On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 10:36:46AM -0800, Michael Motyka wrote:
> Very true. Communicating with a 14th century Englishman would be difficult. I
> took a similar major's course with Robert Kaske in the 80's without the benefit of
> the side-by-side. It was as close to learning a new language as I got without
> having it count towards my foreign language requirement. I think a modern reader
> would recognize a fair number of words and structures. In a good bit of that they
> would be mistaken in their understanding and overall would be hard-pressed to
> comprehend the texts in any depth.
You don't even have to read 14th Cent. lit to experience that. Read "A
Clockwork Orange" -- most folks find they read about 1/3 to 1/2 before they go
back and start over. Gibson, at least the earlier stuff, like "Neuromancer", is
a bit like that, but Burgess really almost invented a new language.
Language evolves more rapidly than the yours (and Tim's) examples tho -- look
at innercity blackspeak, especially Chicago. Forget the ebonics jokes -- this is
a genuine language change. Or look at other areas of the country with older
language evolution -- Gullah in So. Caroline, for instance, a much earlier
language specialization. When I was at the Univ. of So. Alabama in Mobile, I
came across a group of country blacks in a grocery store whose language was
totally incomprehensible, at least to me. I asked black friends about it, and
they could mimic it a bit, but confessed that they too had a lot of difficulty
understanding it, and they were native Mobilians.
I was raised, for the most part, in the deep South, but I've also come
across many whites there whose speech was very difficult to understand, and
which, I'm sure, if one tried to read an accurate phonetic rendition, without
benefit of body language, would seem be essentially a foreign language.
--
Harmon Seaver
CyberShamanix
http://www.cybershamanix.com
