hellogѸ˥֥     ChangeLog ǿ     ƥǿ     1 2 ڡ / page 1 (2)

language_death - hellogѸ˥֥

ǽ: 2026-07-15 01:27

2026-02-19 Thu

#6142. Gambay's First Languages Map --- ȥꥢ轻̱ [pama-nyunga][australian_aboriginal_languages][language_family][world_languages][language_death][australian_english][map]

ܥʪˬ졤ȥꥢ轻̱ܥꥸˡʸˤĤƤŸվޤƤ
AborigineAboriginal Ȥ̾Τϥƥ aboriginēs ʤɤη˴Ť켫ΤƬ ab- "from" ȥꥷͳ origō "origin" ʤäƤ롥Ρפۤɤ̣Το̱ (colonists) ȶ̤٤̱פȤ֤ŤǤꡤѸǤ롥Τ褦ʻ𤫤顤New South Wales 轻̱ Awabakal ǡֿ͡פ̣ guri ˴Ť koori(e) ȤƾΤѤ뤳Ȥ⤢롥ؤǤϡܥꥸˡν "Australian Aboriginal languages" ȸƤ֤Ȥ¿
ȥꥢ轻̱οϡʪۤŸˤ500ȤƤͿ޽ˤäƤ200--300ʤɤȤ⤵롥ȸζ̤˴ؤ䡤οͤܿ18ȾʹߡüԿ͸㸺ƻ¿ʤäƤ뤳Ȥʤɤ顤Τ˿Τ񤷤褦٤Ƥθ碌ƤüԤ5ͤۤɤȤ졤찮γϤΤСۤȤɤǤδΤƤ롥
轻̱ʬहȡPama-Nyungan 췲 Pama-Nyungan 췲̤롥ԤϥȥꥢΦΤۤڤʬۤƤꡤ°ϡӸŪ˸ߤ˴ط롥ȤϤ²ȤǤСѸ줫ߤƥɥĸۤɤεΥθ⤢СҥǥۤɤεΥθ⤢Ȥä轻̱ϡ4--5ǯۤ衤ȼʸȯŸƤPama-Nyungan 췲ϡȥꥢΦʳδΤθȤδطϸӸŪ˸ΩƤ롥
Pama-Nyungan ϥȥꥢȥ쥹ǹԤʤƤꡤѥץȴطȤ롥ʤޥ˥˴ؤƤϡ轻̱θĤäƤ餺οͤȤܿλ˳ˡɤΤ褦ʸ줬äƤΤԾܤǤ롥
ȥꥢ轻̱ʬۤˤĤƤϡGambay's First Languages Map 褯ȤȤǯϢʤǤƤ褦

lib/linguistic_map_of_Australia_by_Gambay_small.png



ϢƤ heldio ǤäΤǡ⻲Ȥ줿#1725. ȥꥢ轻̱ܥꥸˡν

[ | ѥڡ ]

2024-02-24 Sat

#5416. ¿β [variety][world_languages][language_death][sociolinguistics][review]


Words and Worlds: World Languages Review



漼Ѥɾ֤ˤʤäƤ¿ (language diversity) ˴ؤܤѥѥȤ᤯äƤߤUNESCO ETXEA 2005ǯ˽Ǥ줿 Words and Worlds: World Languages Review Ȥ̾ܤĤɤΤ褦ʷаޤꤷΤФƤʤ褦¿ο޽Τ1Ǥ롥
Ƭ1ɤǤȡʤʤɤޤʸǤ롥 (Prologue) "The value of language diversity" ȾФΤĤ11Ǥ (p. x) ʲ˰ѤΤạ̇̄äƤС

Languages are humanity's most valuable cultural heritage. They are fundamental to understanding. Each language provides a system of concepts which helps us to interpret reality. The complexity of reality is easier to understand thanks to the diversity of languages. Progress in understanding is due, amongst other things, to the growing linguistic diversity that has characterised the human species. Languages are also fundamental in the generation and transmission of values. Each language expresses a differentiated ethical sensibility. Each language provides us with symbols and metaphors to deal with the mysterious and the sacred. Furthermore, languages are not closed or exclusive universes. All of them express the rationality of the human species as well as its common fears and hopes. Linguistic diversity is the most obvious manifestation of cultural diversity. In a world characterised by growing processes of globalisation, it seems necessary to assert the value of cultural diversity as a guarantee of more democratic and more creative coexistence. Cultural uniformity would mean a decline, to the extent that we would lose our ability to give specialised answers to specific challenges. The report "Our Creative Diversity", published by UNESCO in 1995, pointed out what orientations were necessary to preserve diversity without renouncing positive aspects of globalisation in the field of cultural and linguistic diversity. We often coincide with the criteria of the defenders of diversity of living species in the natural environment. In both cases it is said that there is a need to protect the heritage. The reason is not exclusively ethical. Both the defence of biological diversity and the defence of cultural and linguistic diversity are necessary conditions for the well-being of humans, for the balances that protect life and for the life quality we aspire to develop.


¿ʪ¿ʿŪ뤳Ȥ¿λݤΰʸǤΤ˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥ԤϸԤ٤ƸŪȤǧ٤㤤
ѤκǸˤơ¿ʸͳŪʤΤǤϤʤȤˤȤ櫓Ϥ򴶤Ǥʪ¿¿ƱǤꡤ¿ʸϡΰǫХ󥹡μȯŸΤɬ׾ʤΤȤ¿ "specialised answers to specific challenges" 󶡤ƤȤƱͤϤ롥
ʲܼܽǤƤѥѥȤɤǤʤɤܤ1



Prologue
Introduction
Chapter 1. Linguistic Communities
Chapter 2. The Linguistic Heritage
Chapter 3. The Official Status of Languages
Chapter 4. The Use of Languages in Public Administration
Chapter 5. Language and Writing
Chapter 6. Language and Education
Chapter 7. Languages and the Media
Chapter 8. Language and Religion
Chapter 9. Transmission and Intergenerational Use of Language
Chapter 10. Linguistic Attitudes
Chapter 11. The Threats to Languages
Chapter 12. The Future of Languages




Martí, Fèlix, Paul Ortega, Itziar Idiazabal, Andoni Barreña, Patxi Juaristi, Carme Junyent, Belen Uranga, and Estibaliz Amorrortu. Words and Worlds: World Languages Review. UNESCO ETXEA, 2005.

