[lbo-talk] Caudwell on on language's inability to reflect the changing nature of reality

[Carrol Cox]

This thread, for the most part, fails to notice levels of language. No
English speaker, any place anywhere over the last 500 years would say or
write, "Man bought the a Diane puppy hit." And with great   confidence one
can say that no one ever will.

And everyone knows what Dorothy teaches in the  next sentence, and where she
comes from. "Dorothy is a French Spanish teacher." And that rule hasn't
changed and it's not going to.

Carrol

[The hit man bought Diane a puppy.]

-----Original Message-----
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
On Behalf Of JOANNA A.
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 1:09 AM
To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Caudwell on on language's inability to reflect the
changing nature of reality

I would surmise that a critical-historical investigation of the linguistic
practices of our species demonstrates that languages are no more fixed than
than anything else. 

---

It depends. For a very long time, roughly 1200-1600, it was thought that
Latin was a superior language because it did not change. It did not change
because Augustan Latin became the lingua franca of the educated and the
clergy. The vernacular went right on changing underneath as did the vulgate.
So, how fixed language is depends on who speaks it and for what purpose.

Joanna
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk