Hypothetical thoughts

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Pages

Author	Topic: Hypothetical thoughts
Student of Trinity Electric Sheep One Member # 3431	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 03:49 Profile #25 Alec seems to be combining a Whig view of linguistic history with Whorffian ideas about how language constrains thought. I think that both these views are certainly dealing with real and important issues: linguistic change is surely evolutionary to some degree and in some sense, rather than purely stochastic; and language surely plays some role in shaping thought. It is only when these two theories are taken rigidly and extremely, though, that they constitute knock-down arguments against what Kelandon has said. So for instance about Latin as a vehicle for science: scientific vocabulary may technically be English (as well as other modern languages), but it is very technical English. English-speaking scientists still have to learn technical terms and concepts, which are certainly not part of the language they learned in their childhood critical periods. If modern scientific terms were introduced into Latin as loan-words or neologisms, the way new terms are constantly being introduced into any living language, then I don't see how learning science in Latin would be much different from learning it in English. Of course the project of reviving Latin to the point where it could serve as a scientific language would be totally Castalian; it's sheer Glasperlenspiel craziness. But on the premise that Kelandon had infinite resources with which to indulge a fantasy, I think it would be a practicable indulgence. I also think, though, that it would actually be more interesting not to try to modernize Latin, but instead just to expose more people to the classical mindset as (as best we can tell) it was. We already have modern mindsets; that would be something different. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 \| Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00
Thralni Master Member # 5977	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 07:23 Profile Homepage #26 I'd be busy unraffling the brain, I suppose, be a pilot next to that, and I'll try to eat spaghetti once in two weeks. -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 \| Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00
Nikki. Shaper Member # 3442	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 07:28 Profile Homepage #27 quote: Originally written by Thralni: I'd be busy unraffling the brain, I suppose, be a pilot next to that, and I'll try to eat spaghetti once in two weeks. Who's been raffling brains, and where did they get them, Thralni?! And how much are tickets... Oh, and this is classic Brody comic material :P [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 07:29: Message edited by: Nikki xx ] -------------------- And when you want to Live How do you start? Where do you go? Who do you need to know? Name by Slarty, so blame him if it's filthy... Posts: 2864* \| Registered: Monday, September 8 2003 07:00
Kelandon Off With Their Heads Member # 4045	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 08:12 Profile Homepage #28 quote: Originally written by Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Yeah, but try teaching women's studies in Latin. Or the liberal arts in general. Also not very hard. German in the 1930's was spoken by Nazis. Does that mean that you can't do anything but talk about world conquest and racial purification in German? quote: But 'basic language' itself has changed astoundingly since Latin flourished. My reference to women's studies exemplifies that: what a Latin-speaker would mean by 'domestic' and what we mean by 'domestic' are so wholly unrelated that it almost seems inappropriate to use the same word for both. No... and this is again so untrue that I'm not sure where you're getting it. What we mean by "domestic" is "of or relating to the house" (and the Latin word for it is domesticus, by the way — you could equally well say that English doesn't have a good word for "domestic" and we just use the Latin one). What a Latin-speaker would mean by it is the same. If you mean "domestic," as in "domestic affairs of a nation," there's another, separate word (or possibly phrase — I forget) for that. quote: in general the humanities have outstripped the ability of Latin to follow. (The last humanists to write primarily in Latin were Renaissance thinkers; the last humanists to write in Latin much at all were from the Enlightenment. We've come a long, long way since both.) Actually, your facts are wrong here. The Oxford Classical Texts still all have introductions in Latin, and no one has accused them of being handicapped by their language choice. I will grant that they're not trying to say anything revolutionary in interpretation, but they are trying to provide an overview of modern criticism in Latin, and no one has suggested yet that they cannot pull it off. quote: My objection isn't to the ability to cover science, but in Latin's basic robustness as a language for the modern era. "Basic robustness" is not a linguistic term. "Vocabulary" is a concern, yes, but I said that we could admit new vocabulary where needed (ideally in the form of calques and compounds from classical terms.) The grammar and syntax are the most important things to preserve, and these will not (and cannot) prevent people from expressing modern ideas. quote: And try constructing 'head shop' in Latin - not just translating it, but constructing it so that it makes sense in Latin - you'd have to translate about the entire freaking counterculture, 30s through 60s, first. I'm pretty sure you could grab a phrase out of Plautus or Petronius and it would work. Alternatively, a compound could do it. quote: Latin has been dead so long that even a fluent expert in the language can't sound like anything except a stuffy, giggly geek when swearing in it. Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo. quote: you can't make love in it (there's copious documentation seemingly to the contrary, but all of that ignores the fact that nothing native speakers of Latin did would qualify as anything better than screwing now - the idea of equanamity and respect between the sexes would have been viewed as risible). This is an interesting (but wrong) point. There was commonly assumed to be inequality involved in romantic relationships. However, this inequality was expressed largely through the metaphors that were used, not the basic vocabulary itself. One would only have to use different images for romantic activity, and the idea of equality be expressed in Latin. The same unequal images were used in English for many centuries, but English can now express equality (which is a Latin word, by the way). quote: I'm just saying that if Latin had any business surviving into the modern era there'd be people speaking it now. This is remarkably ignorant of you to say. There is no reason at all to believe that sound change and grammatical shift in general always improve a language's flexibility and ability to express new concepts. One can cite instances of it doing so, and one can cite instances of it doing the opposite. You could equally say, if "meet" and "meat" ought to be pronounced differently, people would still pronounce them differently. Language doesn't work like that. People don't shift sounds because the result is better (nor because the result is worse). People just shift sounds, and sometimes that leads to problems with grammar (because old distinctions break down). quote: Nobody has grown up speaking Latin for centuries precisely because nobody has thought of it as a particularly good idea to speak Latin exclusively at home in centuries. You are so unbelievably wrong that it is hard to know where to start. People in the seventh century didn't get together and say, "Hey, I don't know if this Latin thing is working out anymore. Let's speak something else." "Hey, yeah, that sounds like a good idea. I want to be a feminist!" Sound change just happens. quote: I'm not qualified to say why, because I'm no linguist, but it doesn't at all strike you that a language whose vulgar dialect has split a hundred different ways (or a thousand or more, depending on how generous you want to be with your definition of 'language' here) has reasons for doing that? I am enough of a linguist that I can tell you that the reason is Grimm's Law, not feminism. As for Latin being adapted to be relevant in the Dark Ages: no. Latin changed in the Dark Ages because people didn't read enough Classical Latin anymore, so first-language infiltration and a whole of of other things became problems. Good Classical Latin of the sort that I'm talking about was still written in the Renaissance, and they didn't have any trouble expressing their ideas. Milton was even able to be revolutionary and heretical in Latin. Are people incapable of writing contemporary literary criticism in Modern Hebrew? Are people incapable of being liberal, revolutionary, and countercultural in Icelandic? No, nor would they be in a revived form of Latin. quote: Originally written by Student of Trinity: So for instance about Latin as a vehicle for science: scientific vocabulary may technically be English (as well as other modern languages) It's usually not even in what was originally English. Scientists talk about "leptons," from the Greek word for "light" (opposite of "heavy," as opposed to "photons," from the Greek word for "light" = electromagnetic radiation). The telescope didn't exist in classical antiquity, but the term comes from classical roots. This is true of a great deal of scientific vocabulary, which is why it would be so easy to turn it back into Latin and Greek, because that's what it's coming from. [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 08:20: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 \| Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Jumpin Salmon ? Man, ? Amazing Member # 5755	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 09:20 Profile #29 quote: Originally scribed by Kelandon: You are so unbelievably wrong that it is hard to know where to start. People in the seventh century didn't get together and say, "Hey, I don't know if this Latin thing is working out anymore. Let's speak something else." "Hey, yeah, that sounds like a good idea. I want to be a feminist!" Sound change just happens. Dude, you so totally weren't there. It did happen like that, and frankly I'm surprised you didn't suss out that I was one of the primary instigators. In other news, I think it is fantastic entertainment to hear Kel defend something about which he feels passionate, while Alec does something about which he also feels passionately. Nothing like a little passion to spice up a congratulatory thread. Edit - damn chisel added an extra / [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 09:21: Message edited by: Spent Salmon ] -------------------- quote: Originally written by Kelandon: Well, I'm at least pretty sure that Salmon is losing. Posts: 4114 \| Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