Referrer (Inside): [2025-01-01-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-06-28 Wed

#5175. ɸಽλδط [standardisation][dialect][dialectology][prestige][language_death]

ɸಽ (standardisation) ϡ1ĤѼˤҲŪ˰ҿΤѼȤߤʤơθҲ˹ƤǤ롥ȡ¾Τ٤ƤѼϡŪ˼ҲŪͤ㤯ʤꡤϰϤޤäƤȤˤʤ꤬̤ȤơɸѼϻ˻뤳Ȥ⤢
嵭θɸಽλδطɬŪʤΤǤϤʤɸಽʹԤƤĤ³뤳ȤϤ뤷ºݤ˱Ѹˤܸˤʬ̤ꡤĤäƤ롥ޤɸಽȤΩơǤȤ⤢뤫⤷ʤ
ȤϤɸಽλδ֤˲餫ΰ̴ط륱¿˰㤤ʤJones and Singh (100) ξԤ̯ʴطˤĤƼΤ褦˵Ƥ롥

It should be pointed out, of course, that the standardisation of a language does not automatically entail the loss of its associated dialects: English dialects are still spoken today, many centuries after the emergence of standard English. However, we will see that the rise of a standard is mainly the result of sociopolitical and cultural factors and that its purpose is to unite the speech community, through knowledge of a codified, uniform variety. The rise of a standard is therefore likely to have a hand in dialect death for although the elevation on one variety to the standard leaves the other dialects intact, the fact that the standard language is the only one deemed appropriate for 'official' functions such as the media, education and government and is ultimately regarded as a symbol of loyalty for the whole community means that its associated dialects are often felt to be 'inferior' by their speakers and come to be reserved for non-official functions, such as for use with family and friends. As upward mobility comes to be attached to the standard language, dialects cease to be transmitted to the next generation and eventually stop being spoken.


ϢƼε⻲Ȥ줿

#1786. 츢ȸλࡤλ ([2014-03-18-1])
#3457. ܤξǴ졦 ([2018-10-14-1])
#3666. ΤƤɸѤΤΤƱ ([2019-05-11-1])
#4256. ָλפεåȡ ([2020-12-21-1])

Jones, Mari C. and Ishtla Singh. Exploring Language Change. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-04-24 Mon

#5110. ΩѴۡƴݤϡ֥륿˥Ÿˬ˸Ƥͽ [museum][seminar][khelf][celtic][breton][voicy][heldio][breton_lai][contact][literature][linguistic_imperialism][language_death][brittany_exhibition]

ܲΩѴˤƴݤϡ֥륿˥塡͡󡤹餬۶Ÿ񤬳ǤŴ֤318611ޤǤȤʤäƤޤ


ƴݤϡ֥륿˥塡͡󡤹餬۶



γŤεȤ館شλΥߤǤϡֱѸˤȥȡѸˤȥ֥륿˥פơޤȤơͽǡ5դ˲ݳưȤƥߤγŸˬͽǤ塤ܥ֥Ǥ Voicy heldio Ǥ⡤ط꤬ۥФƤ뤫Ȼפޤܵɤߤγ⡤ҥ֥륿˥Ÿˤ˴ؿ󤻤ƤФȡ
ե֥륿˥ǤϡȸɤΥ֥ȥ (Breton) ŪäƤޤϰζǤե󥹸˲ƤȤ¤ޤϥ֥ƥ̤ΥʡǡȷϽ줬Ѹ˰ƤΤʿŪʾǤ
ȽʬۤˤˤĤƤϡ#774. ȸʬۡ ([2011-06-10-1])#778. P-Celtic Q-Celtic ([2011-06-14-1])#779. Cornish Manx ([2011-06-15-1])#3113. 󥰥ͤ˥󥰥ɤ᤯Τ ([2017-11-04-1])#3761. ֥ƥȥ֥륿˥ ([2019-08-14-1])#4491. 1300ǯä󥰥ɤδѸ첽 ([2021-08-13-1]) ޤ celtic ε򻲾ȤƤޤ Voicy heldio ǤϡϢ#692. ȸɤҲ𤷤ޤۿƤޤ
ŸˬޤǤΡֱѸˤȥȡѸˤȥ֥륿˥פΤͽϡȤưʲ3Ǥ

1. ŪˤߤѸγȥȽν̾
2. Ѹǽ񤫤줿֥ȥ󡦥 (Breton lai)
3. Ѹȥȸθܿ

ī Voicy heldio ǤϡܵƱͤƤǤ٤ꤷƤޤ#693. ѸˤȥȡѸˤȥ֥륿˥ --- ΩѴۤΡƴݤϡ֥륿˥Ÿˬ˸ơǤҤİ



ΩѴۤΡƴݤϡ֥륿˥ŸסӤ줫1ۤɤƤֱѸˤȥȡѸˤȥ֥륿˥פȤơޤˤĤơҤܤ

Referrer (Inside): [2024-01-01-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2023-04-20 Thu

#5106. ް̾괹ƻ [language_death][linguistic_imperialism][language_shift][sociolinguistics][linguistic_right][review][domain_loss][revitalisation_of_language][ecolinguistics]

ϢܺΤԡˡʣθƻ̡١ʤǡ2022ǯˤ򻲾ȤƤ ([2023-04-17-1], [2023-04-19-1]) ްȤäŤ򰷤äƤΤåɤߤ䤹񤫤Ƥ뤿ᡤᤷ䤹ƾդ줿ʸͭѤǤ롥


 Τԡˡʣθƻ̡١ǡ2022ǯ



Ƭ1ϡ̴äʤ --- οȤȡסʻܺΤˤΥơޤϡɸ˵󤲤褦ˡް̾괹ƻǤ롥۸줬۸˰äȤϸźǤߤ뤬βϤۤñǤϤʤ (12--14) Ѥ롥

Ѹžϡްη̤Ǥ⤢С뤳ȤˤĤƤμȯŪȿǤƤΤ⤢뤬¿ξˤϡĤξäΤ̱Ԥϡ̤ˤϡϸ䤷ˤ٤ųݤ櫓ǤϤʤϸ꾯ʤΰȵǽؤȥƥޥƥå˸ꤷƤޤŪʡʳΡ˸˴ؤŪʸѤ롥ΤȤˤäơϸ¸ߤʤʤäƤΤ (Migge & Léglise 2007, p. 302)

ä򤹤ȡֲΤȡפȸͤ⤤롥ֺϤ⤦̱ϼʤ¸ߤʤåȤᤵȤȺϹԤʤפȡζʤǤɸ줬Ѥ뤳Ȥξʤ̱²サϰ¼ˤƤ⡤ձǤɸѤƸƱ׷ײȯɽΤǯΤȤɸȤȤǡˤ錄ȯŸδäĤ뤳ȡפָġͤĹס¼οס̱²ƱΰռηפʤΤȤڿ̱¹񶵰2021ˡ
ָϸפ֤꾯ʤΰȵǽؤȥƥޥƥå˸פƱˡֻŪʡʳΡ˸˴ؤŪʸפήۤȤ֤ϡۤϪǤϤʤȤ⡤絬ϤˡȯƤ롥Сޤ줿Ķǽβͤ㲼ۤθʲXȤˤΰҿ궯Ȥ֤Ǥ롥ȤХޥߤǡǡʤɸξǡˤX줬Ȥ褦ˤʤäƤ顥ǤϸϤθǤϤʤXȤ褦ˤȡ򤬷᤿顥XΤǤ̥ͤŪʻŻ˽褦ˤʤäʤ顥


