Re: shampoo [was: English compared to other European languages]


Lee Sau Dan wrote:
> >>>>> "Seán" == Seán O'Leathlóbhair <jwlawler@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> Seán> A few people have mentioned that when literacy was rare,
> Seán> borrowing from written sources would be unlikely.
>
> Why?

I was trying to give a little ground and see if the PTD camp would
return the favour. I guess that I am wasting my time.

Actually I find your argument below quite plausible. Even when few
people were literate, I expect it would be the literate elite who were
most likely to communicate with foreigners.

> Back in the days when literarcy was rare, those who are literate
are
> "scholars" and "elites". Whatever they say, those illiterate
would
> believe. During those times, it is likely that many academic
or
> abstract concepts -- together with the foreign words expressing
them
> -- are introduced by such elites to the illiterates. It is not
hard
> to imagine that in some cases such elites to have learnt such
foreign
> concepts via written communication. Then, to teach the
illiterates
> such things, they have to either calque the terms in the
local
> language, or localize the pronunciations of such words. (They
could
> have chosen to keep the spelling, and pronouncing the words
using
> local spelling rules.)
>
> Then, to the illiterates, it would be irrelevant how such words
for
> new concepts are pronounced in the original language. Who cares?
>
>
> Think about names like "Jesus". How is that "j" pronounced
in
> English? French? Spanish? German? ... It seems that they like
to
> keep the spelling "Jesus". If this name were borrowed
only
> phonetically, why aren't we spelling it "Yesues"?

I get your point but how far back should we take it? Should we try to
imitate the Aramaic pronunciation that Jesus probably used himself?

> Seán> This is obviously true but widespread literacy has been
> Seán> common for a long time. Today many non-native English
> Seán> speakers probably read far more English than they hear
> Seán> (these newsgroups for example).
>
> That is true for me. And I have read much more French than I've
heard.

When I visit Denmark, I hear plenty of Danish but I understand little.
However, I can make fairly good sense of the newspaper and other
written material. I would need to spend much more time there to tune
my ear to Danish phonemes but for reading there is no such barrier and
I can get some useful practise in even a short visit.

>
> --
> Lee Sau Dan
>
> E-mail: danlee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee

--
Seán O'Leathlóbhair

.

Relevant Pages