Re: How close is Vietnamese to Mandarin or Cantonese?


"Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote...

> benlizross <benlizro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > In the meantime, I'll say:
>
> > - names are words (which are socially assigned to individuals);
>
> I don't know what account Peter has in mind, but I don't
> consider names to be words in the ordinary sense of the
> word. Cecily Clark, 'Onomastics', in vol. 2 of the
> Cambridge History of the English Language:
>
> Names, whether of places or of people, have by
> definition a distinctive standing vis-à-vis the
> language at large. Although ultimately derived
> from elements of common vocabulary (not
> necessarily that of the language they currently
> grace), they have become emptied of their
> original etymological denotation; and this is true
> even for those whose form still coincides with
> that of the related lexical items: no-one expects
> to find cattle wading across the river at Oxford
> and, should a Mr Butcher actually be in the
> meat trade, the coincidence almost excites mirth.
>
> On the one hand, this semantic detachment promotes
> cross-cultural survival: some Present-Day 'English'
> place names are traceable to Celtic forms at least
> two millennia old, a few even suspected of going
> back to pre-Celtic times; some 'English' baptismal
> names have Hebrew origins. On the other, it lays
> names open to phonological attrition, for no more
> of any form need survive than is required for acting,
> in context, as an unambiguous signal or pointer.
>
> She goes on to point out that names are a poor guide to the
> incidence and chronology of sound changes and may even
> participate in purely onomastic sound changes.

All fair enough, but Peter (at least as Ross reads him) is saying that
"names aren't words" in the sense that they needn't obey the same
phonological "rules" as ordinary words. This quote certainly doesn't
say this -- in fact, its reference to "phonological attrition" suggests
that names are, phonologically, just like ordinary words.

Of course, as Ross says, names (just like non-name words) can be
[+foreign] phonologically. And this is particularly likely to be the
case (though it often isn't), if they're names of foreigners, or of
foreign places, or foreign phenomena.

John.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How close is Vietnamese to Mandarin or Cantonese?
    ... >> I don't know what account Peter has in mind, ... >> Cambridge History of the English Language: ... Then Ross is misreading. ... > foreign places, or foreign phenomena. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • USAjobs: Assistant Profession (Thai) $38 to $66 K,
    ... Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center, Monterey, ... Applicants with a Doctoral degree have no experience requirement. ... an evaluation of degreeobtained outside the U.S. must be mailed to ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • Re: Who castrated Esperanto?
    ... language until recently. ... No. Borrowings which are still felt like borrowings are only a tiny ... then the foreign layer is that tiny minute fraction. ... with a lot of syllables which are not independent elements in russian'? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Who castrated Esperanto?
    ... Just about anything else about language, ... Such as trying to delineate a foreign layer? ... "comprehend" in the other pot. ... 'comprehend' but not 'prehend com', when you can say both 'understand' ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Who castrated Esperanto?
    ... language until recently. ... then the foreign layer is that tiny minute fraction. ... or the source language. ... with a lot of syllables which are not independent elements in russian'? ...
    (sci.lang)
Loading