줬֤꾯ʤΰȵǽؤȥƥޥƥå˸פƤ domain_loss ȸƤФcf. #4537. Ѹ줫ΰϤˤ̲ "domain loss" ([2021-09-28-1])ˡǤ졤˸äƥ兩ȼäƤ᡼Ǥ롥
ָλ (language_death) Ȥơޤϡ¾δϢڤΥʤ㤨и (language_shift) (linguistic_imperialism)츢 (linguistic_right) (revitalisation_of_language) (ecolinguistics) ʤɤȤ̩ܤ˴ؤ롥ƼҲؤ礭Ǥ롥

Τԡˡʣθƻ̡١ǡ2022ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2022-02-09 Wed

#4671. ˤ֥󥦥ԻĻ [cornish][breton][welsh][language_death][celtic][sociolinguistics][reformation]

ε#4670. ˤ֥եꥸκס ([2022-02-08-1]) ˰³ (264) ֥󥦥ԻĻפꤹ1󥦥 (Cornish) ϥեꥸ (Frisian) ʾ˺Ȥǰ餫ΥƤ褦˻פ뤬ɤ

˥ͤ礹ȡΥ̥󥦥ͤϥ̥륺ͤڤΥ졤󥦥ȾΤĤ줿ơΥϥȷϤηǤ륫줫󤶤ȤȤˡƱȸɤΤȤˤ֥쥤̥֥ȥͤʬΥϻȾνפεˤʤäΥϡΤ˿षƤȬǯˤäȤФȤƾǤƤޤää٤ݤθˤΥϡˤʤäƤߤäΤǤ롥ưοʼԤˤƤߤСΥκϡ󥦥ν̱ȤȤηӤĤ餯뼫ʷ̤Ȼפ줿ηӤĤˤĤƤȿ;ϤΤʤϡ塻ǯߤ줿-ΥͭϤʥСǤäHʡƴʷ˸路Ƥ롥֤ʤ󥦥ͤϥΥؤФʤƤϤʤʤΤʤʤϥ󥦥ͤǤסά͡褦Ȥ֤ϤɤλΤΤȤ٤ȤˤĤƤε뤳ȤϤ롥κ˾Ǯ򷹤륰롼פΤҤȤӤȤ󡻡ǯ᤯˻ǤޤäΤȤФΤʤǻȤȤƤꡤ⤽˶ĤҤȤӤȤοƤȤ¤ϡܤ٤Ǥ롥ʤˤϡ饨Ȥˤإ֥饤κӤԤ⤢ۤɤǤ롥


פλϡ󥰥ɤ֥ƥμϰؤȡפ礷褦ȤǤ롥֥ƥüˤ륳󥦥⤽α¿ȤʤꡤƱϤ˱Ѹ줬ƩƤȤˤʤäθ塤󥦥ϼ¼ŪˤϻȤʤäƤޤä20ˤʤäƤϸ֤ͭ褷褦ȤƤ롤ȤΤ
#779. Cornish Manx ([2011-06-15-1]) Ǥ⿨줿褦ˡΥ󥦥ưˤϾħŪʰյʤȤ⤢롥Τ˸Ūˤ񤷤⤷ʤ̱²߽ФפȤȤΰ̣ƹͤƤ롤ǤϤ롥

ɡˡë 𡦺 ľҡˡض̸ --- 衼åѽᤰء١ҡ2018ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2022-02-08 Tue

#4670. ˤ֥եꥸκ [frisian][ethnic_group][germanic][sociolinguistics][language_death][academy]

ӸؤǤϡѸȺǤƤθϲȤХեꥸ (Frisian) ȤȤˤʤäƤ롥ܥ֥ǤϱѸˤμդ͡˰äƤեꥸˤĤƤϡ#787. Frisian ([2011-06-23-1]) #3169. űѸ⳰ˤեꥸͤγ ([2017-12-30-1]) Ǽ夲٤ǡޤܤƤʤä
ǶḽΥեꥸξˤĤ󶡤٤֥եꥸκפꤹ̥Ū1Ѥ (262--63) ̱²߽Ф1Ȥƥեꥸ줬夲Ƥս

줬ϤζΰϤˤäƾǤδˤ餵Ƥ⡤̱²ŪޥΥƥǥƥƥ׵᤹뤳Ȥǡθϰ̤θˤĤʤ뤳Ȥ롥եꥸξ礬Ǥ롥եꥸϡѸƱޥ췲γθ췲̥󥰥եꥸ췲ͤ°Ѹ¿ζäƤ롥θ˸ŤˤäƤꡤޤȴطäƤ衼åѤ̱²θǤ롥ĤƥեꥸüԤϡγȤ襤򼨤ȴαĤߤ򤵤ơؤ⤯äƤDeus mare, Friso litora fecitաֿĤꡤեꥸͤߤĤäפȡȤեꥸäҤȤӤȤϡʥե꡼Ƚȥե˥󥲥󽣤˻͡ˤȥɥġʥǥޡȹ񶭤ܤ륷쥹ҡۥ륷奿󽣡ˡ󽣤Τॹȥإॹϡեδ֤ˤϰ衤ߤȤޤäƤΦȤϤʤۤʤƿ͡ˤΤʬƤޤΤʤǥեꥸˤϿषƤ
ưϽȾФ餹Ǥ˻ϤޤäƤΤǤϡեꥸ¼ǤäƤʤä줬ˡΧʸˤƥեꥸˤȤäϤ᤿ɤ⡤ˤʤäơΰĹΤȤƥե꡼Ȥ¸ߤȤϡǥƥƥγä¥ȤϡŪʵϤαդĤġθˤޤȤޤäˡ򤢤褦Ȥˤˤϥեꥸǥߡꡤ¤Ƥ롥եꥸ϶ˡΧΰˤϤޤۤȤƳƤʤɤ⡤廰ǯʹ߾عܤȤƳ졤޻ǯȽǿѤǤ褦ˤʤäȤ򸫤ȡθ򿩤ߤ᤿ŪʹưΤǡեꥸϥ˶Ϥ˰褯ƤȤ̸ά͡


֥եꥸǥߡפʤȿ뤳ȤΤʤäΤǶä졤Ѹ졤ɥĸ졤̲ȤŪˤŪˤҲŪˤ⶯ʽζ֤ˤäơޤӤƤȤΤϴפΤ褦ˤפ롥

ɡˡë 𡦺 ľҡˡض̸ --- 衼åѽᤰء١ҡ2018ǯ

Referrer (Inside): [2023-01-08-1] [2022-02-09-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2021-09-10 Fri

