Several years ago I was singing the Villon Ballades of Claude Debussy. It was in archaic French a language no longer spoken in France. The first time I went to Montreal I found that I could understand some of what they were saying because it was like the Francois Villon poetry. I was delighted much as I was when I heard the Shakespeare phonetics on the Eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland.
REH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] Chinese as the world language? was: Re: [Futurework] Languages (fwd) > Keith: > > > I'm sure you must be right. However, Quebecian French will die in the end > > if Quebec wants to stay in the mainstream of the developed world. When is > > another matter. It's interesting that the French Academy have given up > > their long-time attempts to exclude American and English word imports. > > Almost all middle class Frenchmen, Germans, Italians, Dutch and > > what-have-you can speak fairly fluent English because that's the language > > of modern commerce and science. Almost no middle class Englishmen could > put > > more than a sentence or two together in another language. Once upon a time > > I used to be able to read Simenon and Pushkin in their own languages > fairly > > comfortably -- and enjoyably, too -- but I could never speak the > languages. > > One has to appreciate that there is a difference between street French and > the French spoken by the educated. My understanding is that the latter > speak French, as in France, with perhaps some minor differences. My neice's > daughter, who attends the French language University of Montreal, is off to > the Sorbonne next year. She's already done some of her studies in France > and has encountered no problems. > > It's interesting how languages evolve. When I was in Jamaica a few years > ago, I had to go way back into the hill country to talk to some elderly > people who had lived there all their lives. Though they spoke English, I > could barely understand them. Another generation or so of isolation, and I > might not be able to. > > Ed Weick > > > > > > At 10:39 22/08/2003 -0400, Ed Weick wrote: > > >(KH) > > >But surely, Prof Daniel Abrams' thesis is *not* valid. He is trying to > > >maintain that minority languages can be protected. I originally wrote > > >that this is not possible. PW, EW and I have each been saying that once a > > >new way of life becomes communicable, tradable and geographically > > >possible, then minority languages disappear. Prof Abrams would do better > > >to spend his time and research money in recording as many minority > > >languages as possible for future study and analysis, than trying to save > > >them in the here and now while our present type of economic system is > > >still sweeping the world. > > > > (EW) > > >Much would seem to depend on the size, status and power of the linguistic > > >group. There is no doubt in my mind that Quebec will maintain French and > > >do its governing and business in French in the foreseeable future. The > people > > >it will deal with in Ottawa will have to be able to use French. > > > > I'm sure you must be right. However, Quebecian French will die in the end > > if Quebec wants to stay in the mainstream of the developed world. When is > > another matter. It's interesting that the French Academy have given up > > their long-time attempts to exclude American and English word imports. > > Almost all middle class Frenchmen, Germans, Italians, Dutch and > > what-have-you can speak fairly fluent English because that's the language > > of modern commerce and science. Almost no middle class Englishmen could > put > > more than a sentence or two together in another language. Once upon a time > > I used to be able to read Simenon and Pushkin in their own languages > fairly > > comfortably -- and enjoyably, too -- but I could never speak the > languages. > > > > Although I think that English is a strong candidate as a world language, I > > wouldn't bet on it. Chinese is a much stronger candidate in the longer > > term. It is basically easier to learn than most others. It has lost all > the > > appendages that other languages still have -- conjugations, declensions, > > irregular verbs, subjunctives, ablatives, and so on -- nightmares that > > plagues learners of most other languages. Chinese has also lost > > inflections, cases, persons, genders, degrees, tenses, voices, moods, > > affixes, infinitives, participles, gerunds and articles. It lost all these > > in the course of several thousand years of a largely unified culture and > > literature. There are no words of more than one syllable and every word > > has only one form. It proceeds by means of subject and predicate -- that's > > all -- and explicates by means of metaphors. Thousands of them. Tens of > > thousands of them. More poetry has been written in Chinese than in any > > other language. > > > > Chinese is just about the most finely chiselled language in the world -- > > the most fully developed. And when China gets to the forefront in > science, > > technology and commerce I think it will probably whop the confused and > > convoluted language that we call English (much as I love it). > > > > Keith Hudson > > > > > > Keith Hudson, 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath, England, > > <www.evolutionary-economics.org> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Futurework mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
