"Finding the Mother Tongue..." Topic
3 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Language Plus Board Back to the Science Plus Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset Rating:
Featured Profile ArticleMal Wright journeys to and from the Australian national convention - and tells us what he thinks of panicking tank hordes and flat terrain!
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Parzival | 07 May 2013 2:29 p.m. PST |
Interesting news from the world of linguistic science— tracking back to humanity's common language, circa 13,000 BC. link Of course, the above article is just an overview. I may have to hunt down something more in-depth. |
etotheipi | 08 May 2013 4:45 a.m. PST |
|
Grinning Norm | 12 May 2013 4:30 a.m. PST |
Ho-hum. They've reconstructed the origins of a few words which have spread to a great many languages. If modern day humans would happen to travel back in time and find that particular region these words originated, they would probably have much less trouble making themselves understood with gestures than by the approximations of what these few words should have sounded like back then in that place. Everywhere else people would have spoken other languages, which in turn have evolved and been replaced by these more successful ones, exchanging features, influencing each other. Traveling speed and communication between groups of people was a tad slower back then than in the information age, so there would have been much more room for isolated language communities. 13000BC also sounds quite optimistic. Typically reconstructing language to a time depth of half or even just one third of that is already pushing the limits of comparative historical linguistics. So while these reconstructions may be valid, the implication of this being the language 'everyone' spoke is plain misleading and wrong. |
|