#4519. "ecolinguistics" Ȥʬ [ecolinguistics][linguistics][biology][world_languages][language_death]

Ƕ褯褦ˤʤä ecolinguistics ȤѸ졥ήԸʤΤȤʤȥɤǻäʤäꤹ뤬Ϥ褯ʬäƤʤȸؤγݤ碌ȤȤʬ뤬̣ƤΤ
Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas (318) ˤȡ"ecolinguistics", "language ecology", "linguistic ecology" Ϥ褽ƱǤꡤΤ褦ʥǤ "ecology" ϴˤ "context" "language environment" ؤΤȤޤˡִĶפǤϡִĶפȤϲʤΤȤȡߥޥμҲŪŪкѳŪŪطʤΤȤȤƤľˡήԸǤ᥿եʤΤǡΤȤϥȤƤ롥ɤΤȤ褯ʬʤ
ȤδϢǤ "ecology" äȸ̩˹ͤƤԤ⾯ʤʤPhillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas ¤ϤΤ褦ʹͤΤ褦ǡʪŪʪŪӼҲŪĶפΤȤªƤ褦 (319) ȤδϢǡּҲŪפȤΤʬ褦ʵΤʪŪפȤΤϤɤȤɤ Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas ϡܵǸäƤ롥
Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas μĥ󤹤Τ񤷤#601. ¿ʪ¿ ([2010-12-19-1]) ǾҲ𤷤ȤȤƤ뤳ȤϳΤǤ롥פˡˤ¿ʪ¿ʬۤشطˤȤ¤˴ŤۤΤ褦ξǡʪ¿ݻ뤿μϿʹ֤θΤʤѤƤꡤԤºŤ뤳ȤˤäԤݤ롤ȤΩȤäƤ롥¿ξüˤʪ¿ξüˤľ뤹롤Ȥ
εˤĤƤɤͤФ褤ΤʬʤޤޤʤΤǡޤ Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas (323--24) ε򤽤ΤޤްѤƤ

Most of the world's megabiodiversity is in areas under the management or guardianship of Indigenous peoples. Most of the world's linguistic diversity resides in the small languages of Indigenous peoples. Much of the detailed knowledge of how to maintain biodiversity, including TEK [= traditional ecological knowledge], is encoded in the language of Indigenous peoples. If we continue as now, most of the world's Indigenous languages will be gone by 2100. ICSU [= International Council for Science] states (2002) that "actions are urgently needed to enhance the intergenerational transmission of local and Indigenous knowledge...Traditional knowledge conservation, therefore, must pass through the pathways of conserving language (as language is an essential tool for culturally-appropriate encoding of knowledge)." Since TEK is necessarily encoded into the local languages of the peoples whose knowledge it is, this means that if these local languages disappear (without the knowledge being transferred to other, bigger languages, which it isn't) the knowledge is lost. By killing the languages we kill the prerequisites for maintaining biodiversity. Ecolinguistic diversity is essential because it enhances creativity and adaptability and thus stability.


ʪŪʪŪʥȼҲŪŪϥ󥯤ƤΤȤӤ򤷤Ϥɤͤޤ

Phillipson, Robert and Tove Skutnabb-Kangas. "English, Language Dominance, and Ecolinguistic Diversity Maintenance." Chapter 16 of The Oxford Handbook of World Englishes. Ed. by Markku Filppula, Juhani Klemola, and Devyani Sharma. New York: OUP, 2017. 313--32.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2021-08-13 Fri

#4491. 1300ǯä󥰥ɤδѸ첽 [anglo-saxon][language_death][celtic][welsh][cornish][linguistic_imperialism]

ϢεǡѸŪˤĤ Trudgill ͤ򻲾ȤƤκǽǡTrudgill (30) ƶŦ򤷤Ƥ롥

Meanwhile, as all the events described above [= the expansion of English] were taking place around the world, back on the island of Britain, where the English language first came into being, Brittonic, the first language ever to be threatened by English, continued to hold its own in the forms of Welsh and Cornish, well over a millennium after contact with Germanic had first begun. Indeed, there were for a long time still parts of the English language's homeland, England, which remained non-English speaking. Some small border areas of England in Herefordshire and Shropshire---Oswestry, for example---remained Welsh-speaking until the middle of the eighteenth century. And Cornish . . . , which had survived the Anglo-Saxon incursions for many centuries, seems to have been lost as a viable native community language only in the late 1700s---although by that time there would have been very few monolingual Cornish speakers for several generations. When it eventually died out, England for the first time finally became a totally English-speaking country: the complete linguistic anglicisation of England had taken 1,300 years.


4ۤɤȤŪû֤ˡѸ줬֥ƥ礫鱩ФơŪŪ뤲ȤͤȤƱѸ줬ɨǤ륤󥰥ɤδѸ첽ãΤˡ5Υ󥰥ͤ褫1300ǯ⤫äȤΤϡȤۤʤơ⤦1ʿԤ롥Ʊ4ۤɤȤŪû֤ˡꥹۤޤȤƤθؤ˻äȤͤȤɨǤ륤󥰥ɤ˾֥ƥΤ줷ȤʤܲΥåȥɾ򸫤¤ꡤ֥ƥ缫Τˤ԰¤ƤȤΤϡȤۤʤ21αѸ첽βǽˡŪ¤ƧޤƤɬפ
ʸǿƤ륱ȷϸ Welsh Cornish ˤĤƤϡ#1718. Wales ˤѸˡ ([2014-01-09-1])#3742. 륺ǯɽ ([2019-07-26-1])#779. Cornish Manx ([2011-06-15-1]) 򻲾ȡ

Trudgill, Peter. "The Spread of English." Chapter 2 of The Oxford Handbook of World Englishes. Ed. by Markku Filppula, Juhani Klemola, and Devyani Sharma. New York: OUP, 2017. 14--34.

