Re: Creole Romance? [was: Thracian , summing up]

>
> Whether that is true or not is beside the point though. If the
> purpose of language is to communicate, it is better if one does not
> go around using words in ways which counter their conventionally
> accepted meanings, regardless of how logically superior one may

feel

> his own new definiton is. For example, I could argue that the

phrase

> "put out the light" should mean to turn a lamp on- after all it is
> causing the lamps filament to put out light rays. But if I go

around

> saying "I am going to put out the light" or "he put out the light"
> meaning to turn the lamp on, then I am going to be needlessly
> misunderstood. Why continue to use a term which will cause you to

be

> misunderstood?

I'm not insisting on using the word 'creole'. I'm saying that the
difference between a classical creole situation and that of the
origin of the Romance languages is one of degrees, not category. How
else account for the 'worn' look of the Germanic and Romance
languages compared to, say, the Slavic ones?

Torsten