Re: glossogenesis (was: Indo-European question)
| From: | Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Saturday, June 23, 2001, 20:11 |
|---|
Tommie L Powell wrote:
> could create language
> boundaries (so that each tribe could develop a distinct
> language of its own).
I don't get your argument. For one thing, even today there are
frequently no distinct borders between languages, but rather chains of
dialects.
> A single band couldn't have ever
> created a distinct language, because (before tribalization)
> it was continually meeting up with (and communicating
> with, and intermarrying with) other bands that spoke slightly
> differently (and which had to speak slightly differently because
> each of those other bands was likewise continually meeting up
> with -- and communicating with, and intermarrying with --
> still other bands that spoke slightly differently from them).
How would meeting up with people speaking similarly impede language?
Your argument is making no sense. "Distinct languages" often don't
exist *today*, borders between languages are often arbitrary.
--
Cenedl heb iaith, cenedl heb galon
A nation without a language is a nation without a heart - Welsh proverb
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTaylor42
Reply