Referrer (Inside): [2023-04-24-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2021-01-06 Wed

#4272. ˸ϤĤΤǤ --- hellog 饸 [hellog-radio][sobokunagimon][world_languages][statistics][demography][language_death][hellog_entry_set]

Ѹ1Ĥθ졤ܸ1ĤθʤΤǡ碌2Ǥۤ͡˥ե󥹸졤ڥ졤ɥĸ졤졤졤ڹʤΤäƤ̾󤲡­碌ƤȡϤƸˤϤĤθ줬뤳ȤˤʤǤ礦100Ĥ餤뤤1,000ġ⤷10,000ġΤ褦ʵȤʤĤʤȤ¿⤷ޤ
¤θؤˤƤ⡤͡ͳˤꡤΤʿФȤϤǤޤԤˤäɤ줬ߤΤǤդλޤơDz⤷Ƥޤ礦ʲİ



ؼԤ֤Ȥ򤫤ĴĥäƸƤСΤʿФΤǤϤʤȵ˻פ⤷ޤ󤬡 No ǤؼԤĥäƤ⡤Τʸ뤳ȤԲǽǤȤΤϡϸǤϤʤǤʤΤǤθȤȤϡäɤΤ褦ʹ԰٤ʤΤ䤤פʤ褦˻פޤ
ǤΤꤿȤΤ;Ǥ Ethnologue 23ǡ2020ǯˤ򻲾ȤƤߤޤȡθο7,117ȥȤƤޤȤ1ĤλͤˤޤΤǤդ򡥺ѤʵФƤϡȤƤϡֿ١פƨƤȻפޤ
ȤꡤӤ˴ϢȤơ##3009,270,1060,274,401,1949εå碌Ƥɤߤ

Referrer (Inside): [2023-01-01-1] [2022-01-01-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2020-12-21 Mon

#4256. ָλפεå [hellog_entry_set][language_death][statistics][world_languages][linguistic_right][language_shift][dialect][linguistic_imperialism][ecolinguistics][sociolinguistics]

Ҳؤμǡָλ (language_death) ˿ȡؿij¿ܲ121ȤϥڡǸ줬ƤȤ¤Τȡʤ饷åΤΤȤ٤ΩˤܸȤѤƤꡤ٤ؤĶǤѸ̳ΤʤdzؽƤԤˤȤäơǴΤ줬ˤۤ¿¸ߤȤȤϡưפǤʤˤʤʿŪܿͤˤȤäơָλפȤϤ̣DZ󤤹ä
ܹˤΤʣ롥ޤȸСλࡤʤȤοȤʹȤ
ѸɮƬȤŪʱƶϤĶʸϡ¿μ微λ򾷤ƤΤݤȤ⤢롥⤷ȤСѸΤ褦ʸϻŪʸǤꡤԤȤߤʤ٤ʤΤ⤷微ߤȤΤǤСïɤΤ褦˵ߤΤ⤽ߤɬפΤʤΤ餬Ѥָ֡סʸ츢ˤĿͤǧȤʤСθĿͤ˲ݤֵ̳פϲˤʤ
Τ褦ˡָλפͤϤȡ٤³ȵ󤬤äƤ롥ҲؤȤΥơޤǤ롥˻񤹤뻲͵Ȥָλפεåɤ

Referrer (Inside): [2023-06-28-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2018-11-22 Thu

#3496. Highland Clearances Scottish Gaelic ζػ [history][celtic][scottish_gaelic][language_death]

åȥɹϤǤϡȷϤθǤ Scottish Gaelic ߤԤʤƤʷˤĤƤϡ#774. ȸʬۡ ([2011-06-10-1]) 򻲾ȡˡEthnologue Scottish Gaelic ˤȡ2011ǯפ57,400ͤۤɤüԤȤüԿ͸鷺ʤΤ Irish Breton ʤɤ¾ΥȷϽȤӤ졤пȤƤСֿפǤ뤳Ȥϴְ㤤ʤåȥɤǤ϶ʴѤˤĤοʤƤ뤬ͽǤʤǤ롥
#1719. Scotland ˤѸˡ ([2014-01-10-1]) ǸȤꡤåȥɤϤǤϡ11ȤˤᤤʳѸ줬ƩƤϤǤ϶˻ޤ Scottish Gaelic Ū˹ԤʤƤϰ褬Ѹ첽ȤΤϡ182٤ˤ錄른㥳ХȤȿ1715ǯ1745ǯˤθˡϤŰŪưä줿 Highland Clearances ʥϥˤ椨Ǥ롥ϡ֥åȥɹΰϰ褫͡ΩफϤȤϤ߱ưפǤꡤ¿ΥåȥɿͤΩभ;ʤ졤ꥫϤäƤä
1745ǯȿ "the Forty-five" ˤꡤꥹܤϡϤο͡˥Ѥػߤ붯Ժ˽Ф (103) βѤ롥

ϻȬȬǯ̾̿κݤΦ˴֥̿ƥ󲦥ॺˤλٻԤϡ̾Υƥͳ褷ƥ㥳ХȤȸƤФ褦ˤʤäϡ켷ǯ켷͸ǯʰʲեƥեȸƤ֡ˤˡॺλ¹ʥåȥɲȤΩơ졼ȥ֥ƥܤä٤Υ㥳ХȤȿǤϡȿطʤ䤽ٻԤưϰۤʤäƤϥɤοͤӤΤ졼ȥ֥ƥܤ񹳤Ƥ褦˸ʤ줿եƥեθ塤ܤȿ˲ôϥɤλ²Ĺκ⻺׼ʼĸŪʻˡåơϥɿͤΰȤƤΥȤʤɤȤˤĤ뤳ȤػߤʸǤХѥפ䥲λѤؤȿԤݼʤϻȼԤϼǯ֤ήȤȳȤʤä


Ʊ18θȾˤϡϲؤ줿ΤΡʹߡϥɤˤ Scottish Gaelic οȤʤä (105) ۩

Ȭ˰ѶػߤȤʤäƤǤϤ뤬󡻡ǯǤΥåȥɤǤϡϻͤοͤӤȤäȤƤꡤƱϡ֥衼åϰ辯ϡפˤޤޤƤ롥ϰΥˤϥؤ֥åΩ졤åȥǤ⥲Υ饸ƥȤǤƤꡤŪ˥˿ĶĤĤ롥


Τ Scottish Gaelic ϡǯġפĤĤ褦ȤƴŪˤ뤳Ȥϴְ㤤ʤ褷ƳڴѻϤǤʤ#2006. ḽ衼åѤǼΧƤ ([2014-10-24-1]) 򻲾ȡ

ˡؤϤƳؤ֥ꥹˤʸ١ߥͥ˼2012ǯ

[ | ѥڡ ]

2018-10-14 Sun

#3457. ܤξǴ졦 [language_death][ainu][japanese][dialect]

