Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
76 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK, Phat, Tangle (4 members, 72 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,317 Year: 4,429/6,534 Month: 643/900 Week: 167/182 Day: 0/47 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation of the English Language
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 136 of 205 (434606)
11-16-2007 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by kuresu
11-16-2007 11:50 AM


Re: History as a Second Language
The earliest writings I can find are 8,000 years old (Chinese). There are potentially older writings.

Huh? Are you sure? According to whom?

As to the 50K date, you might be thinking of the emergence of culture. Some hypotheses put the emergence of culture at roughly the same time H. sapiens came into being--180,000 or so years ago. One part of culture is language.

Some, including myself, would say that language probably goes back to even earlier forms of H. sapiens, such as H. sapiens neandertalensis, or (even) H. sapiens erectus. That's at least 1.5 MYA!

Of course, like you say, one thing is certain; language goes back at least 2KYA.

:)

Jon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by kuresu, posted 11-16-2007 11:50 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 3:20 PM Jon has replied
 Message 164 by kuresu, posted 11-17-2007 2:38 PM Jon has taken no action

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5076
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 137 of 205 (434620)
11-16-2007 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Jon
11-16-2007 2:25 PM


Re: History as a Second Language
The earliest writings I can find are 8,000 years old (Chinese). There are potentially older writings.
Huh? Are you sure? According to whom?

I remember hearing of an archeological find in the south Nile area. Small tiles with a hole in one corner and pictograms on them. They appear to have been tags attached to containers and could represent a precursor to hieroglyphs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Jon, posted 11-16-2007 2:25 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Jon, posted 11-16-2007 4:45 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5076
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 138 of 205 (434629)
11-16-2007 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by IamJoseph
11-16-2007 1:42 AM


Re: Is English really all that different?
I know my maths and two other languages.

But do you speak those other languages? Have learned to express yourself in them and to converse? To think in those languages? The impression I have is that your other two languages are probably biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek and that your knowledge of them only extends to reading or deciphering biblical texts in the original and studying the meanings of key words. That is a very limited experience compared to learning to use and to think in another language.

From Message 107:

quote:
By far, the native speakers are the worst writers, often unintelligible, who constantly confuse homonyms and end up using the wrong words.
This appears very true and commonplace. It is most probably related to taking one's own for granted and an indifference, while a new immigrant must make greater input to adapt and is usually far more enthusiastic of making it in the new scenario. Here, the native can well fear the new comer.

Why fear? Not everybody is xenophobic.

And it is not at all the case that an immigrant must necessarily do better at learning the native's language. While a non-native learns more than a monoglot native by studying a to-him-foreign language, it is also true that the native speaker can learn so much more about his own language by learning another language. Hast du wirklich gar nichts davon verstanden, was Lessing sagte? Didn't you understand anything that Lessing said? That you need to learn a foreign language in order to learn your own. It shouldn't just be everybody else's job to learn English; we need to learn the other languages ourselves.

From Message 108:

I mean here, what the alphabet 'V' sounds like, when it is spoken. The latin and arabic, for example, did not possess the V sound, while the Hebrew did. Many such alphabetical sounds are missing in european languages, and thus there is a displacement factor, resulting in different pronounciations of words. We call this accents, but mainly it is resultant from the lack of alphabetical sounds.

Uh, no, that is not what causes accents. If you had learned to speak a foreign language, you have known better.

There is a wide variety of possible sounds that the human speech apparatus can produce. The study of those sounds and how they are produced is called phonology. However, only certain sounds distinguish meaning within a language; those are called phonemes. Different languages use different phonemes. For example, English has two forms of the "p" sound (one plosive, the other not), but we do not use them to distinguish meaning. However, a South-east Asian language (Cambodian, I think, but it's been decades) does use those two forms of "p" to distinguish meaning. Therefore, those two forms of "p" are phonemic in that other language, but not in English. When a phoneme can be pronounced in two or more different ways, then those forms are called allophones -- eg, the "r" in German can be either velar or apico-dental, which sound different but don't change the meaning.

When we learn our native language, we learn to restrict ourselves to the sounds of the phonemes of that language. Furthermore, our brains learn to identify those phonemes and to distinguish between different phonemes (eg, between the voiced and unvoiced apico-dental plosives as demonstrated by the minimal pairs of "bitter" and "bidder" and "latter" and "ladder").