Thralni Master Member # 5977	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 12:06 Profile Homepage #30 quote: Originally written by Nikki xx: quote: Originally written by Thralni: I'd be busy unraffling the brain, I suppose, be a pilot next to that, and I'll try to eat spaghetti once in two weeks. Who's been raffling brains, and where did they get them, Thralni?! And how much are tickets... Oh, and this is classic Brody comic material :P I should have said "unraffling the mysteries of the brain. Tickets? You may board for free, my dear sir. -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 \| Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00
Sticky Infiltrator Member # 4256	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 12:35 Profile #31 Perhaps you mean 'unraveling'? a raffle is something very different, rather similar to a lotto. -------------------- "Let's just say that if complete and utter chaos was lightning, he'd be the sort to stand on a hilltop in a thunderstorm wearing wet copper armour and shouting 'All gods are false'." Posts: 564 \| Registered: Wednesday, April 14 2004 07:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 13:32 Profile Homepage #32 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: Also not very hard. German in the 1930's was spoken by Nazis. Does that mean that you can't do anything but talk about world conquest and racial purification in German? Be warned in advance that Alec will have a field day with this. quote: quote: I'm just saying that if Latin had any business surviving into the modern era there'd be people speaking it now. This is remarkably ignorant of you to say. There is no reason at all to believe that sound change and grammatical shift in general always improve a language's flexibility and ability to express new concepts. Darwinism. The very fact that language changes persisted over time shows that people who changed their language were more likely to pass on their linguistic habits to others than people who stayed closer to the original language. This strongly suggests that linguistic conservatism was actively detrimental to survival, either on an individual or a cultural level. [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 13:33: Message edited by: Cryptozoology ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 14:14 Profile #33 Kel, I think the biggest problem here is that you're churlishly clinging to a regressive aesthetic (linguistic revival is one of the more deeply reactionary ideas ever concieved) in spite of adherence to modern values. In other words, what you consider cool and what you consider right are working at cross-purposes. Unless, I don't know, you've become a Metterniechian conservative in the time between our last exchange of words on politics. I find that silly, but then again I find your efforts to directly calque Etruscan myths into SW games silly too. I think we're at an impasse. And to be entirely fair, this is partially my way of getting out of a fist-fight about Latin with a man educated in linguistics and endowed with a boner for Latin, which can by no account end well. I acknowledge your superiority in the field and submit the only reason I've been able to hang on to my admittedly tenacious position at all is that you are using your superior knowledge for perfidy. :P While I admit I do not know a damn thing about Latin, what I do know a damn thing about is that what you want to do is evil in a number of subtle and mostly invisible ways. Latin is, above all else, the language of a dead culture which sucked ass in enough ways to occupy a lifetime of intense study, and as a humanist I have to disagree with your linguist's enthusiasm for resurrecting it. :P [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 14:15: Message edited by: Protocols of the Elders of Zion ] Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Student of Trinity Electric Sheep One Member # 3431	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 14:30 Profile #34 quote: Originally written by Cryptozoology: Darwinism. The very fact that language changes persisted over time shows that people who changed their language were more likely to pass on their linguistic habits to others than people who stayed closer to the original language. This strongly suggests that linguistic conservatism was actively detrimental to survival, either on an individual or a cultural level. So linguistic sticks in the mud die so much faster that we get linguistic change in a few generations? That's a pretty fierce selection pressure, there, for a putative linguistic inferiority subtle enough that its existence is not even clear. As I said above, I can buy that a certain amount of linguistic change may be evolutionary in some sense. But what I imagine is that, from the steady random changes, people might be a bit more biased towards picking up useful ones. That's artificial selection, and while it may be survival or exinction for words and pronunciations, it has nothing much to do with survival of speakers, either individually or collectively. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 \| Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 14:48 Profile Homepage #35 quote: Originally written by Student of Trinity: As I said above, I can buy that a certain amount of linguistic change may be evolutionary in some sense. But what I imagine is that, from the steady random changes, people might be a bit more biased towards picking up useful ones. That's artificial selection, and while it may be survival or exinction for words and pronunciations, it has nothing much to do with survival of speakers, either individually or collectively. So languages change either because words and pronunciations die out, in which case the original usages were unstable and trying to revive them will be futile since they'll only change back again, or because speakers die out, in which case trying to bring back the language they spoke is an even worse idea. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Kelandon Off With Their Heads Member # 4045	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 15:20 Profile Homepage #36 quote: Originally written by Cryptozoology: The very fact that language changes persisted over time But they didn't. Old Spanish and Modern Spanish are not the same, any more than Old Spanish and Late Latin are the same. The things that Latin turned into didn't stay, either, and the things that they are today aren't going to stay tomorrow. quote: Originally written by Cryptozoology: So languages change either because words and pronunciations die out, in which case the original usages were unstable and trying to revive them will be futile since they'll only change back again All usage is unstable. Modern English isn't any easier to pronounce than Middle English, even if it did come later. There's nothing harder about saying /i:/ than saying /ai/, but the Great Vowel Shift happened nonetheless. Alec: Now you're talking about whether it's worthwhile to revive Latin or not, which is a slightly different issue. Claiming that Latin is not worth reviving because it's impossible to express modern ideas in Latin is completely idiotic, because it's not true. However, it would be possible to have a debate about the merits of doing such a thing. I don't really care about the merits of doing such a thing, because my interest in it would mostly be fun. The question was, after all, what would you do (i.e. for fun) if you had the time and resources? I do think that there are terrible problems with Latin pedagogy that can only be solved by teaching the language as one would teach a living language, and the easiest way to do that is to revive it, but that's only half the point. I do think that your ideas about why I would do this are totally off-base (a "regressive aesthetic"?), but you've never really been able to wrap your head around the idea that I just like Latin and Greek literature and don't think that they're superior to any other kind. I study Latin and Greek for the same reason that someone might study German or French literature, because the texts are enjoyable and entertaining. However, I do think that it's completely ignorant and pig-headed to claim that they are worse than any other literature, no less than it is to claim that Chinese literature is worse than English (or any other such comparison). What I find enjoyable and what I find right are not at all at cross-purposes, and saying that they are is confusing and probably really stupid. I can enjoy reading the Iliad without wanting to recreate a patriarchal, aristocratic, Bronze Age society in the present. Likewise, I can want to be able to speak Latin without wanting to re-institute slavery, invade Iran, and constrain women to the protection of men at all times of their lives. You can read a story and like it as a story without wanting to live what the characters are going through yourself. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 \| Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Or else o'erleap. Law Bringer Member # 335	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 15:44 Profile Homepage #37 Thuryl: If we're considering linguistic changes some kind of memetic mutation, I'd say the evidence points to them being neutral changes that are subject to drift rather than selective pressures. Every language changes, and languages that split tend to drift off in different directions arbitrarily. Revived Latin wouldn't stay much like any ancient Latin for very long, but that's not a problem. It could, of course, morph into another Romance language, which would show some kind of selective pressure, but it's not clear that it definitely would. Alec: I don't think Latin is so deeply tied to Roman/Catholic/Medieval culture that reviving one is tantamount to reviving the other, and I'm not sure why you're so convinced it would be. Hebrew revived