mixture of many vocabularies but also of their
constituent grammars.  It is possible to construct the same meaning
from a collection of Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Gaelic, or Cockney
isoglosses which would each be intelligible to most modern English
speakers but would also provide a comparative range of grammars.  It
is also likely that some of the arguments over points of usage are
actually rooted in the mixing of grammatical constructs from mutliple
sources.
	
	But the initial premise is still in doubt.  No matter how many
grammars are compared, it is still a streach to find them so similar.
Is it comparable to saying the syntax of DNA makes all life forms
similar?
	
	Mark Chamberlin
	http://www.ciiigeo.ut.ee
	malichii at mail.com
	malichii at hotmail.com
	Nelgi 39,
	Tartu 50412
	ESTONIA
	

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-13-3193