But when we start to learn a new language that has different sounds and uses different phonemes, then multiple problems result in an accent. First, we may not be able to distinguish between phonemes. For example, in Russian palatalization of consonants is phonemic (sounds kind of like placing the semi-vowel "y" between the consonant and the vowel that follows, but that's not what it is). It's difficult for beginning students to hear that. So when the non-native first tries to repeat what he thinks he hears, it's going to come out wrong and he's going to have an "accent".

Second, the non-native will tend to misidentify the sound as being like a different sound in his own native language and so use that instead, which will give him an "accent". A common example of this is a Spanish speaker substituting "ch" for "sh", since the "sh" doesn't exist in Spanish.

Third, the non-native's language may have the same sound as the target language, but it's different phonologically. Therefore, by using his own language's version of that sound he'll sound a bit different, sound "funny", in the target language and so will have an "accent". In a French phonology class, our text (which was in French published in France) contained extensive notes for each sound describing the problems that speakers of specific other language would have in producing that sound. And the same holds true for every language that a foreigner would try to learn.

Fourth, even among native speakers of the same language there are regional differences with favor one allophone over others. And so, even native speakers have "accents". Some of these accents developed in isolation from other regions and some developed under influence from immigrant populations (oh ja, don'cha know?), but they still all develop within the same language and so have nothing at all to do with "alphabetic differences."

Fifth, there are additional elements termed "metalanguage" which are characteristic to different languages. These involve intonation patterns, rise and fall of pitch, and range of pitch. For example (as I recall), Spanish has two pitches, English has four or five, and "Black English" has six (one of which is a falsetto that a man would use when excited or upset). There's a commercial currently on Spanish-language radio in which an Angla comes on speaking perfectly correct Spanish, but her metalanguage is puro anglo and so her "accent" is blatant. Please note that there's nothing at all wrong with her pronounciation, but rather her "accent" is pure metalinguistic in nature. Similarly, the cast of "Your Show of Shows" (eg, Sid Caesar, Carl Reiner, Howard Morris) were highly proficient at mimicking the metalanguage of German and French such that they would sound quite proficient at those languages even though the words they were uttering were either pure nonsense or English words that they would throw in so that the audience would kind of follow their babblings. And they did it all "without an accent".

Accents are about phonology and phonemics and metalanguage, not alphabetics.

Edited by dwise1, : added metalanguage


{When you search for God, y}ou can't go to the people who believe already. They've made up their minds and want to convince you of their own personal heresy.
("The Jehovah Contract", AKA "Der Jehova-Vertrag", by Viktor Koman, 1984)

And we who listen to the stars, or walk the dusty grade,
Or break the very atoms down to see how they are made,
Or study cells, or living things, seek truth with open hand.
The profoundest act of worship is to try to understand.
Deep in flower and in flesh, in star and soil and seed,
The truth has left its living word for anyone to read.
So turn and look where best you think the story is unfurled.
Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the world.

(filk song "Word of God" by Dr. Catherine Faber, http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by IamJoseph, posted 11-16-2007 1:42 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Jon, posted 11-16-2007 4:57 PM dwise1 has taken no action
 Message 149 by IamJoseph, posted 11-17-2007 3:52 AM dwise1 has taken no action

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 139 of 205 (434631)
11-16-2007 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by dwise1
11-16-2007 3:20 PM


Re: History as a Second Language
The earliest writings I can find are 8,000 years old (Chinese). There are potentially older writings.
Huh? Are you sure? According to whom?

I remember hearing of an archeological find in the south Nile area. Small tiles with a hole in one corner and pictograms on them. They appear to have been tags attached to containers and could represent a precursor to hieroglyphs.

Yeah, but since when was China part of the south Nile area? :confused:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 3:20 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 6:22 PM Jon has taken no action

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 205 (434633)
11-16-2007 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by dwise1
11-16-2007 4:02 PM


Re: Is English really all that different?
Accents are about phonology and phonemics and metalanguage, not alphabetics.

:D

Furthermore, our brains learn to identify those phonemes and to distinguish between different phonemes (eg, between the voiced and unvoiced apico-dental plosives as demonstrated by the minimal pairs of "bitter" and "bidder" and "latter" and "ladder").