just fine, and while I'll acknowledge that it may have made no sense and you may call Israel evil incarnate all you want, there is nothing wrong with the modern language itself. I don't see why Latin couldn't take a similar path if anyone had the time, resources, and people to do it. —Alorael, who actually does believe in a kind of evolution of language. Latin declined because those who once spoke the language declined to decline. Posts: 14579 \| Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 16:02 Profile Homepage #38 Eh, since I don't really know enough about the subject to discuss it in detail, I should probably bow out of this discussion before I cross the line from being provocative to actually trolling. :P -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 16:29 Profile #39 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: You can read a story and like it as a story without wanting to live what the characters are going through yourself. Disagree, and I think this is where we differ. At the very least, you can't dismoor that story entirely from its social context. I can't enjoy Lord of the Rings, or at least find if very difficult to, because Tolkien was a colonial English tory and his colonial English toryism shows up everywhere in what he does. You don't have to like the characters, but you have to like the author, in some sense, because you're inviting him or her into your head. And maybe you're not gonna have a problem with reinstituting slavery, because you've been raised with a corpus of literature holding it in repugnance. The problem would be for those who speak only Latin, and if we'd get off the ad hominem for a minute (you calling me an idiot, me inferring you're myopic to the point of villainy) We're not just talking about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights existing only in translation; we're talking about everything more recent than Virgil being translations from something or other. However great the aesthetic appeal of the language might be to you, I find the idea of a living language which doesn't have a native corpus of philosophy on anything more advanced than the plutocratic republic to be somewhat disturbing. It's a decent enough excuse that it stopped being spoken at home a millennium and a half ago, but bring it back and excuses alone won't quite cut it. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 16:40 Profile #40 quote: Originally written by V. V. W. W.: Hebrew revived just fine, and while I'll acknowledge that it may have made no sense and you may call Israel evil incarnate all you want, there is nothing wrong with the modern language itself. I don't see why Latin couldn't take a similar path if anyone had the time, resources, and people to do it. —Alorael, who actually does believe in a kind of evolution of language. Latin declined because those who once spoke the language declined to decline. Zionist culture, which is to say the people that went to the trouble of reviving Hebrew, is pretty vile. While its current native speakers have by and large overcome that, the angle on revival was either intransigent, separatist religious fundamentalism or (joy of joys) yet even more 19th-century European racialism. Point me to one effort at linguistic revival that didn't (a) owe its existence to villains and (b) failed to further segregate a trod-upon minority from the world, and I'll concede. Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Jewels Agent Member # 3364	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 17:24 Profile Homepage #41 read through the whole of Webster's unabridged dictonary... memorize the thesaurus... thoroughly read an argument about reviving a dead language... continues rambling :P -------------------- "Even the worst Terror from Hell can be transformed to a testimony from Heaven!" - Rev. David Wood 6\23\05 "Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as you ever can." - John Wesley Posts: 1001 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 19 2003 07:00
wz. As Infiltrator Member # 3040	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 17:37 Profile #42 quote: Originally written by Alec: However great the aesthetic appeal of the language might be to you, I find the idea of a living language which doesn't have a native corpus of philosophy on anything more advanced than the plutocratic republic to be somewhat disturbing. It's a decent enough excuse that it stopped being spoken at home a millennium and a half ago, but bring it back and excuses alone won't quite cut it. Most of the world's six or seven thousand living languages don't have a corpus of written work. Should areas in which those languages are spoken switch to English or French or some other language with a large body of contemporary literature? Or, would it really matter if those languages stopped being spoken? Why not just translate everything ever written into just one language, and have everyone in the world speak that language? It could be given as many words as one wanted (to represent as many cultures and philosophical ideas as possible), and then everyone would still be able to keep their culture's values while still being able to communicate with everyone. -------------------- 5.0.1.0.0.0.0.1.0... Posts: 508 \| Registered: Thursday, May 29 2003 07:00
