On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 06:18:47 +0100, Wilko Fokken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 04:52:35PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 14:37, Tom wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 12:11:49PM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote: > > These ancient languages were known for their terse, concentrated legal > terminology: "Frisia non cantat, Frisia ratiocinatur" (Frisia doesn't > sing, Frisia counsels). The other linguistic root, the Latin language, > was equally well adjusted to legislation; the "Roman Law" is still > being studied by law-students. > > (As both linguistic ancestors proved inclined rather to legal > terminologies, I wonder how far the English musical culture might be > based on Celtic influences.) > > Legal terminology requires defining rock solid linguistic terms in > order to stay firm to legal disputing. On the other hand, legal terms > must be flexible in a certain way, to be able to cover individual > cases through generalized rules. In legislation, the real, practical > social life is condensed to an abstract model - quite similar to > computing, I guess. > > Another benefit to the English language may have been the long > seafaring history of the British nation. Sailing in rough weather > condtions tends to shorten clumsy words (the big ones get lost), an > effect one can find in the Dutch language, too. > ..interesting. Which legal tradition named THingvellir, Iceland? ;-) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