Some of us pronounce those minimal pairs the same ;), like with a flap, an allophone of both /t/ and /d/... so without context we wouldn't know which phoneme to 'translate' it into.

And that, folks, was my 'I-just-finished-my-phonetics-exam' show-off post :P

Jon


This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 4:02 PM dwise1 has taken no action

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5076
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 141 of 205 (434651)
11-16-2007 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Jon
11-16-2007 4:45 PM


Re: History as a Second Language
The earliest writings I can find are 8,000 years old (Chinese). There are potentially older writings.
Huh? Are you sure? According to whom?

I remember hearing of an archeological find in the south Nile area. Small tiles with a hole in one corner and pictograms on them. They appear to have been tags attached to containers and could represent a precursor to hieroglyphs.

Yeah, but since when was China part of the south Nile area? :confused:


Never said it was.

His statement regarding possibly older writings could be construed as slightly ambiguous:
1. There are older writings somewhere in the world.
or
2. There are older writings in China.

Since the question is about the oldest human writings, I naturally assumed the first meaning. The second meaning is possible, but very unlikely.

However, I'm not sure of how old those writings were of which I spoke, so the Chinese writings could still be the oldest known.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Jon, posted 11-16-2007 4:45 PM Jon has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by jar, posted 11-16-2007 11:13 PM dwise1 has taken no action
 Message 148 by IamJoseph, posted 11-17-2007 3:40 AM dwise1 has taken no action

  
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 1111 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 142 of 205 (434705)
11-16-2007 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Wounded King
11-16-2007 9:46 AM


Re: Is English really all that different?
Wounded King writes:

quote:
That sounds familiar, is it something to do with Hilbert space?

In Reimann, Hilbert, or Banach space,
Let superscripts and subscripts go their ways.
Our asymptotes no longer out of phase:
We shall encounter, counting, face to face.

No, Hilbert space is a complete vector space. This is simple Real Analysis. However, the use of the hotel metaphor and this version of the problem was originated by Hilbert. He extended it even further: Suppose an infinite number of coaches arrive, each with an infinite number of guests (both infinities denumerable). The hotel can still take them all: Empty the odd-numbered rooms as before and put the first coach's guests into rooms 3n (the first goes into 3, the second into 9, the third into 27, etc.) The second coach's guests go into rooms 5n (5, 25, 125, etc.) Continue with prime number bases and voila, all the guests get rooms.

Drift...drift...drift....

Edited by Rrhain, : Didn't point out the prime number issue.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Wounded King, posted 11-16-2007 9:46 AM Wounded King has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33908
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 143 of 205 (434709)
11-16-2007 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by dwise1
11-16-2007 6:22 PM


Re: History as a Second Language
Check out the Gradeshnitsa tablets which date IIRC to about 5000 BCE.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 6:22 PM dwise1 has taken no action

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3959
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 144 of 205 (434721)
11-17-2007 2:20 AM


The topic concerns the origins of the English language
All messages should tie into considerations of the origin of the English language. Please try to make clear what that connection might be.

If the message content does not have that connection, the message is off-topic.

Adminnemooseus


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting, Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics, Official Invitations to Online Chat@EvC

Admin writes:

It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.

There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.

Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Source


  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2907 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 145 of 205 (434723)
11-17-2007 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Rrhain
11-16-2007 2:26 AM


Re: Is English really all that different?
quote:
IamJoseph writes:
quote:
________________________________________
Involuntary reflexes cannot occur w/o a thought resulted construct underlieing it.
________________________________________
Incorrect. That's the entire point in calling them involuntary.
When the doctor strikes your knee with the hammer to test your reflexes, your knee twitches faster than it could take for the signal to travel to your brain and back. That's because the signal isn't processed by your brain but rather by the spine.


Doesn’t have to show brain connection [tho these are connected], and we know this action can occur even after death for some hours. Like the involuntary actions of other organs, the involuntary process does not occur because of the knee joint, but that this process is incorporated in the body mechanism. Its like your computer, whereby most of the actions it performs are involuntary and hidden from the user – yet they are incorporated in the pc system. Involuntary does not mean by itself, but not controlled by one’s self; it does not mean there is no control factor - which is thought based, both the knee and your pc.

quote:

________________________________________
I'm not sure if you reject the uni being finite
________________________________________
This might be a good time to distinguish between "finite" and "bounded." The two are not the same.
There are three things involved in a set: The elements of the set, the elements outside the set, and the boundary. Depending upon the set, the boundary may or may not be part of the set. The boundary is defined as an element such that no matter how small a delta you draw around it, there will always be elements both inside and outside the set.

These are mathematical placebos, and not reflected in reality. You cannot prove a math premise using math back-up; this is limited to the academic. The concept of infinity is not grasspable or explainable by maths; we use the term infinite generally to express a vast number, as an expressionism only, but not as an actuality; we use it maths as a term for a large number/quatity which cannot be or need not be, accounted.

quote:
The universe is finite but unbounded. It also has no center.

This is not the case, and is presented to escape the ‘finity’ factor. The universe does have a centre: the original point [BB?], eg. A particle, expanded to the current status quo. This means the original diameter of the BB particle, expanded to become the diameter of the current universe, and we and everything else, is in the centre. The original centroid has expanded. There is no way a finite body cannot have a centre! And we know, an infinity being expanded is a self-contradictory moot point.

quote:
________________________________________
You cannot expand infinity; there are no different kinds of infinity, eg small and larger ones.
________________________________________
Incorrect. There is a hierarchy of infinities. Some are larger than others.

They were not infinite to begin with.

quote:

________________________________________
You cannot add $ to an infinite number of $.
________________________________________
Yes, you can. This is basic Real Analysis.
Suppose you have a hotel with an infinite number of rooms. You're booked solid. A new guest shows up. Can you fit him in? Of course: Just have all of your guests move down one room. This leaves Room 1 open and your guest can take that room. For any finite number of guests, you just have them move that number of rooms down.

Incorrect. Another room is not an addition/expansion of the infinite number of rooms [your nominated infinite entity here]. Your glitch is: that the infinite rooms were ‘booked solid’ [meaning, to the capacity of infinite], so where did the additional room come from? – its an impossibility, else you never had infinity to begin with. Do you see what I mean by academic placebos? – here, one can ‘write’ the notion of ‘infinite + 1’ – but this is limited to the academic premise only.

So, what's your preamble - the uni is finite - or finite and infinite together?!

{Content off-topic - hidden. Use "peek" if you feel you must see it. Adminnemooseus}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Comments and off-topic banner.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Rrhain, posted 11-16-2007 2:26 AM Rrhain has taken no action

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3959
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 146 of 205 (434724)
11-17-2007 2:35 AM


Terminal topic drift - Topic closed
If you wish to present a case for why it should be reopened, go to the " Thread Reopen Requests" topic, link below.

Adminnemooseus


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting, Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics, Official Invitations to Online Chat@EvC

Admin writes:

It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.

There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.

Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Source


  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3959
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 147 of 205 (434734)
11-17-2007 3:29 AM


Reopened
Topic reopened per Jon's request. Let's get it back on topic, shall we?

Adminnemooseus


  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2907 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 148 of 205 (434736)
11-17-2007 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by dwise1
11-16-2007 6:22 PM


Re: History as a Second Language
quote:
HISTORY:
Indus Valley culture (c. 2500-1500 B.C.)
Mohenjo-daro, Harappa - sites of ancient urban centers in western India
Aryan invasions (c. 2000-1500 B.C.)
HTTP://WWW.PITT.EDU/~ASIAN/WEEK-1/WEEK-1.HTML

The above is plausable, even though dating predictions range from 100 CE to 2000 BCE, because we have surrounding evidence of India being an older civilisation, and had interaction with ancient Egypt over 3000 years ago. [as an aside, Hindhi is almost the same as the hebrew, both in alphabet design and ancient word meanings].

The issue of Thracian does not satisfy the criteria:

quote:

DECODING THRACIAN HISTORY

http://www.sofiaecho.com/article/reading-room-decoding-thracian-history-the-symbols-of-a-primitive-people/id_15359/catid_70

Thracian religion centred around life, death, and fertility. The Slavs were Nordic and obsessed with the sun and the moon. The Thracians were great warriors with independent tribes, while Slavic culture was agricultural and conservative. The Thracians brought us Kukeri traditions and Baba Marta. The Slavs gave us the traditional circular Bulgarian folk dances and the lucky number three. Without knowing it, these centuries-old civilizations worked together to create a modern culture for their descendants.
Today, Bulgarians consider both the Slavs and the Thracians to be their ancestors. But the more primitive Thracians were here first. Their artefacts dominate the archaeological headlines, and you’ll find handmade souvenirs depicting their heroes, horsemen and chariots. Most foreigners in Bulgaria have viewed a Thracian treasure, or read about these tribes, which spread across the Balkans during the 4th and 5th centuries BCE. Spartacus, the gladiator slave, who led a rebel war against the Romans, was a Thracian. Homer mentions the Thracians in his Illiad, calling them “people who reminded him of the gods”. Herodotus, an historian who lived during the 5th century BCE (and gave the Greek word “history” it’s modern meaning) called the Thracians “the most numerous ethnic group, second only to the Hindus”. Yet, despite this trivia, due to their independent tribes and failure to achieve a unified national consciousness, the Thracians have a mysterious and hollow history.
The Bulgarian Academy of Science’s professors and archaeologists have conducted a myriad of meticulous digs across the decades. But while they have uncovered ceramic artefacts, masks, a cache of over 15 000 gold Thracian pieces, and controversial archaeologist Giorgi Kitov’s has unearthed a bronze head, a tomb, a sarcophagus, (through unapproved mechanised methods) and many other pieces, they have overturned no evidence of a Thracian alphabet or written form of communication – nothing to help us understand their culture or to indicate that their society was anything but primitive.
Hence, when archaeologists exploring the remains of a Bronze Age fortress in Perperikon, in southern Bulgaria, discovered ancient carved tablets a few decades ago, they were hoping for, but not expecting, anything new. At this time, the Bulgarian Academy of Science did what academics did. Examined. Handled with care. Whispered to each other. Even after they searched for a repetitive pattern, which can scientifically prove a language or at least a form of communication, they found the tablets to be only “decorative pintaderas” and they were simply displayed with the rest. In fact, when other experts contradicted their conclusions, claiming that the tablets from Gradeshnitsa and Karanovo were of Thracian origin, these dissenters were indiscreetly hushed or vehemently attacked.


Neither sanskrit or chinese is older than the Hebrew: point us to proof matching the hebrew and its hard copy?

{Content off-topic - hidden. Use "peek" if you feel you must see it. Adminnemooseus}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Comments and off-topic banner.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 6:22 PM dwise1 has taken no action

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2907 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 149 of 205 (434739)
11-17-2007 3:52 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by dwise1
11-16-2007 4:02 PM


Re: Is English really all that different?
It is not essential one must speak another language fluently as the native one, and one can read and write it, know expressionism and songs of it, and its history. What I meant with immigrants, is they obviously have an existential reason to adapt to the new country, and have to apply themselves more. Most new immigrants end up wealthier and produce greater benefits to the new country, and to science [Einstein] than the natives.

We can trace english's emergence, because this is observable from a certain period, and did not exist before then. In contrast, an ancient, primal language is not traceable: we can point to its oldest existence, but not how it got there. This is made more enigmatic that languages are not evidenced more than 6000 years: the reason of no writings is not relevent here, while the evidences of older civilizations by a small period can be allocated to carbon dating being unreliable for small margins. The operable factor here is, we have no writings in a copious supply, over grads of transitory periods, older than 6000; not in hard copy. We have no history per se pre-6000!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by dwise1, posted 11-16-2007 4:02 PM dwise1 has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Jon, posted 11-17-2007 4:48 AM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 152 by Rrhain, posted 11-17-2007 5:02 AM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 158 by akhenaten, posted 11-17-2007 11:35 AM IamJoseph has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 150 of 205 (434743)
11-17-2007 4:35 AM


