LL-L "Lexicon" 2007.11.21 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  21 November 2007 - Volume 01
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
=========================================================================

From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Lexicon" 2007.11.20 (02) [E]

Ron, Mark and all;
I realised there was a tongue-in-cheek element. I also know it is impossible
to separate non-Germanic (I include Norse) absolutely - my example took
several tries, and sounds rather contrived.

On another site I belong to, a member is trying to promote what he calls
"Ednew English", and several have tried similar things in the past.  A few
alternatives  ("linkstrand" for "isthmus") are great, many sound plain
silly. The 19th C suggestion of "folkswain" for "omnibus" made sense, but
everybody says "bus" these days anyway.

But I still believe that in most cases, you clear the fog if you keep it
Anglo-Norse wherever you can.  Of course for many people clearing the fog is
the last thing they want, and over-latinising is very much the hallmark of
the lawyer and the politician for that very reason!

Paul Finlow-Bates

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Lexicon

Thanks, Paul.

The use of jargon for the purpose of exclusion is very common practice the
world round, going far beyond the use of Latin and Greek. Among the most
extreme examples are the development of what amounts to separate languages
for the priest (or shaman) class, for initiated men, and separate languages
for men and women of the same group in addition to a common language.

The cases you mentioned are just not as extreme and clearcut in that
separation is "softer": "You get access if you're educated enough." Also,
the individual speaker cannot be accused of having instigated this since he
or she merely follows a guild tradition that was developed over quite some
time and has its roots in the use of Latin as an international lingua franca
of the learned. It is the *deliberate *use of less common Latin-based
choices in addressing the general public where things become "interesting."

There are or were other such guild languages in European cultures, for
instance terminologies of artisan's guilds that you could only fully acquire
through apprenticeship to the degree of journeyman. Such terminologies tend
to be native-based rather than foreign-based.

And then there are the so-called "jargons" of the social periphery, people
that are excluded or exclude themselves from mainstream society. However, as
I see it, here one must be careful to differentiate between the use of
jargon for deliberate exclusion from the use of "jargon" of necessity or
convenience. A case of deliberate exclusion is, I believe, Rotwelsch ("gang
gobbledigook"), a German-based "underworld" jargon peppered mainly with
words from Romance languages, Romany and Yiddish, most of them with a twist
or two so even speakers of the donor languages can't understand them.
(Rotwelsch is now extinct, but many imported terms are now well established
in German.) Another such case may be Traveller's Cant. In my opinion, cases
such as Polari and the earliest versions of Jewish languages represent the
other extreme, cases of necessity. Polari began as a type of international
pidgin once used among theater and circus people, originally fringe
societies of international origin, and the transition to Polari as a Gay
jargon developed from that. Beginnings of Jewish languages as jargons arose
from the need to augment the lexicons of the mainstream languages to
accommodate Jewish belief, philosophy and traditions for "inside use." The
transition from jargon to language is mostly due to isolation (including
relocation) at later points in time (Judeo-German > Yiddish, Judeo-Italian >
Italkian, Judeo-Portuguese > Lusitanic, Judeo-Spanish > Ladino,
Judeo-Catalan > Catalanic, Judeo-Provençal > Shuadit, Judeo-French >
Zarphatic, Judeo-Czech > Knaanic, Judeo-Greek > Yevanic, Judeo-Georgian >
Gruzinic, Judeo-Farsi > Dzhidi etc., Judeo-Tajik > Bukhori, Judeo-Kushitic >
Kayla, and so forth). Some of them remain jargons in that they don't develop
their own structure, such as English-based Yinglish, Yeshivish and what you
might call "General Judeo-English." A couple of my Jewish friends began to
use the last of these with me once they knew I understand the terminology
and the culture behind it, and thus they don't need to explain or
paraphrase. The same goes for Muslim friends and their use of Arabic-derived
terminology. So in my opinion there is no intent to exclude others.

I am glad we agree that a lot of Latinate English words are so established
and generally understood that there is no need and no way to avoid them. It
is when people attempt to replace these that things become a bit silly in my
opinion. It tends to give Germans a bad taste in the mouth, because during
the Nazi period there was just such a campaign to "purify" German, and many
of the proposals are highly amusing (in large part due to ignorance) if they
weren't so preposterous and the philosophy behind it so sinister.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071121/e3e2329d/attachment.htm>