λˤĤơ(language_death) γƵˤƤ椬ˤŪʾˤʣ뤬ǧΤƤȤϤʤ1011ȯԤKODOMOʹˡ꤬夲ƤΤǡƤñ˾Ҳ𤷤
졦λϥͥĴǧԤʤäƤ뤬2009ǯˤС̸ϡ־ǤδˤƿפȤƤ롥ߡ̳ƻ13ͤۤɥ̤ο͡餷ƤȤ뤬̸ή礦äΤ10ͰʲȤ롥
ޤ־Ǥδפˤ졦ȤƤϡȬŻ졤Ϳ졤졤Ƭʤˤߡ˸졤졤ܸŸ졤Ȭ줬󤲤Ƥ롥ǯNHKϥɥޡɤ٤Ǥϡα̤ǡդ˻뤬դ줿Ȥˤʤä¾̺ҤϤν־ǤδפȤʸģʤɤĴ¸ʤƤ롥
ܤܤȡ졦λϤ˿Ǥ롥ͥˤ7000ۤɤΤʤǡ2500θ줬ǤδˤȤͳȤƤϡҳʶ衤̱ϲԻؤοͤΰưʤɤ󤲤졤ưפǤϤʤ100ǯ֤400θ줬Ǥ˾ǤȤ졤ν礵롥
ϢơȤ櫓#276. ˤǴδ٥ ([2010-01-28-1])#277. ʤξǤ򵤤ˤΤ ([2010-01-29-1])#280. Τ˴Ϣ륵ȡ ([2010-02-01-1])#1786. 츢ȸλࡤλ ([2014-03-18-1]) 򻲾Ȥ줿

Referrer (Inside): [2023-06-28-1] [2019-01-23-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2018-05-20 Sun

#3310. ʪǴȸǴ [language_death][world_languages][hel_education]

319˥˥ǥΥκǸĤ֥פȤ˥塼ɤ1960ǯˤϥ2300Ƭ©ƤѤ̩ĤԤʤ졤2000ǯˤθΤǤƤߡĤ2Ƭϥ᥹ΤߤʤΤ˿ǤμǤꤷ
ݼݸϢ (IUCN) δˤС2017ǯ9ɽΥåɥꥹȤζʬȼοϰʲ̤517 KoDoMo ʹˡ֤ǼʬǴפǤꡤ25062郎ζʬ°롥

ʬο
859
68
ǴIA5403
ǴIB8152
ǴII11507
Ǵ5691
¾3ʬ56287
87967


򺣡ʪǴˤĤƤϡΡ֥פΤ褦ˤФйŪȤʤ뤬Ǵָλ (language_death) ˤĤƤϥ˥塼ʤɤ礭夲뵡ϤۤȤɤʤȤäƤ褤ƱǡʴˤǤʤ顤ǧ٤κϲͳ褹Τλ͡ʳ٤ǽǤꡤҲؤΥǥåιơޤȤʤ롥ѤäȻפĤȤǤϡΤ褦ʵ䤬󤲤롥

⤽λȤϲ
ʤλϵΤ
λ¾
ޤǤɤθ줬Τ
ߡǤɤθ줬ǤΤ
줬ޤȤȤϤΤ
ɤ餻뤳ȤϤǤΤ
λθͰŪ˵ߤȤϤǤΤϤɤΤ褦ˤ
λͫ٤ȤʤʤΤ뤤ϤǤϤʤΤ
λȹ碌ơλˤĤƤϤɤΤ褦˹ͤ٤
ʪȸǤǤϡƱǡۤʤ뤫
ǤѸϡλȤɤؤäƤ뤫
ĤѸܸˤʤΤ

¿ˤĤơ#274. üԿ ([2010-01-26-1])#276. ˤǴδ٥ ([2010-01-28-1])#277. ʤξǤ򵤤ˤΤ ([2010-01-29-1])#280. Τ˴Ϣ륵ȡ ([2010-02-01-1])#1786. 츢ȸλࡤλ ([2014-03-18-1]) Ϥ language_death γƵǹͤƤȤʤɤDzƵƤߤȹͤƤ롥

[ | ѥڡ ]

2018-03-09 Fri

#3238. [language_shift][language_death][bilingualism][diglossia][terminology][sociolinguistics][irish][terminology]

ܥ֥Ǥϡ (language_shift) ٤夲ƤϸäͤƤߤ褦Trudgill Crystal Ѹ콸ˤС줾켡Τ褦ˤ롥

language shift The opposite of language maintenance. The process whereby a community (often a linguistic minority) gradually abandons its original language and, via a (sometimes lengthy) stage of bilingualism, shifts to another language. For example, between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries, Ireland shifted from being almost entirely Irish-speaking to being almost entirely English-speaking. Shift most often takes place gradually, and domain by domain, with the original language being retained longest in informal family-type contexts. The ultimate end-point of language shift is language death. The process of language shift may be accompanied by certain interesting linguistic developments such as reduction and simplification. (Trudgill)


language shift A term used in sociolinguistics to refer to the gradual or sudden move from the use of one language to another, either by an individual or by a group. It is particularly found among second- and third-generation immigrants, who often lose their attachment to their ancestral language, faced with the pressure to communicate in the language of the host country. Language shift may also be actively encouraged by the government policy of the host country. (Crystal)


ؤϸĿͤ佸Ĥ뤳Ȥ⤢뤬奢ɤǼƤȤꡤ򤫤ơ٤äȿʤळȤ¿ϢơؤϤФ bilingualism ʳͳȤ⤢뤬Ȥˤ줬ٲ diglossia ξ֤߽Ф⤢뤳Ȥ˿Ƥ
ޤؤϰ̱δ֤䤹Ȥ⿨Ƥ뤬ާƸС͡ưȤ˸ؤϵ䤹ȤȤʡ#3065. ԻԲ¡ء ([2017-09-17-1]
ɤŪ˵äʤ뤤Ϻ³Ƥ˸ؤˤĤƤϡ#2798. ̦رѸȤ򡡥ɤκ١ȽŹ2016ǯ ([2016-12-24-1])#1715. Ireland ˤѸˡ ([2014-01-06-1])#2803. ɸüԿ͸Ȼϰ ([2016-12-29-1])#2804. ɤˤߤΤͤ츽ݡ ([2016-12-30-1]) 򻲾ȡ

Trudgill, Peter. A Glossary of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Crystal, David, ed. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008. 295--96.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-05-31 Tue

#2591. ťΥɸϤĤޤǥ󥰥ɤǻȤƤ [old_norse][bilingualism][emode][language_death]

ɸˤĤƤϡ#1149. The Aldbrough Sundial ([2012-06-19-1]) ǿ줿 Page ʸΤۤĤͤ롥μˤΤʷФʤȤ¿ƤԤˤäưոϤޤޤǤ롥ǤϡBaugh and Cable (92--93) θ򼨤

Although in some places the Scandinavians gave up their language early, there were certainly communities in which Danish or Norse remained for some time the usual language. Up until the time of the Norman Conquest the Scandinavian language in England was constantly being renewed by the steady stream of trade and conquest. In some parts of Scotland, Norse was still spoken as late as the seventeenth century. In other districts in which the prevailing speech was English, there were doubtless many of the newcomers who continued to speak their own language at least as late as 1100 and a considerable number who were to a greater or lesser degree bilingual. The last-named circumstance is rendered more likely by the frequent intermarriage between the two peoples and by the similarity between the two tongues. The Anglian dialect resembled the language of the Northmen in a number of particulars in which West Saxon showed divergence. The two may even have been mutually intelligible to a limited extent. Contemporary statements on the subject are conflicting, and it is difficult to arrive at a conviction. But wherever the truth lies in this debatable question, there can be no doubt that the basis existed for an extensive interaction of the two languages upon each other, and this conclusion is amply borne out by the large number of Scandinavian elements subsequently found in English.