Kelandon Off With Their Heads Member # 4045	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 21:07 Profile Homepage #43 quote: Originally written by Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Disagree, and I think this is where we differ. Probably so. I read fiction as fiction — it's not real. Apparently others don't, but this seems strange to me. quote: And maybe you're not gonna have a problem with reinstituting slavery, because you've been raised with a corpus of literature holding it in repugnance. The problem would be for those who speak only Latin, and if we'd get off the ad hominem for a minute (you calling me an idiot, me inferring you're myopic to the point of villainy) We're not just talking about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights existing only in translation; we're talking about everything more recent than Virgil being translations from something or other. Not really, no. Leaving aside the fact that Vergil was pretty well smack-dab in the middle of the Roman period, so quite a bit that is more recent than Vergil still exists from ancient Romans, there's still a great deal of Renaissance literature. I suppose I've taken as obvious that we'd have a veritable Switzerland, with probably Latin, Greek, English, and German all as official languages, and assume that just about everyone would be at least bilingual. There's nothing preventing modern native Latin speakers from learning English or German or French or whatever and translating those ideas into Latin. As wz. pointed out, people are currently doing that with many languages that didn't previously have those sorts of writings. Latin-speakers would, of course, write their own stuff, too. I did mention that there would be a university associated with this small island in the Mediterranean, so part of the point would be to have a few departments of various different things. We could have departments of Latin, Greek, English, German, history, religion, philosophy, biology, chemistry, and physics, at the very least, to start out. We'd probably only need a few dozen professors to start out. Part of the early research of the departments would be to put modern ideas into good Latin and Greek, so your objection fades to nothing at this point. [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 21:08: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 \| Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Or else o'erleap. Law Bringer Member # 335	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 21:37 Profile Homepage #44 quote: Originally written by Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Point me to one effort at linguistic revival that didn't (a) owe its existence to villains and (b) failed to further segregate a trod-upon minority from the world, and I'll concede. Your argument is circular. All linguistic revivals have had evil origins, so all linguistic revivals must originate in evil. I'd go so far as to claim that Hebrew shows that the origins don't matter once the language takes root. I'm well aware that you're not fond of the state of Israel or its origins, but you cannot pin your objections on Hebrew. For that matter, name a truly successful revival that isn't Hebrew. I truly don't know of any comparable situations. The closest things i can think of are various local language efforts, usually post-colonial, that meet with very limited success. —Alorael, who wonders what you would say to Kel if his attempt were based on Esperanto rather than Latin. No written works, so no legacy of evil. Or what about Latin with all literature deliberately suppressed? [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 21:38: Message edited by: V. V. W. W. ] Posts: 14579 \| Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Najosz Thjsza Kjras Lifecrafter Member # 6388	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 21:45 Profile #45 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: quote: Originally written by Protocols of the Elders of Zion: Disagree, and I think this is where we differ. Probably so. I read fiction as fiction — it's not real. Apparently others don't, but this seems strange to me. Fiction is fiction, but the way it is framed isn't fictional. (You can't just make up anything you like and say 'Ha! Fiction!', otherwise it's bad fiction.) Fiction requires internal consistency, and internal consistency relies on one's take on the real world. In LotR, old weapons and powers and individuals are inscrutable and powerful - an ancient elite above the grimy, grubby lesser world. Industry debases the immortal and sublime craftsmanship known to the ancients; elves are possessed of an untouchable air of supremacy and even the evil powers are generally immortal and beyond the meager ken of the savage hobbits - so far beyond, in fact, that they don't even relate to the Ring - the intercession of some supreme dark power - in the same way. Even the conlangs were manufactured with heavy influence from Anglo-Saxon - the 'original language' of England - and Finnish, which was considered a holdover from the Europe of old. No doubt he would have found using French or German or Italian or even Latin or Ancient Greek somewhat vulgar. I think