[PW] Re: Hypothetical cultural divergence

[cvj at hcvco.com]

And your source(s) for your statements would be ...?  Connie

>>On the other hand, until "modern" communications and anthropologists
>>muddied the waters, the language spoken in Appalachia was very much
>>closer to Elizabethan English that it was to contemporary American, so
>>there's an example of a language "freezing" in an isolated community.
>
> This is a common myth but unsupported by the evidence.
>
>>From Language Myths
>> (http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/%7Emcginn/LanguageMyths.html)
> Myth 9: In The Appalachians They Speak Like Shakespeare (Michael
> Montgomery)
>
> "Thesis:  In many parts of Appalachia the local dialect is very close to
> Elizabethan English as spoken around the year 1600.  This myth was
> formulated by outsiders, and is very is robust for two reasons:  it is
> romantic (hence attractive); and it is and politically useful (helps
> outsiders appreciate the mountain folk).
>
> "Antithesis:  But the so-called attractiveness of the myth does not make
> it
> true.  The thesis is of doubtful validity because:
>
> "a. It is vague—so much so that linguists are not interested in exploring
> it
> "b. It often cites wrong examples:  clumb and fotch and tee-toncey
> (`tiny’)
> are not actually Elizabethan.
> "c. It is historically wrong—Appalachians didn’t come from England at all;
> most were from Scotland and Northern Ireland, and also from all over
> Europe.
> "d. It is misleading—Appalachian children cannot read and understand
> Shakespeare any better than children from other dialect areas.
>
> "Synthesis:  Appalachian English does contain quite a few archaisms which
> are also found in Chaucer and Shakespeare:  holp, afeard, learn (meaning
> `teach’)."
>
> Remember, however, that all forms of Modern English retain features of
> Elizabethan English.  This is why English speakers today can understand
> 400-year-old plays and the King James Version of the Bible.  (See
> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002699.html ).
>
> Also in Language Log, at
> http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002352.html , are
> links
> to recordings of reconstructed pronunciation of Shakespeare's plays.  I
> have
> never heard an Appalachian speak like that.  (I was born and raised in
> North Carolina and my mother's entire family hails from West Virginia,
so > I've heard a bit.)
>
> As for the original question: Significant language change in 300 years is
> definitely within the realm of possibility.  However, for the languages to
> actually be 100% mutually unintelligible (usually the hallmark of a
> distinct
> language; the definition of dialect vs. language isn't always clear,
> though), it's unlikely, as Dan pointed out quite well.  Take that
> Elizabethan example: admittedly with some effort, most Modern English
> speakers can make sense of Shakespeare or the KJV.  That's how much our
> language has changed in nearly 400 years on its own.
>
> A question about the Pacific Islanders Peter mentioned: Where did you read
> about that?  It seems like it would be difficult for a community of any
> size to radically change its vocabulary every time an individual died.
>
> Autumn Trenton
>
>> >Hello,
>> >
>> >I've had a friend ask me a hypothetical, possibly unanswerable
>> question,
>>and I
>> >thought this excellent listserv would be the best shot of giving me
>>direction
>> >toward finding some sort of answer. The question, in my friend's words,
>>is:
>> >
>> >If you have a fairly homogeneous group of people that speak a common
>>language
>> >that are then sundered by a cataclysm, following which the different
>>groups
>> >remain fairly insular with little to no communication with each other
>> or outside cultures, how long would it take the languages to diverge?
>> After, say,
>> >300 years, would they be separate languages or dialects? What types of
>> >differences would one expect? I want fairly pronounced differences of
>>custom
>> >and ritual, but this would no doubt be accompanied by divergence in
>>language as well.
>> >
>> >I believe this is for a book he is writing.
>> >
>> >I realize that there are probably not any "real life" anthropological
>>examples
>> >that could provide evidence of this scenario, but it is possible to
>> find
>> >scholarly speculation about the time needed for cultural and linguistic
>> >divergence? I am aware of glottochronology theories, but they are not
>>very accepted amongst linguists.