Re: Language naming terminology

Steg Belsky wrote:

> >Americans tend to see themselves as a special nation, that is somehow
> >different from the rest of the world, much as Israel saw and sees
> >itself as unique (this would seem to be confirmed by a recent poll, where
>
> >something like 71% of those polled held something like that belief).
>
> That is very very weird....  In Judaism there are two concepts, _or
> lagoyim_ (a light to the nations) and _`am sgulah_ (treasure-nation),
> which can be interpreted at first glance as being somewhat similar to
> that, but Israel is primarily secular, and most of Israelis are secular,
> so i don't see how they would get that attitude.  But Israel is pretty
> unique anyway....you usually don't see a nation come back to life for a
> *second time* after more than a thousand years of nonexistence.
> And they should have called it Judea anyway ;)
Well, admittedly, only some Jews nowadays see it that way, but that
was the closest analogy I could think of.  I'm sure that kind of belief
was quite a lot stronger in Biblical days.  The underlying similarity is
ideological;  while the Jews have spiritual religion (which one might
view in some sense as an ideology, although that's an oversimplification),
Americans have, in the words of George Will, a "civic religion", a common
ideology which defines what we are, more or less.  Like he said, nobody
knows how you become French or German (the origins of whom are lost in the
midst of the primoridial past);  people not only know how you
become an American, but we know the date it all started (officially).
(apologies to my non-American friends out there who think I'm
being a little Americanocentric. :)  )

Anyways (to put this on a linguistic track), that kind of Weltanschauung
helps to define the ways we look at language.  As for me, I cherish the
little things like the Southern use of "y'all" which (aside from being
infinitely
useful :) ) are a means of identifying yourself as a Southerner.  They
connect
me, and others who hold the same belief, to those good things in the South
(this doesn't mean we ignore the bad;  we just choose to celebrate the
good).
When you use those little things, they remind you of the good things that
were accomplished in the past, and connect you to your heritage.

(By the way, in saying this, I think being patriotic, loving one's country,
is not mutually exclusive with multiculturalism;  I can choose to celebrate
any number of cultures, as there is no culture which is wholly bad or wholly

strange, or wholly good or wholly understandable for that matter)

Well, enough of waxing lyrical. :)   There was one more comment I wanted
to make about the history of the Jews:  it almost seems to me a greater
accomplishment that along with that social resurrection there was a
concomitant
linguistic resurrection, in a sense;  Rabbinical Hebrew had been pretty much

as close to dead as one could be without actually _being_ dead, and the fact

that they were able to achieve this is, linguistically, a feat of "Biblical"
proportions. :)
When one compares the experiences of the Jews with those of the Irish and
how
those people attempted to resurrect their language from obsolescence, it is
almost
astonishing.  The Irish government has, as much as almost any other
government
on earth, been dedicated from the get-go to reestablishing Irish (or Gaelic)
as
the national language, both in writing and speaking.  There the problem was
that
the Irish have not, to date, fostered the sense of unity and commonality
that the
Jews have done, and therewith have not been able to give their efforts with
respect to language the extra boost that would be needed; it's just a fact
that
without the popular support, the actions of any popularly elected government

will be fruitless before they begin.

So, for these reasons, and for all the other examples which are too numerous
to
recount here, it would seem to be shown that something fundamental about
human nature and language in particular as part of that nature exists that
makes people
want to associate something higher with the mundanity of something so
everyday,
so commonplace as language.  It is, in almost any situation of cultural
conflict, one
of the pivotal axes around which the conflict turns. It is also the same
thing that can
bring people to tears when used in a certain way, much as hearing the
eloquence
of the Declaration of Independence does for Americans. Perhaps it is that
very
mundanity, that very commonality which is so closely associated with the
experiences
of youth that makes people want to create something ex nihilo; or perhaps,
there is
something, something yet unfound, that is there for the picking, which is so
at
the heart of being human that, yet it exists, may not soon or ever be
brought to
light.  It is a very curious thing, language is.


=======================================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
ICQ#: 4315704   AIM: Deuterotom
Website: <http://www.angelfire.com/tx/eclectorium/>
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."

We look at [the Tao], and do not see it;
  Its name is the Invisible.
                 - Lao Tsu, _Tao Te Ching_

Nature is wont to hide herself.
                 - Herakleitos
========================================================