Re: Plausibility Check


Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
Richard Herring wrote:

The other half is learning how to present it in such a way that others
can assess its credibility for themselves. You are very bad at that.

I always tell about my sources of information when someone
asks me about.

Trust nobody.

How can you live without trusting anyone? Poor fellow.

Which includes estimating its accuracy and credibility, their
motivation, by how many levels of hearsay it's been distorted, etc... If
they don't provide the metadata for doing that, they get low scores.

Okay, tell me about your metadata. Your understanding
of the world has been mediated, first by your mother and
father, then by siblings and comrades, by teachers, by
books, by journals, by radio, TV, the Web, etc. Almost
everything you know has been been provided or at least
influenced by one or another medium (by someone or
something "in between," which is the meaning of the word
medium). Tell me all that came in between your natural trust
as a baby and the above statement "Trust nobody.".

But you fail to present the evidence from which you made your
evaluation.

I gave you the quote

English in the time of Shakepseare had 200,000 words,
information technology alone created 200,000 words

That is not a quote; that is your recollection of what you (think you)
heard (and it is translated as well, but the possibility of distortion
in translation is here minimal).

and by request I gave you the source, the radio program
Mailbox, DRS 1, 11:40 to 11:45, one or two or perhaps
three years ago.

That is not a "source." A source would be the date of the broadcast,
and preferably it would identify the authority for the statement.

I gave you the link to the website, you
can contact the editors of the Mailbox, I even wrote
a draft of a letter to them. Can you ask for more?

Back in 1975/75 I defined language and stated a correlation
between human made things and words (look up an earlier
message of mine here in this thread). The above sentence
confirms that correlation, which is why I picked it up, which
is why I remember it accurately, and which is why I can
still remember the source.

Then I checked the plausibility by consulting the 23 volumes
of the Middle English dictionary and calculated a rough
number of 100,000 English words in the era from 1066 to
1475. The end of that era coincides with the rise of the
Renaissance in Italy,

Petrarch wasn't a Renaissance man?

the Renaissance opened the door to
many new scientific disciplines, which led to new applications,
which led to plenty new words. For example the words for
colors increased in Shakespeare's time, owing to new dyeing
techniques. 200,000 English words in the time of Shakespeare,
then, are well plausible to me. I have no reason to doubt that
number,

If that number were remotely accurate, as many words would have had to
be lost from English as you claim were added by "information
technology" alone. The counts of words in unabridged dictionaries
include all the terms used in all the sciences and average ca. 500,000
today.

neither have I a reason to doubt the qualifications of
the authors of that radio program.

Yet you are unable to identify them or state those qualifications.

I assume they relied on
a publication.

A very big assumption when it comes to questions of language.

There must be some people around who study
the number of words, and how that number increases. May
well be that someone wrote and published a paper on the
increasing number of English words through time. Do you
know every book and doctoral thesis and journal and article
and paper on linguistic topics? If you can't evaluate the number
of English words in the time of Shakespeare yourself, and if you
doubt my memory, ask the editors of the Mailbox.

Why are you afraid to consult the OED database?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why is this not considered a hate crime?
    ... and the meanings of some English words. ... the victim or not. ... It does seem my definition of hate is more broad that yours. ... Your version requires that we adapt our language to conform ...
    (misc.legal)
  • Re: Turkish bolluk
    ... chinese via old bulghar turkic explains more (the chinese, ... As for Chinese, It is an analytic language, brought to its extreme. ... ....Here I think it would be interesting to mention that the Serbian ... seems to be a clear parallel to English words duke (from Lat. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: ts in Tagalog
    ... variation from language to language or within a given language (VSO is ... Aglipay, magpapauna sa lifestyle check ... outnumber words that could be identified as Filipino (inlcuding ... Spanish loans and/or assimilated English words. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Pain has subsided incredibly
    ... > concerned with the English words for the human anatomy when the hebrew ... > language was developed. ... FEMALE 'American' name! ...
    (alt.support.mult-sclerosis)
  • Re: How can lie be justification for truth?
    ... >> Not many English words - or words in Hebrew, or Aramaic, ... >> The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language ... >> has an appendix on the Indo-European roots of all of the ... > The Sanskrit-first folk are nutters who rely on Hindu ...
    (talk.origins)