Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 10 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
#9321 11/22/00 08:53 AM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
the original pronunciation is now lost to us
Not quite! there are no limits to the capacity of the latest high technology of unraveling ancient mysteries. Recently, I seem to remember, I read an article in a scientific journal about the close examination of Roman pottery. The contour of some well-preserved vases was adorned with very fine wavy lines which, to the astute researcher, resemled the sound traces on old grammophone records. He put the vase on a rotating potter's wheel, and fixed a grammophone head to its side, and - lo and behold, the distinct voice of the potter, who sang a hymn to the glory of his imperator Kaesar, emanated from the loudspeaker...


#9322 11/22/00 10:34 AM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
This was supposed to be wordplay and fun and you've made it all grown up and serious!

To be honest, I agree with you. Here are some more instances which, IMO, support this notion.

1. RP is not what it used to be. Recordings of BBC radio programmes from 50 years ago show that the pronunciation in those days was quite different from what we consider 'good' British English today. AS I mentioned in another thread (a long time ago in a forum far far away), even classic films like "Brief Encounter" are now less than easy to understand because of the change in accents. We do not have reliable knowledge of any accents before the invention of the gramophone. To claim otherwise is, I believe, disingenuous.

2. It isn't just Latin that has these problems. I learned in college that we do not 'really' know how Chaucer pronounced all those ownderful words in his "Canterbury Tales". We make some guesses based upon the rhyume scheme (much as we do with Shakespeare), but by and large we are guessing. There is no assurance that a Middle English scholar, if plonked by time machine in Chaucer's era, would be able to make herself intelligible. And this was a mere 700 years ago, not 1500 or more.

3. Whilst some may claim that the 'oral' tradition ensured some consistency, or purity, of pronunciation, we have instances today that show this not to be the case. Latn American Spanish and Spanish Spanish haave clearly marked pronunciation differences - the values given to the 'z', for inctance, or the 'c'. Similarly (and bel can maybe help us here), Quebecois French is not identical to French French, which is again different from West African French or Algerian French. A few generations is all that is required (even with the utmost care taken by speakers to 'preserve' the mother tongue) for a language to change greatly. In a few such changes (a few hundred years) it can become genuinely unintelligible.

4. The greatest case in point, I think, is Chinese. 1.3 billion people who can write to each other and make themselves undestood (I understand that the Chinese script, being composed of ideograms, is universally intelligible), but cannot conduct oral conversations with each other. I think Bridget made this point in a post somewhere.

In sum, when we speak of the pronunciation of Latin, even if we restrict ourselves to Latin 'RP', we would have to take into account at least the time difference. The Latin Caesar spoke would almost certainly sound different from the Latin that Jerome used, or that Constantine did. By analogy, another classical language, Sanskrit, had a number of phases, during which periods it was most likely close to unintelligible to users from other periods: the Vedic period (and yes the Rig Veda and others were composed in this language) approx 3200BP to 2400BP; 'Panini' Sanskrit - where the formal grammar was laid down - approx 2400BP to 1600BP; and 'golden age' Sanskrit - when Kalidas and others were wowing the Gupta court - approx 1600BP onwards. Sanskrit had, by about 1200 years ago, pretty much vanished as a living language, but we know from commentaries and texts throughout its life, that by the time Panini came along, there were already controversies about the meanings of various words and phrases in the Vedas. During Kalidas' period, Panini was archaic and difficult to interpret. And so on. I find it difficult to imagine such great formal changes without corresponding changes in pronunciation.

So there... spam me too.


#9323 11/22/00 03:40 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
>Not quite! there are no limits to the capacity of the latest high technology of unraveling ancient mysteries. Recently, I seem to remember, I read an article in a scientific journal about the close examination of Roman pottery. The contour of some well-preserved vases was adorned with very fine wavy lines which, to the astute researcher, resemled the sound traces on old grammophone records. He put the vase on a rotating potter's wheel, and fixed a grammophone head to its side, and - lo and behold, the distinct voice of the potter, who sang a hymn to the glory of his imperator Kaesar, emanated from the loudspeaker...


But if you run it backwards it says that Paul is dead!!! But we're still not sure which Paul it means.



TEd
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
B
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
You are right Shanks, in the mere 500 years since official colonization of Canada, the French language has undergone a number of changes. French and Québecois do not sound alike at all, the tone of voice and where the letters are pronounced in the mouth are quite different. The manner (and order) in which the syllables are stressed are also often different. There are also words that have been 'invented' here, that the French do not use. Oddly, the Québecois can readily understand the French but the opposite is not always the case – thus their assertions that we are speaking the language incorrectly (grrrr!!)


Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Hang on, hang on, guys! I was trying to start a fight, not a cosy "I agree" arrangement!

So fight - yes, I was long-winded, but I hoped was being just a teensy-weensy bit controversial, too!



The idiot also known as Capfka ...
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
B
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
But why CapK? Your argument makes a lot of sense.


Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409
M
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
M
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409
So fight - yes, I was long-winded, but I hoped was being just a teensy-weensy bit controversial, too!

The only possible reason someone could choose to pick a fight with you over that post would be to accuse you of stating, in the words of Basil Fawlty, "the bleeding obvious."



#9328 11/23/00 06:56 AM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
but I hoped was being just a teensy-weensy bit controversial
The trouble is, in order to merit the qualification of "controversial", a theory needs to be disprovable, i.e. one should at least be able to imagine the kind of facts that would make the proposed theory unlikely.


Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,346
F
veteran
Offline
veteran
F
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,346
Oddly, the Québecois can readily understand the French but the opposite is not always the case – thus their assertions that we are speaking the language incorrectly


That just means the French are fairly even-handed in their attitude to foreigners speaking their language, methinks!

Were you expecting favouritism, just because French is also your language? More likely the expectations are higher.

Bless 'em!
We love 'em to bits, we do.




Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
B
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,891
I guess you're right, Fisk choux; but have you ever tried to have a conversation with someone who is constantly correcting your pronunciation. Arrrgh. Don't you just want to throttle them and say "listen to what I am saying, not how I say it dag nabbit."


Page 6 of 10 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,912
Posts229,283
Members9,179
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
TRIALNERRA, befuddledmind, KILL_YOUR_SUV, Heather_Turey, Standy
9,179 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 444 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,542
wofahulicodoc 10,510
LukeJavan8 9,916
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5