Ed, (01)
All languages evolve. But they have different structures, which may
make certain kinds of expressions shorter and simpler than others. (02)
> What you think is significant about English right now was true
> of French 300 years ago and may be true of Chinese in 2050.
> It is all about language evolution, which is the central theme. (03)
The fact that English happens to be the dominant language now and
French was dominant a few centuries ago is definitely *not* what
I was trying to explain. (04)
For parallels, look at Japanese and Chinese. Japanese scribes
learned Chinese characters with their pronunciation in a dialect
of Chinese. When they used them to write Japanese, they pronounced
them in Japanese -- except in compounds. The character for 'new' is
pronounced in Japanese as /atarashi/ when used as an adjective
by itself. But in compounds, it's pronounced in Chinese as /shin/.
The area of Tokyo named Shinjuku has three Chinese words and characters
for 'new hotel district'. Nobody pronounces those three characters
with the native Japanese pronunciation. (05)
This is an example of the way a clash of languages changed Japanese.
It caused Japanese to adopt the Chinese paradigm for coining new words,
and weakened the native Japanese paradigms. However, Japanese does
have various grammatical morphemes. So they developed the syllabic
hiragana and katakana to express those forms. (06)
When the Japanese opened up to the wider world, they started to borrow
many new words from western languages, which they spelled in katakana.
The character for ju (a kind of hotel) in Shinjuku is pronounced
/yadoya/ in native Japanese. When they began to build western-style
hotels, they borrowed the western word, which is pronounced /hoteru/. (07)
For the word 'taxi', the Japanese use syllabic katakana to spell
/takushi/. For 'bus', they say /basu/. For taxi, the Chinese
themselves say chu-zu-qi-che (for-hire-energy-vehicle). For bus,
they say gong-gong-qi-che (public-use-energy-vehicle). But in
context, they rarely use those compounds. Instead, they'll say
"Call me a che" -- i.e., taxi. Or they'll say "I'm waiting for
the che" -- i.e., bus. (08)
This is the point I was trying to make: the changes to Japanese
caused by its clash with Chinese weakened its native methods
for coining new words. That also made it more receptive to
borrowing words from other languages. But Chinese uses its
own resources to coin new compounds. (09)
EJB
> An-ge-stell-t-er is literally 'in-stall-d-er' -- a person who is
> 'put in a place' in an organization. The French origin of em-ploy-ee
> could be translated in-use-d, or in-place-d, a participial adjective
> taken as a noun. (010)
I agree. But note three points: (1) the clash with Danish caused
the Anglo-Saxon paradigms to be weakened; (2) the clash with
French introduced a completely different paradigm; and (3) the
university system, which taught Latin (and some Greek) to anyone
who did any significant amount of writing. (011)
As a result of these clashes, Anglo-Saxon compounds such as
the equivalent of 'heaven-candle' were lost. Anyone who wrote
anything more than sales receipts used their university training
to write 'celestial spheres'. (012)
> And we have coined similar terms, like 'installer' and 'mortgagee'.
>
> As we can see, rather than losing this technique for vocabulary
> extension to the French influence, English simply gained the mechanisms
> of the second language as well. (013)
No. When there are multiple paradigms for word formation, they tend
to become moribund or drastically simplified. English retained a few,
but most of them are not as productive as they were in their original
languages. The Germanic -er is still fairly productive in English,
but -ee is rarely used except for words borrowed from French. (014)
The issues that cause one language or another to become dominant
are very different from those that make it easy for a language to
borrow new terms. (015)
John (016)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (017)
|