Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Do all languages have a "turning point"?

  Tags: Linguistics | History
 Language Learning Forum : Philological Room Post Reply
38 messages over 5 pages: 13 4 5  Next >>
basica
Senior Member
Australia
Joined 3316 days ago

157 posts - 269 votes 
Studies: Serbian

 
 Message 9 of 38
21 April 2015 at 6:13am | IP Logged 
Quote:
it's not routine to read works from before about 1900 in Dutch due to
the very different structure.


While the situation sounds more drastic than it is in English, I'd say that this is also a common issue in English. I find novels from say before the 1850s tedious to read either due to the vastly different style (generally too verbose for my tastes) or a host of unfamiliar vocabulary - the later could be resolved obviously if I read more books from that period, but I have yet to find many books that have caught my interest - at least enough to make that sort of deliberate impact.

EDIT: one misplaced digit, 100 year difference.

Edited by basica on 23 April 2015 at 4:56am

1 person has voted this message useful



1e4e6
Octoglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4070 days ago

1013 posts - 1588 votes 
Speaks: English*, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Norwegian, Dutch, Swedish, Italian
Studies: German, Danish, Russian, Catalan

 
 Message 10 of 38
21 April 2015 at 7:22am | IP Logged 
Serpent wrote:

What kind of native speakers are we talking about? Like, what about you personally -
can you read that old literature? Do you know the subjunctive conjugation even if you
never use it? Or is it mostly limited to scholars?

Just curious, obviously.


I read half of a self-teaching grammar manual-book for Dutch that was written for
people from the UK who wanted to learn Dutch as a foreign language. It was published
in the 1700s, and it reminded me very much of German. It looked like a dialect of
German.

I think that the declinations were like this (I may have got it wrong):

nom/gen/dat/acc
masculine sing: den/des/den/den
feminine sing: de/der/der/de
neuter sing: het/des/den/het
plurals: de/der/den/de

Then it goes on to decline with other words, like dezen, dezer, mijnen, mijner,
zijnen, zijner, harer, eenen, eener, eens, and all sorts of combinations, just like
German. It obviously looks very similar to German "einen", "meinen", "deinem",
"seiner" and such.

I found it on Google Books:

A Grammar of the Dutch Language, Baldwin Janson,
published London, (1792/MDCCXCII)


It is a bit funny that it seems to stress that the reader should learn his or her
declinations and verb conjugations because there are many. Of course the modern
language is not like this anymore though.

Especially funny-sounding is this example sentence on page 44:

Den koning heeft eene gunste raad gejont aan mynen vader/The king has granted a
favour to my father


Verbs also had many conjugations, like German:

page 86: (if the "du" conjugation were included, I think that it would be "du
aarbeidedst"

"I did labour"

Ik aarbeidede
gy aarbeidede
hy aarbeidede
wy aarbeideden
gyl aarbeidede
zy aarbeideden


Edited by 1e4e6 on 21 April 2015 at 7:56am

1 person has voted this message useful



shk00design
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 4224 days ago

747 posts - 1123 votes 
Speaks: Cantonese*, English, Mandarin
Studies: French

 
 Message 11 of 38
21 April 2015 at 8:36am | IP Logged 
The problem with Chinese is that we don't have any sound recordings until the 20th century. The writing have
gone through over 2000 years of transformations starting with the writing on turtle shells. There were once
several types of characters in use until the first Emperor in the 3rd century BCE decided to phase out different
types of characters in favour of just 1. When it comes to dialects, there has always been many. Each Chinese
province would have a distinctive dialect and a number of sub-dialects. At one time communication was poor
that people in different parts of the country would only understand each other by writing Chinese characters
down on paper. Now people who are educated in China would be able to speak Mandarin at some level.
Communication naturally becomes easier. There are still a lot of expat Chinese who would communicate with
each other in English because person A speaks Cantonese & English and person B speaks Mandarin &
English.

In the mid-20th century, Chinese writing used in Mainland China became simplified. However, the people in
Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau continued to use Traditional characters while China, Singapore and the
Chinese communities in S-E Asia have adopted Simplified characters as well. Between writing 中國 for China
and 中国 with the second character 國 & 国 being different is enough to make a block of text unintelligible to a
group of Chinese who are used to 1 style of writing over the other.

More recently, there are new characters added to dialects such as Cantonese used in Hong Kong and Minnan
(a variation of Hokkien dialect) in Taiwan. People do write in the Cantonese dialect which uses would
frequently use different words & phrases than standard Mandarin.

Like all languages including English, change occur not only with spelling and syntax from old to modern
English. There are new words & phrases that would not have existed 100 years ago and things that used to be
common a century ago is no longer in use. If you ask somebody what is an automobile a century ago nobody
would be able to tell you.

Some modern words added to the Chinese language include: 電腦 or 计算机 for computer. There is at least 1
word in the Chinese language like "Android 技能手机" for an Android mobile phone. The word "Android" only
came about in the last 5 years and the Chinese simply kept it in the original form without trying to make up a
new word in their language. Another loan word I came across recently is UFO (Unidentified Flying Object). The
common term is: 飞碟 (fēidié) for a flying disk. The term 幽浮 (yōufú) is also used as a loan word put together
phonetically to sound like "UFO".

Edited by shk00design on 21 April 2015 at 8:48am

1 person has voted this message useful



tarvos
Super Polyglot
Winner TAC 2012
Senior Member
China
likeapolyglot.wordpr
Joined 4487 days ago

5310 posts - 9399 votes 
Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans
Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish

 
 Message 12 of 38
21 April 2015 at 11:31am | IP Logged 
Serpent wrote:
tarvos wrote:
It is practically impossible for Dutch speakers to
read literature from before 1900, with the exception of Max Havelaar by Multatuli, and
it's not routine to read works from before about 1900 in Dutch due to the very
different structure.

The subjunctive also exists in Dutch, replete with conjugation, but is never used and
considered archaic. If you go back a 100 years maybe it was still used.

What kind of native speakers are we talking about? Like, what about you personally -
can you read that old literature? Do you know the subjunctive conjugation even if you
never use it? Or is it mostly limited to scholars?

Just curious, obviously.


No one uses the subjunctive ever, except in a few fixed expressions ("Lang leve de
koning!", long live the King). Maybe if you have studied French or Latin you know what
a subjunctive is (we call it aanvoegende wijs or conjunctief though). This verb form
is not taught at schools, not present in normal grammar books etc. It's only taught in
the context of languages that have it, and the only reason I knew about it was because
my French teacher was an excellent linguist (he also taught Latin, but not to me
personally) and he mentioned it in French class one day. But it never really came up
in Latin class that we have an equivalent.

I have read about it online on Wikipedia but would not be able to use it fluently
except for the 3rd person singular (because that is the one used in fixed expressions)
like "Moge hij" or "Men neme".

Honestly I haven't tried to read anything from before 1900 because it is not required
that you do (except for Multatuli maybe but I skipped Max Havelaar when we did that
topic; I read something more contemporary by van Dis). You study that there is such a
thing as older language, but you are not required to read it at all and the texts
quoted above by 1e4e6 already look quite strange to me.

I would say the use of the subjunctive is really limited to academic texts and the few
fixed instances that everyone knows about (and even then it is invoked as an
archaism).

The cases, however, were in full effect 100 years ago (though had receded from speech
in nearly all dialects) and were abolished in 1946 or 1947, depending on whether you
ask the Dutch or the Flemish. The reason we did away with them is because they were
quite simply not used in spoken language at all, and they were instated to make Dutch
sound more "noble" in analogy with Latin and German. Once it turned out that it hadn't
caught on, it was thrown away.

Edited by tarvos on 21 April 2015 at 11:35am

3 persons have voted this message useful



robarb
Nonaglot
Senior Member
United States
languagenpluson
Joined 4839 days ago

361 posts - 921 votes 
Speaks: Portuguese, English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, French
Studies: Mandarin, Danish, Russian, Norwegian, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Greek, Latin, Nepali, Modern Hebrew

 
 Message 13 of 38
21 April 2015 at 5:34pm | IP Logged 
tarvos wrote:

they were instated to make Dutch
sound more "noble" in analogy with Latin and German.


Were they really instated or were they just left in the written standard after they had been dropped from the spoken
language which presumably had them from Proto-West Germanic?
2 persons have voted this message useful



tarvos
Super Polyglot
Winner TAC 2012
Senior Member
China
likeapolyglot.wordpr
Joined 4487 days ago

5310 posts - 9399 votes 
Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans
Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish

 
 Message 14 of 38
22 April 2015 at 12:57am | IP Logged 
robarb wrote:
tarvos wrote:

they were instated to make Dutch
sound more "noble" in analogy with Latin and German.


Were they really instated or were they just left in the written standard after they had
been dropped from the spoken
language which presumably had them from Proto-West Germanic?


They were reinstated, to the best of my knowledge.

Edited by tarvos on 22 April 2015 at 12:57am

2 persons have voted this message useful



robarb
Nonaglot
Senior Member
United States
languagenpluson
Joined 4839 days ago

361 posts - 921 votes 
Speaks: Portuguese, English*, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, French
Studies: Mandarin, Danish, Russian, Norwegian, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Greek, Latin, Nepali, Modern Hebrew

 
 Message 15 of 38
22 April 2015 at 3:46am | IP Logged 
Interesting. So, in Dutch schools, do you read many foreign old books translated into contemporary Dutch? Or do
you read few or no old books at all? In American school, I remember reading several 19th century books (which was
never a big deal) plus many of the 16th and 17th century works of Shakespeare (which were hard for us to
understand, but eventually we either figured it out or relied on notes and translations). Another popular school book
which I've read, but not in school, is the 18th century Gulliver's Travels. And of course our US constitution is another
18th century document that we still read.

Edited by robarb on 22 April 2015 at 3:51am

1 person has voted this message useful



eyðimörk
Triglot
Senior Member
France
goo.gl/aT4FY7
Joined 3879 days ago

490 posts - 1158 votes 
Speaks: Swedish*, English, French
Studies: Breton, Italian

 
 Message 16 of 38
22 April 2015 at 8:49am | IP Logged 
tarvos wrote:
No one uses the subjunctive ever, except in a few fixed expressions ("Lang leve de koning!", long live the King). Maybe if you have studied French or Latin you know what a subjunctive is (we call it aanvoegende wijs or conjunctief though). This verb form is not taught at schools, not present in normal grammar books etc.

I suspect, without much data to back it up, that this fairly common. Languages "simplify" all the time, after all.

Swedish is another language that has completely dropped the subjunctive (konjunktiv - "Länge leve konungen!", "Helgat varde ditt namn. Tillkomme ditt rike."), but it remains in fixed phrases and forever encrusted in the brains of those of us who learnt the Lord's Prayer (Pater Noster) in the 1917 translation, rather than the 1999 translation. We discussed the Swedish subjunctive a bit in my Classical Greek classes, in order to explain the subjunctive and the optative, but it was a bit of a lost cause because pretty much only the front row understood what the Swedish subjunctive did, and only one student was confident in how to conjugate the subjunctive in Swedish (a little retired lady who took classical languages for fun, and had just finished a BA in Latin).


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 38 messages over 5 pages: << Prev 13 4 5  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.4219 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.