Loose Ends (1): Hebrew Is The Only Resurrected Language

[BoSoxGal]

Wasn't that a Dubya gaffe? Or was that Dan Quayle?

eta: Ah, Snopes reveals it was not an actual Quayle-ism, but a joke. Credit to Representative Claudine Schneider of Rhode Island, @ 1989.

[Andrew D]

Is it possible for someone to have more than one native language? For example, I have spoken both English and Italian since infancy. Does that mean I have two native languages, or that neither can be considered my native language, or something else?

That is an interesting question, Scooter, and there is some dispute over what is the correct answer. The prevailing view appears to be that cases in which a person learns more than one language as that person's native language -- i.e., that each of those languages is as much that person's "first" language as is any other -- are exceedingly rare, if they exist at all. That accords with my own observations: Infants whom I have seen growing up using more than language have tended overwhelmingly to speak one of those languages primarily and to resort to the other only in special circumstances. But that does not, in itself, answer whether one language was primary from the beginning or whether one language became differentiated as primary only later. And I have made no systematic study of the matter.

Among others, Alan Davies has written at considerable length on that question, and I think that he has concluded that although it does not happen often, one can have more than one native language. But he rather scrupulously avoids the term "native language". And he is especially interested in "the question of whether a second or foreign language learner who starts learning after puberty can become a native speaker of the target language." His own phrasing of the question necessarily entails at least the theoretical possibility that someone who learns a language as a "second" language can somehow become a "native speaker" of that language. However interesting that theory may (or may not) be as a matter of applied linguistics, it necessarily requires a substantial departure from the meaning of "native language" as that phrase has been used and recognized in English for centuries.

At bottom, we have not seen any specific evidence that anyone is presently learning Cornish as a first language. The specific evidence provided of young children's being taught Cornish included the program founder's own description of the program as teaching young children Cornish as a "second language". Unless one throws the generally accepted meanings of "native language" and "dead language" completely overboard, young children's learning Cornish as a "second language" does not qualify Cornish as having been resurrected.

Of course, if there are people who are learning Cornish as a first language, then Cornish has at least arguably been resurrected. ("Arguably," because if a half-children are taught Cornish as a first language, but that practice does not continue to a further generation, then one might more plausibly describe Cornish as having momentarily flitted from dead to moribund and back to dead.) As always, relevant evidence can and quite properly should change anyone's conclusions. I am open to any such evidence as might be adduced, but as long as the evidence remains that people learn Cornish only as a second (third, fourth, whatever) language, the conclusion which that evidence conduces is that Cornish has not been resurrected.

[Andrew D]

is there not a difference between "your" native language and "a" native language of an ethnic, cultural or minority group? I do believe there is.

Cornish is a resurrected language.

Yes, Gob, if one wishes to redefine "native language" in that way, then one can say that there are people who speak Cornish as their "native language". Of course, that would mean that people who speak Latin and whose ancestors (or any of them) were natives of republican or imperial Rome speak Latin as their "native language". It would mean that if handful of octogenarian scholars of Etruscan descent have learned to speak Etruscan, those few people are speaking Etruscan as their "native language". It would mean that any language presently spoken by people who happen to be descended from people who learned that language as their first language is a language presently spoken as some people's "native language". It would mean that someone can speak as a "native language" a language which that person did not learn until after her or his great-grandchild's wedding.

(And "cultural ... group" opens the door even further. Is anyone here willing to suggest, seriously, that there are people whose "native language" is Ebonics?)

The weight of lexicographical authority -- the weight of the considered judgments of those who (unlike me or you or anyone else here) have made it their life's work to consider such questions -- has not swung anywhere near so far. With good reason.

(And considering the lamentable laxity which most moder lexicographers have adopted, the fact that even they have not gone so far out on a lexicographical limb speaks volumes. Or, at least, it should.)

If one uses the phrase "native language" to mean what it has been recognized for centuries to mean, then Cornish is not presently anyone's native language. (As far as we have seen from the evidence adduced, anyway; again, if there is contrary evidence, all of us should consider it if and when it is brought before us.) And that means that it is still dead.

Not that Cornish's being dead is a bad thing. Latin is dead, and it remains beautiful and, in various contexts, useful. Sanskrit is dead (as that term is generally understood; pursuant to technicalities of legal jargon, it may not be "dead" in the eyes of the law), and it remains beautiful and, in various contexts, useful -- at least arguably more useful than Latin. Etc.

Cornish, like Latin and Sanskrit and a host of others, is "dead" simply in the sense that it is no longer learned as a first language. That is not a value judgment about it; it is simply a fact.

[Andrew D]

Deja Moo...

More like Deja Doo-Doo...

I for one am really glad to see this discussion coming back again...

So many things that could be said about it were left unsaid in the previous 100 plus posts on the subject...