it's taking it far too far to say that any of this is some kind of conscious analogy to the real world in Tolkien's lifetime. (Tolkien specifically disclaimed the idea of LotR as some kind of roman a clef.) But it was definitely and recognizably formed by a man who had a high regard for the traditional aristocracy of a country in dramatic social flux, and extreme disregard for novelty. Tolkien was a reactionary in the truest sense of the word: he viewed with summary distrust and contempt anything without roots in the ancient. Just because he's a reactionary doesn't make him any less than a magnificent novelist and mythologer. But he's still pretty profoundly and fundamentally against everything I hold dear, which makes inviting him into my head pretty harrowing for me. quote: Latin-speakers would, of course, write their own stuff, too. I did mention that there would be a university associated with this small island in the Mediterranean, so part of the point would be to have a few departments of various different things. We could have departments of Latin, Greek, English, German, history, religion, philosophy, biology, chemistry, and physics, at the very least, to start out. We'd probably only need a few dozen professors to start out. Part of the early research of the departments would be to put modern ideas into good Latin and Greek, so your objection fades to nothing at this point. Well, all right. I suppose you have me here. I still think it's a little silly to talk about reviving a dead language in a world where half of the human population doesn't have the standard of life necessary to get a telephone call in their lifetime, but eh. :P Posts: 794 \| Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00
Randomizer Law Bringer Member # 6785	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 21:46 Profile #46 There has been a revival in Navajo language, but part of that was due to movies about how the language was used as a basis for a code during World War II against the Japanese. I knew a Japanese graduate student in American Indian culture who was accused of being a spy and gathering information so they could crack the code during their next war. There have been several attempts to revive other languages to prevent them from completely dying out due to lack of speakers. Hebrew survived because it was used as a religious language that all Jews tended to learn for study. You needed to know it to understand the Old Testament and TaImud. It formed a common language when Israel was being formed. Posts: 4643 \| Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 21:51 Profile Homepage #47 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: *I read fiction as fiction* — it's not real. Apparently others don't, but this seems strange to me.** Fiction doesn't come out of a vacuum and it doesn't go into a vacuum. The author's choice of subject matter is inevitably going to reflect his worldview and what he deems important in life -- and saying "yes, the things I chose not to write about are important too, but somebody else can write about those" just isn't good enough, especially if everyone's doing it. Likewise, that worldview can't help but rub off to some extent on readers. The reason fiction is so important to so many people is precisely because it affects their outlook on life; you can't then shy away from that fact when somebody claims that a particular piece of fiction is harmful. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Kelandon Off With Their Heads Member # 4045	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 21:56 Profile Homepage #48 Alec: I suppose we're talking about personal tastes, here. Meh. As for the idea that reviving Latin is silly, well, it probably is. :P But aren't some of the things that you do for fun kinda silly, too? Randomizer: You're mixing two things: reviving a dead language and trying to prevent an endangered language from dying out. There were no native speakers of Hebrew for a while. Now there are. That's reviving. Navajo has never completely died out, so it can't be "revived" in the same sense of the word, just re-popularized. Thuryl: Yes, I probably agree with most of what you're saying, but it ends up not mattering very much to me in this case. I can still enjoy reading the Iliad without wanting to bring back the Bronze Age social structure. Orson Scott Card has views that I find repugnant, but I can still enjoy his books. [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 22:00: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 \| Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Tuesday, February 27 2007 22:08 Profile Homepage #49 quote: Originally written by Kelandon: Thuryl: Yes, I probably agree with most of what you're saying, but it ends up not mattering very much to me in this case. I can still enjoy reading the Iliad without wanting to bring back the Bronze Age social structure. Don't you feel even the least temptation to romanticise that era when you read about it, though? I'm not saying it's a reason not to read about it, but it's certainly a reason to maintain a reflective and critical attitude. [ Tuesday, February 27, 2007 22:11: Message edited by: Cryptozoology ] -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00