Danelaw ϰˤƤ1100ǯ餤ޤǸťΥɸ줬äƤȿ¬Ƥ뤬θˤĤƤϸڤʤҲŪХ󥬥ˤĿŪХ󥬥ˤ衤٤κä٤䤷̤褦ľܡܤʸʤȤʤȡ٤Ƥϲ¬ΰФʤȤˤʤ롥
ΰѤˤϥåȥɤΰˤťΥɸλѤˤĤ17ޤǷ³ƤȤθڤ뤬Ϣơ#828. Shetland ([2011-08-03-1]) ε⻲Ȥ줿Shetland ǤϡťΥɸ줫1Ѽ錄 Norn λѤ18ޤ³Ƥ褦Ǥ롥

Page, R. I. "How Long Did the Scandinavian Language Survive in England? The Epigraphical Evidence." England Before the Conquest: Studies in Primary Sources Presented to Dorothy Whitelock. Ed. P. Clemoes and K. Hughes. Cambridge: CUP, 1971. 165--81.
Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 2013.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-05-21 Sat

#2581. ҲؼԤˤŪˤĤ [sociolinguistics][language_planning][language_death][language_myth][linguistic_imperialism]

#1381. "interventionist" sociolinguistics ([2013-02-06-1])#1518. ([2013-06-23-1])#2039. դ˴ؤ¯⡦äȸŪ ([2014-11-26-1]) εǸ褦ˡ (language_planning) ϤȤŪᤰäƤϡҲؼԤδ֤ˤ礭ʰոγ֤꤬롥ȤƤαѸʤ褦ʲȼƤ椯ν򲿤Ȥ̿ݸ褦Ȥɸꤷ褦ȤѤ夹Ҳؼ Wardhaugh ϡȸؼԤβˤĤϤκǸˡΤ褦ʿŤΩɽƤ롥

There is a paradox here: linguists are sometimes told that they save languages best by not acting at all; certainly they should do nothing to promote English in the world, or to standardize a language, or possibly to help in any kind of language planning anywhere. Yet, there is no assurance that they will save a single language by not acting. An alternative possibility is that intervention actually slows down decline and loss. However, there is really no hard evidence for either position. Each is essentially ideologically driven: if you believe this you do one thing and if you believe that you do another. We do well to remember that because we are involved in socio-linguistic matters, ideology is likely to be at least as potent a factor as scientific findings in determining any approach we may adopt. We will also have to confront issues of identity and power. We might be well advised to tread cautiously.


ͰŪʸŪ䡤˴ؤɽϡ켫ΤҲؤΥ᥿ŪǤꡤоݤȤʤΤǤ롥ҲؼԤϡ˼ʾʻԤʤʤФʤʤΩˤȤȤˤʤ

Wardhaugh, Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 6th ed. Malden: Blackwell, 2010.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-04-19 Tue

#2549. ȤƤαѸ¦ [native_speaker_problem][language_death][sociolinguistics][elf][lingua_franca][model_of_englishes][linguistic_imperialism][ecolinguistics]

Ѹ줬Ū lingua_franca ȤƤ뤳ȤϡѸȤ˹Ū٤򼨤ԤˤȤäƴФäˤʤˤϤΤ褦˹ͤʤԤ¿롥ŪŪʸŪŪ¾ͳǡѸؤȿ͡ϴְ㤤ʤ¸ߤ뤷ʤȤѶŪˤϹդ򼨤ʤͤ¿Ѹˤξ¦̤롥襳ߥ˥ƻȤƤαѸѤʤɡ¦̤ϹǧƤΤǡ¦̤ܤ
Ѹ¦̤ϡѸȽεǽ˻ŦƤ롥üŪˤСѸȽȤϡѸˤäƻۤ뤳ȤǿŪǽȤոǤʡ#1606. Ѹ캹̡ѸƸ ([2013-09-19-1]) linguistic_imperialism γƵ򻲾Ȥ줿ˡޤѸϡޥΥƥλ (language_death) ĹƤȤ¦̤Ŧ롥ˡ̣ȤˡѸ줬ĥ¿첽ƤȤ¤⤢ꡤѸΤߤäѸüԤϡˤƤषΩ֤ƤΤǤϤʤȤŦ롥 native_speaker_problem ȤդλϡBaugh and Cable (7) Ѹ "mixed blessing" (= something that has advantages and disadvantages) ȤƸڤƤ롥

Recent awareness of "engendered languages" and a new sensitivity to ecolinguistics have made clear that the success of English brings problems in its wake. The world is poorer when a language dies on average every two weeks. For native speakers of English as well, the status of the English language can be a mixed blessing, especially if the great majority of English speakers remain monolingual. Despite the dominance of English in the European Union, a British candidate for an international position may be at a disadvantage compared with a young EU citizen from Bonn or Milan or Lyon who is nearly fluent in English.


ѸŪ¦̤Τɾ뤳Ȥʤ줾˺ꤹ뤳Ȥο

Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable. A History of the English Language. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 2013.

Referrer (Inside): [2023-02-14-1]

[ | ѥڡ ]

2016-03-18 Fri

#2517. ŵȤϲ [variety][sociolinguistics][terminology][language_death][standardisation][religion][history][latin][greek][sanskrit][arabic]

ѸˤϤ˸ؤˤؤǤȡФŵ (classical language) ȤѸ˽Ф魯ŵŵŪϡΡʻˡˤθŵʸŵȷӤĤȤƤΥƥ (Latin) ŵꥷ (Ancient Greek) Ǥ롥ŵϸ (modern language) ΩΤǤꡤָŵ (dead language)פȤϢۤ줽ۤñʤΤǤϤʤ (cf. #645. Ѹ ([2011-02-01-1])) ŵ°ȤƤϡ (vitality) ΤۤΧ (autonomy) ɸ (standardisation) פǤ (see #1522. autonomy heteronomy ([2013-06-27-1])) Trudgill (22) Ѹ콸

classical language A language which has the characteristics of autonomy and standardisation but which does not have the characteristic of vitality, that is, although it used to have native speakers, it no longer does so. Classical European languages include Latin and Ancient Greek. The ancient Indian language Sanskrit, an ancestor of modern North Indian languages such as Hindi and Bengali, is another example of a classical language, as is Classical Arabic. Classical languages generally survive because they are written languages which are known non-natively as a result of being used for purposes of religion or scholarship. Latin has been associated with Catholicism, Sanskrit with Hinduism, and Classical Arabic with Islam.


