Re: deepfriedmars.com
From: alexV (alexV7623_at_comcast.net)
Date: 11/21/04
- Next message: Ruud Harmsen: "Re: Misperceptions of Spanish pronunciation?"
- Previous message: Ruud Harmsen: "Re: Misperceptions of Spanish pronunciation?"
- In reply to: Xenia: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Next in thread: Padraig Breathnach: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Reply: Padraig Breathnach: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Reply: Jacques Guy: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Reply: Joseph W. Murphy: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 07:34:42 -0500
"Xenia" <tyusha@freemail.ru> wrote in message
news:7df91bca.0411210319.37cf1223@posting.google.com...
> "nightjar" <nightjar@<insert_my_surname_here>.uk.com> wrote in message
news:<419f440b$0$16967$afc38c87@news.easynet.co.uk>...
> > As languages develop, they generally become more complex. A language
that
> > has not evolved some of the attributes of a more complex grammar is,
> > therefore, usually considered to be less advanced linguistically.
>
> On the contrary, it's clear that ancient languages (Latin, Greek,
> Sanskrit, Old English) were MUCH MORE grammatically complex than their
> modern descendants.
>
> For example, Old Russian had 7 cases, Modern Russian dropped the
> Vocative. Similarly, Modern Russian lacks the dual number which was
> present in the Old Russian.
>
> > Most commonly, languages develop through contact with other languages
and
>
> More commonly, it's the centuries of foreign domination that lead to
> loss of inflections and development of simplified, or analytical
> syntax. I would disagree that analytical syntax represents some
> "advanced" stage of language development. So degradation of more
> complex Indo-European grammar led to emergence of modern English and
> Bulgarian.
>
> > Russia has a long tradtion of isolationism, which would limit that route
for
> > development.
> Russian grammar faithfully preserves most characteristics of the Old
> Slavic. .
The complexity of Russian grammar is a liability not an advantage. It is
complex in all the wrong places. It is complex in the noun and pronoun
forms. English is much simpler in there. English is much more complex in
verbal forms and it is precisely where it counts. English is a significantly
more dynamic language.
You are totally wrong in your statement that "centuries of foreign
domination that lead to loss of inflections and development of simplified,
or analytical syntax.." It was an explanation based on superficial
observations by some who had no other comparison references or did not want
to find any. It is true that the loss of inflections occurred when educated
classes in England were switching from French to English but what about
Chinese and other languages that underwent similar evolution centuries ago
without any foreign domination?
Simplification of grammars is a consistent evolutionary trend in many
languages but it may be taking place at different speed here and there.
Russians may end up losing their inflections a few centuries from now,
hopefully. So far they have dropped only one case as compared to the old
Slavic and it took them a thousand years to do so.
- Next message: Ruud Harmsen: "Re: Misperceptions of Spanish pronunciation?"
- Previous message: Ruud Harmsen: "Re: Misperceptions of Spanish pronunciation?"
- In reply to: Xenia: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Next in thread: Padraig Breathnach: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Reply: Padraig Breathnach: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Reply: Jacques Guy: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Reply: Joseph W. Murphy: "Re: deepfriedmars.com"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|