Re: Languages Evolve in Punctuational Bursts

So why are native Japanese words a minority of the
language? Your argument doesn't work.
Regarding the Inuit language and the Australian
languages in question, they are supposedly very
isolated. Someone gave this example years ago either
on the old IE list or the old Nostratics list.
Among IE languages, Lithuanian is usually touted as
the most conservative yet Lithuania has a long history
of invasion and repression by its neighbors who in
turn tried to impose Polish, Russian and German upon
the population in areas they controlled. Latvian,
spoken next door, has a similar history, yet has
evolved more.

--- Patrick Ryan <proto-language@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McCallister" <gabaroo6958@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Languages Evolve in
> Punctuational Bursts
>
>
> > This is pretty specious --there are Australian and
> > Greenland Inuit languages that are said to have
> very
> > rapid word replacement. The articles Kelkar
> included
> > listed Polynesian languages with varying levels of
> > replacement. Native Australians, Inuits and
> > pre-European Polynesians were the most homogenous
> > people on the planet --much more so than the
> Japanese
> > who have Jomon, Yayoi, Korean and Chinese ancestry
> and
> > whose language has changed immensely over the
> > centuries and has great diversity.
> >
> >
> > --- Patrick Ryan <proto-language@...> wrote:
> >
> > > Icelandic conservation is due to ethnic
> continuity.
> > >
> > > Compare Japanese.
> > >
> > >
> > > Patrick
>
> <snip>
>
> My statement was an overly broad generalization that
> does not take into
> consideration cultural and political factors so let
> me say I think it is the
> _main_ cause for conservation but there are other
> causes for
> non-conservation.
>
> Without ethnic continuity, language changes rapidly
> notwithstanding any
> other causative factors.
>
> Now, you bring up several specific examples.
>
> Australian and Greenland Inuit: these populations
> are literally bombarded
> with non-Inuit material; and being small
> populations, they have no means of
> defending their linguistic cultural heritage. And
> for the elite of these
> populations, an additional factor is prestige mating
> with members of the
> area-dominant cultures, namely non-Inuit.
>
> What people were and what they are now is two
> different things.
>
> Are you alleging, by the way, that rapid change
> characterizes Polynesian
> languages, for example. The article succinctly
> explain how small _isolated_
> populations develop changes but this would not,
> IMHO, negate my basic
> proposition since by continuity I imply and now
> explicitly assert continuous
> ethnic contact.
>
> However many ethic inputs the Japanese people had,
> the have had thousands of
> years to fuse and become integrally homogenous. That
> is the secret to their
> success, in my opinion. They all march in lock-step
> for the interests of
> their people as they perceive.
>
> This is one of the major reasons why, in the USA,
> with our grand visions, we
> actually accomplish so little - too many, mostly
> ethnic factions, vying for
> the advantage.
>
> Compare German (continuity) and England
> (non-continuity) - which has changed
> more?
>
>
> Patrick
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping