There are 20 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
From: Gary Shannon
1b. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
From: Gregory Gadow
1c. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
From: andrew
1d. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
From: caeruleancentaur
1e. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
From: Hanuman Zhang
1f. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
From: Hanuman Zhang
2a. Re: USAGE: YAEUT: "Molten" vs. "Melted"
From: David McCann
3a. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Gary Shannon
3b. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Eric Christopherson
3c. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
3d. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
3e. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Lars Finsen
3f. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Mark J. Reed
3g. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
From: Lars Finsen
4a. Re: Some questions on phonology
From: Alex Fink
5a. Re: Origin of human language (was Re: Some questions on phonology)
From: Herman Miller
6.1. Re: Neanderthal and PIE
From: Eric Christopherson
6.2. Re: Neanderthal and PIE
From: Lars Finsen
6.3. Re: Neanderthal and PIE
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
7. Re: cuadrivalent verb (E)
From: David Fernandez-Nieto
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:02 pm ((PDT))
OMG! It even works with the "Beverly Hillbillies" theme!
--- On Wed, 10/15/08, David J. Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Want to make it worse? Emily Dickinson's poems can also
> be
> sung to the theme song of Gilligan's Island.
>
> -David
> >
> > Because I could not stop for Death,
> > He kindly stopped for me;
> > The carriage held but just ourselves
> > And Immortality.
And then one day he was shooting at some food,
When up from the ground came bubbling crude,
Oil that is.
--gary
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
Posted by: "Gregory Gadow" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 7:19 pm ((PDT))
Consider: The catchphrase of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles has the same
meter as the word Hallelujah. Anyone care to join me in the Kowabunga
Chorus?
Also seasonally themed is the fact that Lewis Carroll's poem "Jabberwocky"
can be sung to "Greensleeves."
Gregory Gadow
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gary Shannon
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 2:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [CONLANG] OT: Gunga Din lyrics
OMG! It even works with the "Beverly Hillbillies" theme!
--- On Wed, 10/15/08, David J. Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Want to make it worse? Emily Dickinson's poems can also
> be
> sung to the theme song of Gilligan's Island.
>
> -David
> >
> > Because I could not stop for Death,
> > He kindly stopped for me;
> > The carriage held but just ourselves
> > And Immortality.
And then one day he was shooting at some food,
When up from the ground came bubbling crude,
Oil that is.
--gary
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
Posted by: "andrew" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 7:58 pm ((PDT))
Connie Willis made the same observation in the short story she
contributed to the Martian Dispatches. It is written as a pastiche of
a thesis of how Emily Dickenson defeated the Martians by telling them
to go away and leave her to rest in peace. It should be required
reading for anyone in tertiary education -- best use of footnotes this
side of the Discworld.
- Andrew.
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, Dirk Elzinga wrote:
> And quite of few of Emily Dickenson's poems can be sung to "The
> Yellow Rose of Texas," including this:
>
> Because I could not stop for Death,
> He kindly stopped for me;
> The carriage held but just ourselves
> And Immortality.
> ...
>
> I can't read Emily Dickenson anymore.
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Completely off-topic:
> > I just realized that the poem "Gunga Din" by Kipling
> > can be sung to the music of Kid Rock's "All Summer
> > Long."
> > (Yes, I need to get a life.)
> > --Ph. D.
--
Andrew Smith -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
http://hobbit.griffler.co.nz/homepage.html
"If you are gonna rebell you have to wear our uniform."
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
Posted by: "caeruleancentaur" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 6:47 am ((PDT))
> Gregory Gadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consider: The catchphrase of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles has
> the same meter as the word Hallelujah. Anyone care to join me in
> the Kowabunga Chorus?
I don't watch the Ninja Turtles, but I'm positive that Kowabunga was an
interjection used on the Howdy Doody Show decades ago.
The subject matter of this thread is not surprising when one realizes
that there are only so many metric feet available in a given language.
I take advantage of this when selecting hymns for our Sunday Masses.
We have no instrumentalists and I must lead the singing a capella.
There are a number of hymns that can be sung, e.g., to the tune of
Beethoven's "Ode to Jode," known to musicians as 87 87 D.
Charlie
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
Posted by: "Hanuman Zhang" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:41 am ((PDT))
AAaaaargh! Now I am gonna take a day ta get that outta me head...
on 10/15/08 1:01 PM, David J. Peterson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Want to make it worse? Emily Dickinson's poems can also be
> sung to the theme song of Gilligan's Island.
>
> -David
> *******************************************************************
> "A male love inevivi i'ala'i oku i ue pokulu'ume o heki a."
> "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
>
> -Jim Morrison
>
> http://dedalvs.free.fr/
>
> On Oct 15, 2008, at 1014 AM, Dirk Elzinga wrote:
>
>> And quite of few of Emily Dickenson's poems can be sung to "The
>> Yellow Rose
>> of Texas," including this:
>>
>> Because I could not stop for Death,
>> He kindly stopped for me;
>> The carriage held but just ourselves
>> And Immortality.
>> ...
>>
>> I can't read Emily Dickenson anymore.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Completely off-topic:
>>> I just realized that the poem "Gunga Din" by Kipling
>>> can be sung to the music of Kid Rock's "All Summer
>>> Long."
>>> (Yes, I need to get a life.)
>>> --Ph. D.
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Miapimoquitch: Tcf Pt*p+++12,4(c)v(v/c) W* Mf+++h+++t*a2c*g*n4 Sf+++
>> +argh
>> La----c++d++600
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: OT: Gunga Din lyrics
Posted by: "Hanuman Zhang" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:42 am ((PDT))
No No No *holdin' bloody head in paws*
on 10/15/08 2:00 PM, Gary Shannon at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> OMG! It even works with the "Beverly Hillbillies" theme!
>
> --- On Wed, 10/15/08, David J. Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Want to make it worse? Emily Dickinson's poems can also
>> be
>> sung to the theme song of Gilligan's Island.
>>
>> -David
>>>
>>> Because I could not stop for Death,
>>> He kindly stopped for me;
>>> The carriage held but just ourselves
>>> And Immortality.
>
> And then one day he was shooting at some food,
> When up from the ground came bubbling crude,
> Oil that is.
>
> --gary
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: USAGE: YAEUT: "Molten" vs. "Melted"
Posted by: "David McCann" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:46 pm ((PDT))
H. W. Fowler. A Dictionary of Modern English Usage:
"Molten, apart from its use as a poetic variant of melted, is now
confined to what needs great heat to melt it. Molten iron, melted
butter."
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary:
"molten. adjective
Liquefied by heat; in a state of fusion. Chiefly (connoting a higher
temperature than melted) of metal, rock, etc."
These definitions work for me.
Messages in this topic (18)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:04 pm ((PDT))
--- On Wed, 10/15/08, Lars Finsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Atlantis seems to be really required content in juvenile
> fantasies.
> My Atlantids also were interplanetary. And I traced their
> history
> back to more than 30,000 years BP.
My own Atlantis was the region between Thailand and Australia that was all dry
land 12,000 years ago when so much sea water was tied up in the ice age
glaciers. It didn't "sink" but was inundated by the rising sea level at the end
of the last ice age.
--gary
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:32 pm ((PDT))
On Oct 15, 2008, at 11:38 AM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Jörg Rhiemeier
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I also dabbled with a conworld featuring a "classic-style"
>> Atlantis drowning in the mid-Atlantic when I was in my teens.
>> My Atlantis was a high-tech, even starfaring, civilization
>> that eventually bombed itself out of existence (however, it
>> was too late to meddle with Neanderthals: I placed it about
>> 10,000 BC), but left behind a few colonies in neighbouring
>> planetary systems such as Tau Ceti.
>>
>> Later, I scrapped that universe because I realized that it
>> was way too corny and Dänikenian.
>
> No, no, no. Not at all! Now if the Atlanteans were *from* Tau Ceti
> and came to Earth, that'd be Dänikenian. :)
[ In advance, I must warn everyone that this is a long post. I didn't
mean for it to be, when I started it! If anyone doesn't want to read
the conworldy parts, there is a linguistics part near the end. ]
I must say the idea that people from the ancient world were
spacefaring is fascinating; I read a lot of those von Däniken books
as a kid where early humans came from space, so the idea that early
humans were the product of alien colonization is fairly mundane to
me ;) but had never thought about the possibility of early humans
venturing out themselves.
I also incorporated space colonization and an Atlantis-like submerged
continent (creatively called Atlan) in my childhood and adolescent
conworld. In that world, about 8000 years before the "present", there
were no less than three sentient species, only one of which was
autochthonous, and all the humans (who were from elsewhere) lived on
this one continent. Of course, that continent was destroyed, but
several groups of people managed to escape and settled in other parts
of the world, leading to today's cultures and languages.
For several years I've been trying to decide whether to abandon this
conworld, or rehabilitate it to be more realistic. I have a few
possible reasons for the humans to only live on Atlan, e.g. the
continent was only home to a research outpost, and humans weren't
actually intent on colonizing; or there were just so few of them that
they had only one population center; or they had a treaty with the
natives that said they would only settle there. I tend to envision
the land as fairly populous and urban, so the first two don't seem to
fit... although I suppose it could have started as an outpost or
small settlement and grown huge over the years. I don't see any
reason why the indigenous species would not have settled there
themselves... although just as I was writing that, it occurred to me
that maybe they had a religious or superstitious reason to avoid it
(and perhaps with good reason, since it *did* get destroyed after
all!) :)
Still more problematic is how and why the continent was destroyed.
Although the conworld in question has supernatural as well as sci-fi
elements, I'm mostly ruled out the trope that Atlan was destroyed
because it was morally corrupt. Another line of thinking holds that
Atlan was either artificial, or was held up artificially somehow, and
perhaps a mechanical failure caused it to be submerged. (Hmm, if it
was artificial, that would help explain why the natives didn't
colonize it -- it wouldn't have existed until humans created it.)
Then there's the question of how some inhabitants survived. There is
an idea in my mind that some of them were warned supernaturally, but
there are no details. And the traditional idea is that they left in
boats, but I guess there's nothing to say they didn't escape in air
vehicles instead.
In any case, after settling in different areas of the world, they
(gradually or suddenly) lost their "high" technology. I guess because
there were few experts among them, and they didn't have time to bring
along any books on science and technology, and there was no
infrastructure such as computer networks or electricity where they
landed.
Finally, the linguistic part. I've always maintained that the fall of
Atlan happened about 8000 years before the "present", but also that
the linguistic diversity of the resulting present world is similar to
that of Earth, or at least a large landmass like Eurasia. But based
on that 8000-year figure, I now think the world's languages would be
about as similar as the Indo-European ones to each other. On the
other hand, the bands of people landed on several different
landmasses and were isolated from each other for at least hundreds of
years, something which is not true of IE. I'm not sure how long their
year is, either, but I've always assumed it to be similar to our own.
Any thoughts on the logistics of this kind of technological collapse
population dispersal scenario?
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:02 am ((PDT))
Selon Lars Finsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Atlantis seems to be really required content in juvenile fantasies.
Seems to be. I have mine as well ;) . OK, this seems to have become a long post
as well, you are warned!
> My Atlantids also were interplanetary. And I traced their history
> back to more than 30,000 years BP. They definitely could have met the
> Neanderthals - and did, according to my still readily readable notes.
>
My Atlandids called themselves Dhastem (or Ddastem, depending on the
transliteration scheme I used). They were humans, more advanced than we are now,
but not starfaring. Their technology was also quite different from ours, with
more advances in chemistry and biology than what we have right now, but in
physics they were only slightly more advanced than us. They didn't have the
global communication network we have, for instance, which might be because they
mainly kept to their island in the middle of the Atlantic ocean.
I know they called their language Astou, although I don't remember how they
called their continent (it's somewhere in my notes). Unlike other Atlantis(es?),
the history of the Dhastem can be traced no further than 10,000BC, and they were
still around when Ancient Greece began using the Greek alphabet. Indeed, the
only examples of Astou we have are artefacts found in Greece, and the language
is written with an archaic form of the Greek alphabet. It seems the Dhastem
thought their own writing system was somehow sacred, and wouldn't use it outside
their island. On the small Dhastem colonies they had on other continents, they
would only use indigenous writing systems to write their language, usually
adapting them more or less efficiently (they didn't need perfect transliteration
systems).
The island of the Dhastem was destroyed somewhere around 700BC, a cataclysm
suffered by the whole world (and probably the origin of various Flood legends).
It was not moral corruption that destroyed the island, nor failed Dhastem
experiments. The Dhastem were certainly imperialistic, and felt themselves
superior to the primitive cultures around them, but they were not morally
corrupt as such. They just thought it was their duty to protect the primitive
people around them. And they did, against another technologically advanced
civilisation based on a continent in the middle of the Pacific ocean, which I
called Mu, for lack of a better name. The people of Mu were technologically
advanced humans like the Dhastem, but through history they became a theocracy,
which slowly began to take a turn to the fanatic, the xenophobic, until they
started attacking the Dhastem who they considered sinners that were soiling the
world and prevented it to reach true perfection. The Dhastem defended themselves
with better technology than Mu had expected, and for decades a Cold War
followed. Small battles happened here and there, but mostly the continents of
the Dhastem and of Mu were spared. The "primitive" civilisations on the other
continents could only watch, and many considered the Dhastem and Mu to be some
kinds of gods anyway, and battling gods was not considered unusual, as we can
see in various legends around the world.
The Cold War was broken when Mu unleashed a weapon of unknown nature against the
home continent of the Dhastem. Reason would have made clear that Mu was signing
its own death warrant that way, but by that time people on Mu were so fanatic
that the few people that tried to warn of their impending doom were attacked and
slaughtered as infidels. The Dhastem knew Mu was developing such a weapon early
enough, and knew very quickly what it could do, as they had developed something
similar but had refused to use it, but their cover attempts to prevent Mu from
using it failed. When they detected the weapon being used, it was already too
late. As I wrote earlier, the Dhastem had this belief of superiority, and never
even considered that their continent could ever be targeted itself by a weapon
that couldn't be stopped by their defences. They had no recourse. Their
continent, which was already straddling the Atlantic riff and wasn't the most
stable place to live, was completely and utterly destroyed, and sank into the
ocean. Only one small bit stayed above water level, once everything settled:
Iceland, which unfortunately was completely uninhabited at the time of the
Dhastem (being the top of a mountain too high for humans to inhabit it). The
cataclysm caused giant tsunamis to sweep over the coasts of Europe, Africa and
America. Shock waves across the Earth woke up volcanoes and caused earthquakes
everywhere. Those shock waves ended up concentrating themselves on the opposite
point of the Earth, which was where the continent of Mu was situated. They
created a kind of super earthquake that shattered the continent and made it sink
as well. Mu destroyed itself when they tried to destroy the Dhastem.
It took months before things settled. Very few Dhastem survived (the very few of
them who lived in colonies, a few hundreds at maximum). Even fewer Mu people
survived (Mu was very centralist and didn't have colonies). The colonies didn't
use much technological items (they didn't want them to fall into the hands of
the "primitive people" around them), and certainly didn't keep many books (since
they refused to have anything with their original writing system anywhere except
on their own continent). So their technology slowly faded and the survivors
themselves ended up mixing with the people around them, over the course of
centuries, so that by the time of the Roman empire all that was still known
generally were distorted legends. Some "secret societies" kept some artefacts
that were miraculously spared, as well as some knowledge, and a few books
written in that Astou transliterated using the Greek alphabet, and that's the
only thing that reached us and allows us to know the Dhastem existed at all.
I'll need to recheck my notes. I especially like the Astou language, which
features an Indo-European-like morphology for nouns, but a more
South-American-like morphology for the verbs.
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl
It takes a straight mind to create a twisted conlang.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:09 am ((PDT))
Selon Eric Christopherson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Any thoughts on the logistics of this kind of technological collapse
> population dispersal scenario?
>
In the case of my Dhastem, the loss of technology is due to the fact that it was
concentrated on the continents that were utterly destroyed, and both
civilisations had a life philosophy that prevented them from thinking up an
escape plan that would save their technology (that we know of, at least).
The few Dhastem colonies on other continents were light in technology (the
equivalent of an anthropologist or biologist camp in the Amazonian forest like
we have, with only the vital minimum), small, and populated with people who
couldn't maintain it well. The Dhastem prohibition to use their own writing
system except on their own continent ensured that most important books of
knowledge stayed on their continent, and were lost when it was destroyed.
All in all, I consider that quite a realistic scenario, especially considering
that I was something like 16 when I imagined it! :)
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl
It takes a straight mind to create a twisted conlang.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
3e. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:48 am ((PDT))
Den 16. okt. 2008 kl. 12.02 skreiv Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets:
> The island of the Dhastem was destroyed somewhere around 700BC, a
> cataclysm suffered by the whole world (and probably the origin of
> various Flood legends). ---lots of stuff snipped---
Fun. And it doesn't seem any perceptibly more childish than most of
the things that get published nowadays...
LEF
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
3f. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Mark J. Reed" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:09 am ((PDT))
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Lars Finsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fun. And it doesn't seem any perceptibly more childish than most of the
> things that get published nowadays...
Oh, for Pete's sake. Could we talk about conworlds without sweeping
indictments of current popular fiction? Yeesh.
--
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
3g. Re: Juvenile fooleries (was Re: Neanderthal and PIE (Long!))
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:48 am ((PDT))
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> quoting me:
>> Fun. And it doesn't seem any perceptibly more childish than most
>> of the
>> things that get published nowadays...
>
> Oh, for Pete's sake. Could we talk about conworlds without sweeping
> indictments of current popular fiction? Yeesh.
Sorry, didn't know that was a taboo.
LEF
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Some questions on phonology
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:20 pm ((PDT))
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 21:28:11 +0200, Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Have a look at http://www.xibalba.demon.co.uk/jbr/pleisto.html , which
>attempts to create a Neanderthal-era language.
Sweet, a new piece by JBR! Great stuff.
>It doesn't even go the
>route of specific, individual phonemes but applies features to
>syllables as whole. (So, for example, "bot" would not be a possible
>syllable because the "voiced" or "voiceless" feature would have to
>apply to the entire syllable, not just a phoneme at the onset or
>coda.)
Yes, but I think this glances off the point. The reason it doesn't have
phonemes is because it cuts out the whole middle layer of representation:
where modern languages have
*words* composed of several *phonemes* each with values of several
*features*
this paleolang has simply
*words* consisting of values of *features* .
So words are monosyllabic, and it's inconceivable that they could be
otherwise, since that would mean giving a feature two different values for
the different points in time and there's just no room for that in the
representation. Thus for instance there aren't even coda consonants (beyond
those that can be thought of as manifestations of supersegments), given that
there are onset consonants. On the other hand there could be (and in JBR's
there is) a value of the voicing feature which is "starts off voiceless,
becomes voiced", so a word like /ka/ is not ruled out.
Alex
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: Origin of human language (was Re: Some questions on phonology)
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 6:03 pm ((PDT))
Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
>>> but why would humans need to have ever been the, to hijack a
>>> comment from the Proto-Indo-Neanderthal discussion, mammalian counterpart
>>> to
>>> mockingbirds?
>> Exactly - no reason at all! In fact if early hominids were "mammalian
>> mockingbirds" that would surely imply a reversion to a state inferior to
>> chimps and, I suspect, (most) other primates.
>
> Right. There is no valid reason to assume a "mockingbird stage"
> in hominid language evolution. _Australopithecus_ probably
> communicated in a way similar to modern chimpanzees; from there,
> the systems of calls gradually became more complex and more
> grammatical until the first full-fledged languages emerged
> about 100,000 years ago or so. It is possible that early hominids
> used calls reminiscent of other animals' sounds to refer to the
> animals in question, just as there are onomatopoeic words in
> modern human languages, but that's not the same as a "mockingbird
> stage".
I think you're all taking the "mockingbird" comment out of context. It's
an analogy to how the language of modern humans (non-genetic) differs
from the proposed genetic language of the hypothetical Neanderthals in
this alternate reality who survived up to the point where modern humans
picked up some of their language.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6.1. Re: Neanderthal and PIE
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:54 pm ((PDT))
On Oct 13, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> Hallo!
>
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 22:05:33 +0100, Falcata Lusa wrote:
>
>> 2008/10/11 Jörg Rhiemeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> [...]
>>> PIE probably was spoken about 6000 years ago; estimates
>>> of an earlier age can be ruled out (IMHO) because the vocabulary
>>> of PIE as it can be reconstructed reveals that the "Proto-Indo-
>>> Europeans" practiced agriculture, used wheeled vehicles and knew
>>> at least the metals copper, silver and gold.
>>
>>
>> We now have words for computer, cellphone, snorkel, robot,
>> internet and
>> still that alone is not proof that our language appeared during
>> the 20th
>> century.
>
> You missed the point of my argument. The point is not what kinds
> of words *modern* Indo-European languages have, but what kinds of
> words can be reconstructed for *Proto-Indo-European*, and these
> include words for agricultural terms, wheeled vehicles and metals,
> which indicates that, whenever PIE was spoken, the people speaking
> it knew those things. Note that *no* words for computer, cellphone
> and all that can be reconstructed for Proto-Indo-European - of course
> not, because those things were unknown back then.
I think Falcata's point was that English has words for computer, cell
phone, etc., but that doesn't prove that English arose in the 20th
century.
However, I think that if English split up right now into a bunch of
daughter languages, one could safely infer from the cognate words in
the daughter languages that the *split* had taken place in the late
20th/early 21st century. (Unless they were borrowed, as technological
words often are :) )
So I guess the idea is that the *most recent unified form* of PIE
dates to some time when wheels, agriculture, and metalworking were
known in the IE area. But people tend to use "PIE was spoken 6000
years ago" as shorthand for that. (Of course, *how* unified PIE was
at that time is discussed and debated.)
Messages in this topic (38)
________________________________________________________________________
6.2. Re: Neanderthal and PIE
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:20 pm ((PDT))
Den 15. okt. 2008 kl. 18.05 skreiv Jörg Rhiemeier:
>
> Most anthropologists are of the opinion that the Neanderthals
> simply went extinct and did not contribute to the modern human
> gene pool. If they were, as evcidenced by their artifcats,
> qualitatively less creative than our species, unable to invent
> new things or to create and appreciate fine art and music and
> all that, and possessing only a comparatively rudimentary
> language, this alone should have constituted a species barrier.
> No matter whether interbreeding was biologically possible or
> not, hardly any Cro-Magnon human would even have considered
> mating with a Neanderthal!
I don't quite agree with you on that. After all, another thing that's
typical of modern humans is the great variety in tastes, which is, I
think, linked to the imaginative ability. I wouldn't deny the
possibility that some might have been attracted to the big brutes. In
fact, bigness and brutishness is attractive to some even today. If
there was some way to communicate, there must have been some way for
attraction to develop as well, I think. Even if our ancestors
couldn't communicate any better with them than we can with our pets,
you still have the fact than humans of today do get attracted and
even attached to dumb beasts.
And even if the Neanderthals *were* startlingly uncreative and
unappreciative of finer things, I don't think we can be sure that
they were *completely* uncreative and unappreciative. The fact that
artful artifacts were found with them speaks against it. There are
uncreative and unappreciative brutes even today who don't seem to
have any trouble getting laid. Myself I cannot imagine how a
Neanderthal could be much more uncreative and unappreciative than
certain individuals I have met, and still survive in their environment.
And even if all this does not help the Neanderthals into our gene
pools, there's the possibility that they could have helped
themselves. Copulation isn't always voluntary.
LEF
Messages in this topic (38)
________________________________________________________________________
6.3. Re: Neanderthal and PIE
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:01 pm ((PDT))
Hallo!
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 21:17:13 +0200, Lars Finsen wrote:
> Den 15. okt. 2008 kl. 18.05 skreiv Jörg Rhiemeier:
> >
> > Most anthropologists are of the opinion that the Neanderthals
> > simply went extinct and did not contribute to the modern human
> > gene pool. If they were, as evcidenced by their artifcats,
> > qualitatively less creative than our species, unable to invent
> > new things or to create and appreciate fine art and music and
> > all that, and possessing only a comparatively rudimentary
> > language, this alone should have constituted a species barrier.
> > No matter whether interbreeding was biologically possible or
> > not, hardly any Cro-Magnon human would even have considered
> > mating with a Neanderthal!
>
> I don't quite agree with you on that. After all, another thing that's
> typical of modern humans is the great variety in tastes, which is, I
> think, linked to the imaginative ability. I wouldn't deny the
> possibility that some might have been attracted to the big brutes. In
> fact, bigness and brutishness is attractive to some even today. If
> there was some way to communicate, there must have been some way for
> attraction to develop as well, I think. Even if our ancestors
> couldn't communicate any better with them than we can with our pets,
> you still have the fact than humans of today do get attracted and
> even attached to dumb beasts.
True - tastes vary a lot, and there is hardly a taboo that
isn't broken by *someone*. And perhaps there even *wasn't*
a taboo. It is, however, pretty certain that no human being
living today has Neanderthal ancestors, which probably means
that the two species were not interfertile, or produced only
sterile offspring like mules.
> And even if the Neanderthals *were* startlingly uncreative and
> unappreciative of finer things, I don't think we can be sure that
> they were *completely* uncreative and unappreciative. The fact that
> artful artifacts were found with them speaks against it. There are
> uncreative and unappreciative brutes even today who don't seem to
> have any trouble getting laid. Myself I cannot imagine how a
> Neanderthal could be much more uncreative and unappreciative than
> certain individuals I have met, and still survive in their environment.
You are right. Neanderthals probably *did* have some sort of
aesthetic sense. They put flowers on the pits in which they
disposed of dead bodies, and be it just to neutralize the stench.
The items they made may have been purely functional - but they
aren't *ugly*. They had a sense for symmetry and all that.
Neanderthals may not have shown the complex symbolic behaviour
of _Homo sapiens_, but they probably were above mere brutes.
> And even if all this does not help the Neanderthals into our gene
> pools, there's the possibility that they could have helped
> themselves. Copulation isn't always voluntary.
Sure. It is not impossible that the two species raped each other.
We know such behaviour from our species; we don't know about the
other, but cannot exclude it.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Messages in this topic (38)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
7. Re: cuadrivalent verb (E)
Posted by: "David Fernandez-Nieto" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:23 am ((PDT))
"Eugene Oh" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
????
> daf]
> when you say "i sell you a book for $10" = "i give you a book and you give
> me $10", y think that that AND is special. "and you, because of reciprocity,
> give me..."
> i propose "e" /i:/ as that special AND.
daf]
perhaps E is out of the topic "quadrivalent verb". E is a resource to define
"sell" or "buy".
when i read "i give you a book and you give me $10", the relationship between
"i give you a book" and "you give me $10" doesn't seem to be essential, but
casual. is significative the order of the two parts "betweening" AND ? E is an
essential AND. never mind the order, and the two parts that between E are not
two, but one only thing.
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