ܤˤƤϡŤ졤ʸŵȤưƤʸϡߤǤŪѼԤʤȤ̣ vitality 礤Ƥ뤬ˤ autonomy standardisation ǧ졤䡦ۤȶӤĤƤ񤭸դѼǤ롥
ʤŵΤ⤦1Ĥ°Ȥơΰˤ⼨ƤΤΡŪʸ (historical authority) Ū˲äƤ褤ΤǤϤʤȻפ롥

Trudgill, Peter. A Glossary of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

[ | ѥڡ ]

2014-11-01 Sat

#2014. ꥢ (2) [history_of_linguistics][neolinguistics][neogrammarian][wave_theory][substratum_theory][historiography][loan_translation][language_death][origin_of_language]

ε#2013. ꥢ (1) ([2014-10-31-1]) ˰³γɤξҲ𡥿ؤ1910ǯо줷Ƥ30;ǯвᤷΤȤؽѻ Language ˡǯʸˡ (neogrammarian) ʸ Hall ˤ뿷ؤؤȽʸǺܤ줿Фơǯ3ܤʬ̤ʸϤˤꡤɤ Bonfante ػŪˤϤΥߥ󥰤ǤäܼɤȤ館뤨뤫Ȥ˴ؤȤʤäƤꡤɤͤ롥Ωϡ19 Schleicher Schmidt ΩʤȤ뤷ߤθؤȼҲؤΩˤʤ館뤳ȤǤ롥
ˤƤ⡤Hall ϤʤޤǶȽΤȻפ虜ʤ餤˿ؤ򤳤Ƥ롥ȽʸκǽǤϡ"We have, in short, missed nothing by not knowing or heeding Bàrtoli's principles, theories, or conclusions to date, and we shall miss nothing if we disregard them in the future." (283) Ȥˤ٤ʤ
ؤäΩĴפȤθѤܼϡषȽԤǤ Hall (277) Ŭڤ˻ŦƤ롥εƤȹ碌̣ɤ줿

In a reaction against 19th-century positivism, Croce and his followers consider 'spirit' and 'spiritual activity' (assumed axiomatically, without objective definition) as separate from and superior to other elements of human behavior. Human thought is held to be a direct expression of spiritual activity; language is considered identical with thought; and hence linguistic activity derives directly from spiritual activity. As a corollary of this assumption, when linguistic change takes place, it is held to reflect change in spiritual activity, which must be the reflection of 'spiritual needs', 'creativity', and 'advance of the human spirit'. The most 'spiritual' part of language is syntax and style, and the least spiritual is phonology. Hence phonetic change must not be allowed to have any weight as a determining factor in linguistic change as a whole; it must be considered subordinate to and dependent on other, more 'spiritual' types of linguistic change.


Bonfante ˤ⡤Ʊ餤ŰŪǤ롥Bonfante ϡؤΩʱѸǡ˾ܽҤƤꡤȤ櫓ǯʸˡɤȤΰ㤤Ŧʤ餽ħ⤷ƤƤΤǡŪˤ餯Ǥ⥢䤹ؤγ1ĤȤʤäƤΤǤϤʤHall μĥΤ褯ޤȤ뤳Ȥ񤷤ΤǡĤΰѤäƤ夨ʡ#1069. ե顼ɡɡ --- üԸĿͤοŤ󤸤ѡ ([2012-03-31-1]) εҤ⻲Ȥ줿

The neolinguists claim . . . that every linguistic change---not only phonetic change---is a spiritual human process, not a physiological process. Physiology cannot EXPLAIN anything in linguistics; it can present only the conditions of a given phenomenon, never the causes. (346)

It is man who creates language, every moment, by his will and with his imagination; language is not imposed upon man like an exterior, ready-made product of mysterious origin. (346)

Every linguistic change, the neolinguists claim, is . . . of individual origin: in its beginnings it is the free creation of one man, which is imitated, assimilated (not copied!) by another man, and then by another, until it spreads over a more-or-less vast area. This creation will be more or less powerful, will have more or less chance of surviving and spreading, according to the creative power of the individual, his social influence, his literary reputation, and so on. (347)

For the neolinguists, who follow Vico's and Croce's philosophy, language is essentially expression---esthetic creation; the creation and the spread of linguistic innovations are quite comparable to the creation and the spread of feminine fashions, of art, of literature: they are based on esthetic choice. (347)

The neolinguists, tho stressing the esthetic nature of language, know that language, like every human phenomenon, is produced under certain special historical conditions, and that therefore the history of the French language cannot be written without taking into account the whole history of France---Christianity, the Germanic invasions, Feudalism, the Italian influence, the Court, the Academy, the French Revolution, Romanticism, and so on---nay, that the French language is an expression, an essential part of French culture and French spirit. (348)

The neolinguists think, like Leonardo, Humboldt, and Àscoli, that languages change in most cases because of ethnic mixture, by which they understand, of course, not racial mixture but cultural, i.e. spiritual. In this spiritual sense, and only in this sense, the terms 'substratum', 'adstratum', and 'superstratum' can be admitted. (352)

Without a deep understanding of English mentality, politics, religion, and folklore, all of which the English language expresses, a real history of English cannot be written---only a shadow or a caricature thereof. (354)
 
The neogrammarians have shown, of course, even greater aversion to so-called loan-translations, which the neolinguists freely admit. For the neogrammarians, a word like German Gewissen or Barmherzigkeit is a perfectly good German formation, because all the phonetic and morphological elements are German---even tho the spirit is Latin. (356)

. . . even after the death of that 'last speaker', each of these languages [Prussian, Cornish, Dalmatian, etc.]---allegedly dead, like rabbits---goes on living in a hundred devious, hidden, and subtle ways in other languages now living . . . . (357)

It follows logically that because of their isolationistic conception of language, the neogrammarians, when they are confronted with two similar innovations in two different languages, will be inclined to the theory of polygenesis---even if the languages are contiguous and historically related, like German and French, or Greek and Latin. The neolinguists, on the other hand, without making a dogma of it, incline strongly toward monogenesis. (361)


ǸΰѤˤ褦ˡǯʸˡɤȿɤΩϸ쵯ˤޤǵڤǤꡤۤΤ̤ŰŪȿܤƤȤ狼롥

Hall, Robert A. "Bartoli's 'Neolinguistica'." Language 22 (1946): 273--83.
Bonfante, Giuliano. "The Neolinguistic Position (A Reply to Hall's Criticism of Neolinguistics)." Language 23 (1947): 344--75.

[ | ѥڡ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow