Re: Linguistics
From: Efrain Ramirez (eramirezt@coqui.net)
Wed Jun 25 19:18:41 2008
Que vive el idioma español.. :)
Ef
>At Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Gerald P. Rodríguez wrote:
>
> ¡Que viva la idioma Española!
>
> Gerald P. Rodríguez, M.D., FACOG
> Santa Fe
>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
> From: R. Daniel Braun
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:23 AM
> Subject: Re: Linguistics
>
> That's all fine and good, but if our congressmen don't get off their butts and make English, the OFFICIAL language of the good ole US of A. we're all going to be speaking Spanish anyway.
>
> Dan
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:15 AM, <DoctorJoe@aol.com> wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/24/08 11:17:01 PM, Stephen.Raymond@dhhs.tas.gov.au writes:
>
> Horrified as I am, I can't resist asking, why logical?
>
> Well, not to beat a dying horse, but ...
>
> Remember that English (and I'm not sure about other languages) became somewhat "formalized" after the invention of the dictionary. Before then, words were spelled irregularly, evidenced by any reproduction of old books and other printed materials. The dictionary was a force which regularized the language and attempted to keep it that way.
>
> However, with the expansion of the English language (e.g. American English, Aussie & Kiwi English, "English" English, Indian English), there is a vulgarization of the language in different ways and in different areas of the world. In other words, it's not just whether you're from London or Liverpool any more. And each country is independent of the source of the mother tounge now. In fact, there is some sense of pride in speaking differently from the Queen.
>
> So too, in large countries like the US of A, there are large regional differences (along with regional allegiences and pride) which facilitate the very same phenomenon on a more local scale, perhaps more dramatic than the local scale of London versus Liverpool.
>
> Therefore, it's logical to think that there would be a relatively active movement to formalize such differences ("ask" versus "axe") from region to region.
>
> Perhaps the most obvious historical example of the above is the Roman Empire. Latin was the official language of Rome and thence of the Empire. But after the Empire expanded and then lost control of the different regions, the vulgar Latin in each region became characteristic unto itself, giving us Italian, French, Spanish, Portugese, Romanian, etc. About half way through the Crusades, Europe fell into the inability to understand itself. Languages tend to do that, it seems. There's your logic.
>
> Joe P.
>
> P.S. An even more interesting subplot of this phenomenon is Italy (and Emilio, correct me if I'm wrong). Each major city or center in Italy had its own dialect of Latin/Italian, even into relatively recent history. (Not to include Sicilian, which is a bit different altogether.) However, when Vittorio Emanuele unified the country, he picked Florentine as the official language, since Florence/Firenze was the relatively well-recognized literary and artistic capital of the country. Thus, Italian today is not a subdialect of Latin, it's an artificially selected sub-subdialect of Latin.
>
> Ya know -- This stuff is pretty cool!
>
>used cars.
>
> --
> R. Daniel Braun, MD FACOG(L) ABMP CMTh
> Professor Emeritus
> Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology
> Indiana U. School of Medicine
>
> R. Daniel Braun
>
> "Science without Religion is LAME; Religion without Science is BLIND"
> Einstein 1941
--
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." - Michael Jordan
