Nahuatlan?

[Steve Swanson]

Dear undergraduate student,

I think that a careful review of the postings regarding "nahuatlan" will
show that the characterizations and labels to which you refer were
being cited from a library's index system and its entry on Nahuatl
related languages.  In that original email, it was pointed out that the
labels used for those languages were an improvement over just calling
them all "Aztec" languages, but the query was seeking advice from
Nahuatl scholars and interested parties on this list as to the
appropriateness
of "Nahuatlan".  As your citation of Campbell and Karttunen indicate,
we need to be conscious of our labels, and the spirit in which you write
is appreciated.  However, since it appears that nobody in this thread,
who you label "so-called scholars" from your position of anonymity,
actually used those labels, your post seems somewhat misdirected.

Addressing the spirit of your post, I agree that there are some
negative implications for the use of the term "classic" or "classical"
Nahuatl, as there are for a term like "classic" or "classical" Greek.
My reading of these terms is that the "climax" of the civilization
that used the language has passed, and the language spoken during
that cultural "climax" is better, or more pure, or more relevant than
modern forms of the language.  Does anyone on this list know how
native speakers of Greek or Nahuatl (or any other language descended
from a "classical" language) perceive or refer to older forms of their
language?




----- Original Message -----
From: <War14655 at aol.com>
To: <nahuat-l at server2.umt.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: Nahuatlan?


look at u, labeling the so-called ancient "aztec" language or so-called
classical language as "extinct."  I think it's high-time that you rid
yourself of that practice.  Even Joe Campbell admonishes that, "Scholars of
Nahuatl are accustomed to talk about 'classical Nahuatl' and what is spoken
today; yet the people who speak Nahuatl today are the desecndants of the
people who spoke it five centuries ago.  The practice of isolating classical
Nahuatl is rather like calling the English of Shakespeare's time "Classical
English" while referring to English as it is spoken today in various places
around the world as "the modern dialects."  It is not technically wrong, but
if we don't do it for English, we should be wary of doing so for
Nahuatl"(Campbell and Karttunen p2).  If this is a listserve of so-called
scholars and a lowly undergrad student, like me, can see the error in this
kind of mislabeling, then surely u guys see it too...