Well, if I were a cowardly, dishonest, faux-conservative, pseudo-patriotic intellectual pipsqueak, moral midget, and social parasite, I might well share Lord Jim's purported view. But despite my various afflictions -- not all of them undeserved, not by a long shot -- I have not been treated that badly.

It must be difficult. To look in a mirror (which I do only rarely; primping is not among my pecadillos) expecting to see brimming talent and to find instead only irremediable mediocrity.

How pitiable can that be? Any self-proclaimed "author" wants to be published. Not being able to get anything published must be far more than bad enough. But to be unable even to give away the fruits of one's labors?

That has to be hard.

Any self-proclaimed "web entrepreneur" wants to sell something over the internet. To have no sales must be far more than bad enough. But to encounter nothing but "temporarily unavailable" and "The domain you are trying to reach has been disabled for violations of our TOS/AUP"?

That has to be hard.

And especially for someone with so fragile a psyche. Someone who has to resort to projecting his own inadequacies onto others by accusing someone else of sponging off of his wife. This from someone utterly incapable of earning a living. Not for want of trying, and not for unwillingness to work -- just for having nothing to offer that anyone else values enough to pay for.

That has to be hard.

And it probably explains a great deal ....

[Andrew D]

is there not a difference between "your" native language and "a" native language of an ethnic, cultural or minority group? I do believe there is.

Cornish is a resurrected language.

But in order to be "a" native language it has to be the native language of some individual human beings. I still haven't seen any stats on just how many (if any) people learn Cornish in childhood from their parents, the way all people learn their native language(s). If there are any (even if there are far far fewer than those who learn Hebrew that way), Cornish could then, arguably, be considered "resurrected" language. If not, not.

Bingo!

Are there people learning Cornish as their first language? Or, if one takes that view of the dispute among linguists, as one of their first languages?

If so, then Cornish is apparently being resurrected. If not, then it remains dead.

-------------------------

Is* there any data on this?...and if not, why not?


*yes, Andrew, I know, I know...but I first wrote "are there any data" and it just didn't sound right. "Data" is (has become) a strange sort of word.


(edited for spelling)

In such a circumstance, if one finds oneself torn between the correct usage and the popular usage, reconstructing the sentence is often a viable option. For example, one might write:

Does anyone have any data on this? ... and if not, why not?

The singular-vs.-plural "problem" goes away ....

[dgs49]

What difference does it make what you call your "native language"? Hundreds of millions of people around the world are brought up in more than one language and are completely fluent, both at home and outside, in more than one language. I suspect scooter is one of them, as is my wife.

A related and interesting phenomenon is that of languages being resurrected from "life support" due to ethnic reawakening. I believe that French was close to dying out in Quebec due to English-only teaching policies, then was resurrected as matter of provincial will in the '50's. I'm sure scooter will correct me on the details. Similarly, Luxembourgish (sometimes referred to as Luxembourgese) was considered a mere dialect when local pride resulted in it being taken more seriously and better codified. Is not Gaelic getting greater emphasis in Ireland?

A perverse result of globalism is the counter-trend of ethnic groups to demand recognition of their differences, and even demand a defined territory where they can maintain their ethnic and cultural identities. When I went to Spain I was more than a little bit surprised to find people speaking Catalan, to the exclusion of Spanish.

[Andrew D]

What difference does it make what you call your "native language"?

I originally presented "a trivia question: What genuinely dead language has been resurrected?" As with trivia questions generally, the correct answer makes, I suppose, no significant difference at all. Still, however, there is a correct answer ....

[Lord Jim]

When I went to Spain I was more than a little bit surprised to find people speaking Catalan, to the exclusion of Spanish.

That sort of cultural fanaticism always puzzles me....

How can folks be so blindly dedicated to imposing this foolishness even at the expense of putting the their own children at such a competitive disadvantage?

I just don't get it.

[Sean]

Well I can't wait for "Loose Ends (2)".

Should be a belter!

[Lord Jim]

Well I can't wait for "Loose Ends (2)".

Should be a belter!

LOL

I was thinking the same thing...perhaps there'll be a whole series....

I'm guessing "2" will probably be a screed where His Highness declares his absolute correctness about the virtues of public nudity....


And "3" will be another dead horse where The Great One pronounces his absolute indisputable rightness...

And so on, and so on....

So if anyone thought that his absence might be explained by his finally getting some help trying to find a replacement part for the mental gasket he blew last summer...

He apparently wants to assure one and all that he steadfastly remains the obsessed, vicious, vain-glorious crank that he became....

I guess he's going to disappoint the legions of admirers who posted follow ups in Dale's thread about how much they missed him and pleading for his return, as well as all those who posted "welcome back, it's good to see you posting again" messages in this thread....

Oh, wait...

Well, I guess that's what happens when you completely tank your reputation...

Like Randy says:


"Beware, beware, be wary of The Naked Man"

[Andrew D]

And "3" will be another dead horse where The Great One pronounces his absolute indisputable rightness...

