Re: Language revival (was Re: Which auxlangs? (was Re: I won't[to] start a flame war))

Raymond Brown wrote:
> This'll always be a problem where a culture has an ancient history but
> where the language has changed greatly.  But even keeping the older forms
> does not IME overcome this.  Our _written_ language has not changed much
> since Shakespeare's time (especially as Shakespeare's inconsistent
> orthography is generally regularized according to modern practice!) - but
> his writings are not readily accessible to many of the younger generation -
> and Chaucer certainly isn't.  It requires work.
Yes, but we can read documents from 1900 with no problem.  That's what
David was referring to.  Imagine if we had a similar change.  Well, what
if you wanted to read a book written around 1900?  Unless it happened to
be "translated" into the modern orthography, or you knew the old, it
would be inaccessible to you.

--
"Old linguists never die - they just come to voiceless stops." -
anonymous
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/Books.html
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTailor