Creation of the English Language

No, but relevant to the idea of "macroevolution", the language spoken by a population does change through the accumulation of small changes, and when populations become separated for a long length of time the languages will evolve in different ways. This allows one to develop principles that allow one to develop phylogenic trees, and, in fact, the general histories of the Indo-European languages are pretty much uncontroversial (although that can't be said for some ideas about the details), and similarly for the Afro-Asiatic Family, the Niger-Congo Family, and so forth.As far as I know, the division of the world's languages into several large families aren't disputed by creationists -- perhaps they believe that Proto-Indoeuropean and Proto-Sino-Tibetan and the others were the original languages "created" after the Babel fiasco. But what is interesting is that the very same techniques that allow us to group the languages into a phylogenic tree showing the genetic relationships (and also used in Textual Criticism to group extant copies of pre-printing press manuscripts into similar genetic relationships) also end up grouping the biological species into a very similar, and, in fact, more detailed hierarchical classification. To me, the implications are obvious....

---

Computers have cut-and-paste functions. So does right-wing historical memory. -- Rick Perlstein