Most interesting thread with many good contributions.
It seems to me that language is no more than a tool for thinking and communicating. If it is flexible enough, it will change in response to new events. However, causation is the event and not the language.
If events change, so will the language. Thus, a way of life will be conveyed by a language that is itself a response to the way of life.
So, if life changes, the language may take on a new direction, for the old language is no longer useful.
So, the language of an Indian Brave moving through the forest may keep him alive - just as the language of a modern American may get him across 5th Ave. without being killed.
However, we like old things, so an older language may take on a veneer of attractiveness. Perhaps things will be read into its use that weren't really there. There again, one dislikes old, once important, things disappearing into darkness. The urge is to save them before they are gone forever.
Nothing wrong with that.
Harry
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ed wrote:
> Selma > I think it is essential to be clear about the difference between what a > language conveys about a way of life and that way of life as it has been > distorted over centuries of abuse. >Oh I do agree. But the centuries of abuse were part of history too. They too impacted on language and culture. Ed
****************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of LA Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (818) 352-4141 Fax: (818) 353-2242 *******************************
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.416 / Virus Database: 232 - Release Date: 11/6/2002