Points for IAJ to Address:
I am going to throw out some information that I would like IAJ to address. From The Oxford History of the English Language re the globalisation of English:

quote:
One of the great 'facts' about English in the early modern period is that the language was used in exploration and conquest,...¹
quote:
It is, as the previous chapter has already indicated, entirely the case that the activities of the UK in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries spread English world-wide in commercial and imperial terms, and that those of the USA in the twentieth consolidated its global role culturally, technologically, and militarily.²
quote:
  1. Two World Wars (1914–18, 1939–45) in which the key victorious nations were English-speaking. Especially in World War II [AmE and BrE] the Second World War [BrE], the use of English for military, political, economic, and other purposes expanded greatly in the various war zones. In Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Pacific millions of people came into regular contact with English who would not otherwise have had much (or anything) to do with it. And where English arrived it tended to stay on after the hostilities ended, for a variety of reasons that included reconstruction, trade, and education.
  2. A political and economic Cold War (1945–89) between a capitalist West and a communist East. In this long and often tense struggle for territorial and ideological influence, the USA was the foremost Western contestant. However, after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989, the USA became the world's sole 'super power', the perceived prestige of which impelled many people in ex-Soviet satellites, such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Poland, to switch from Russian to English as their language of wider communication, having already regarded it for years as a—if not indeed the—language of freedom. Inevitably, Russians also began to find it useful to know some English, especially in trying to catch up on a West that was now both technologically and economically far ahead of them.
  3. Globalization, the name of a process, set in train after the Soviet collapse, of world-wide social, cultural, and commercial expansion (and exploitation), in which the USA was the center [AmE] or centre [BrE] of socio-economic, political, cultural, and linguistic interest. In the closing quarter of the century, English was not only a key socio-cultural language but also the communicative linchpin of both international capitalism and the world's media. By this point, the American variety had also become the main influence not only on other languages but on other Englishes (included the British variety). In its standard spoken form, AmE was now also the primary model for teaching English as a second or foreign language. For many years, key publishers in the UK's 'English language industry' had resisted this tide but when it became clear that the tide was becoming ever stronger, they began to publish courses in US usage from offices in New York, alongside their continuing operations at home and elsewhere. In this, they profited from both Englishes (and, if BrE ever did ecline beyond a certain unwished-for point, they would be well placed to transfer more resources to selling the US variety).³*

Such status, however, was not always given English, as Richard W. Bailey (same book) points out about the English of the 14th Century4:

quote:
English is the 'slangy' language; Latin is the vehicle for serious business. Two other English insertions in this sermon quote a tapster and a glutton. In both cases, English is the language of silliness and sin.

From this I think IAJ needs to address the following points:

  1. Demonstrate that English is naturally 'pliable'** despite the fact that it has not always been held up as the language of prestige.
  2. Explain why the information in the first three quotes could not have been sufficient in spreading English.
  3. Provide an alternate hypothesis by which English became the global language that takes into account all the actual evidence—e.g., real kings—that is known on the history and development of English.

Until IAJ can do these things his ideas will not be anything more than existing in fanciful dream worlds, and he will have failed to have demonstrated why 'his insistence that English is somehow fundamentally different' adequately provides the information asked for in the OP: "Who, when, where, how and in what form was it created?"

In other words, he will need to either directly answer these questions—provide a straight-up creation model—, or explain how the 'pliability' of English demonstrates a creation scenario instead of being a result of the facts listed within this thread.

Jon
__________
¹ "English Among the Languages" Richard W. Bailey in The Oxford History of the English Language Ed Lynda Mugglestone (Oxford:2006) 340.
² "English World-Wide in the Twentieth Century" Tom McArthur in The Oxford History of the English Language Ed Lynda Mugglestone (Oxford:2006) 379.
³ McArthur 369–70.
4 Bailey 337.
_____
* The bracketed information in this quote appears in the original text in which it is also in brackets.
** I've decided to use the term 'pliable', in the same way as IAJ, to mean 'the characteristics of English, both in linguistic and cultural anthropological terms'.

Edited by AgamemJon, : -/=


In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

En el mundo hay multitud de idiomas, y cada uno tiene su propio significado. - I Corintios 14:10
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A devout people with its back to the wall can be pushed deeper and deeper into hardening religious nativism, in the end even preferring national suicide to religious compromise. - Colin Wells Sailing from Byzantium
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

[Philosophy] stands behind everything. It is the loom behind the fabric, the place you arrive when you trace the threads back to their source. It is where you question everything you think you know and seek every truth to be had. - Archer Opterix The Shape of the Fabric (Message 210)


Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by IamJoseph, posted 11-17-2007 6:02 AM Jon has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022