No, that would be a Little Lord Jimmy posting.

I have many times posted things such as:

Thanks, Gob. I don't know where I got the idea that Australia had been a unitary entity before independence, but I was obviously wrong.

(Emphasis added.)

If I wanted to be an "obsessed, vicious, vain-glorious crank," I could just emulate Little Lord Jimmy. I could post absurd shit such as:

... in the US the prosecution cannot appeal to have a sentence increased ....

Anyone who cared about the truth of the matter could easily discover it. A simple query entered into an ordinary search engine would have revealed the truth.

The truth, if anyone cares, is in the words of the Supreme Court:

... it is a “well-established part of our constitutional jurisprudence” that the guarantee against double jeopardy neither prevents the prosecution from seeking review of a sentence nor restricts the length of a sentence imposed upon retrial after a defendant's successful appeal.

(Monge v. California, 524 U.S. 721, 730, 118 S.Ct. 2246,2251 (1998).)

But Little Lord Jimmy has never cared about truth.

No, that's not right. Little Lord Jimmy does care about truth -- but the standard of "truth" for Little Lord Jimmy is whatever it claims to be true.

If Little Lord Jimmy is so sure that he is right, why is he still afraid to confront me directly?

[Andrew D]

Anyway, there is yet to be adduced any substantive evidence that people are learning Cornish as a first langauge. And, yet again, should any such evidence be forthcoming, it could change the conclusion.

But while Sean and Lord Where-Is-The-Sacred-Reagan-Anus-That-I-May-Crawl-To-It-And-Lick-It-Clean Jim are busy poncing around in their cesspool of self-congratulation, the facts remain the facts.

And they remain afraid of them.

Others will have to draw their own conclusions.

[Sue U]

The prevailing view appears to be that cases in which a person learns more than one language as that person's native language -- i.e., that each of those languages is as much that person's "first" language as is any other -- are exceedingly rare, if they exist at all. That accords with my own observations: Infants whom I have seen growing up using more than language have tended overwhelmingly to speak one of those languages primarily and to resort to the other only in special circumstances.

I have nothing but anecdotes, but I don't think it's exceedingly rare, especially among immigrant families. Up the street from me is a family in which the wife/mother is Japanese, husband/father is Chinese, and the kids born here. While English is often spoken in the home, since it's the only common language, it is neither the husband/father's nor the wife/mother's native language (nor are they very good at it); the kids are perfectly comfortable speaking in Japanese to their mother, Chinese to their father and English to both -- and to everyone else. I have observed similar situations in local Indian and Vietnamese familiies (particularly where the grandmother and/or other older relatives are living in the home), where Gujarati or Vietnamese almost exclusively is spoken at home, although the kids are fluent English-speakers because they have grown up playing with other kids, watching TV, going to school and generally living in our English-speaking society. Are they "native" speakers?

[Sean]

Anyway, there is yet to be adduced any substantive evidence that people are learning Cornish as a first langauge. And, yet again, should any such evidence be forthcoming, it could change the conclusion.

But while Sean and Lord Where-Is-The-Sacred-Reagan-Anus-That-I-May-Crawl-To-It-And-Lick-It-Clean Jim are busy poncing around in their cesspool of self-congratulation, the facts remain the facts.

And they remain afraid of them.

Others will have to draw their own conclusions.

Ah! So you are trying to pick a fight Andrew.

Well, good luck with that...

[Guinevere]

Anyway, there is yet to be adduced any substantive evidence that people are learning Cornish as a first langauge. And, yet again, should any such evidence be forthcoming, it could change the conclusion.

But while Sean and Lord Where-Is-The-Sacred-Reagan-Anus-That-I-May-Crawl-To-It-And-Lick-It-Clean Jim are busy poncing around in their cesspool of self-congratulation, the facts remain the facts.

And they remain afraid of them.

Others will have to draw their own conclusions.

Ah! So you are trying to pick a fight Andrew.

Well, good luck with that...

And did you not read LJ's post prior, which contributed nothing to substance to the discussion and called Andrew all sorts of names?

[Lord Jim]

I see from the quote Sean posted that he has picked up exactly where left off....

quaddriver with a law degree...

Of course one could tell just from the title of the thread that what would follow would be the usual "I have of course been 100% right a along" bloviating gasbaggery that he adopted from his role model...

He might as well change his handle to "Andrewdriver".....

[Scooter]

And did you not read LJ's post prior, which contributed nothing to substance to the discussion and called Andrew all sorts of names?

And so dragging Sean into that served what purpose, exactly?

[Guinevere]

And did you not read LJ's post prior, which contributed nothing to substance to the discussion and called Andrew all sorts of names?

And so dragging Sean into that served what purpose, exactly?

I didn't drag Sean into anything. He called out Andrew, not LJ. Not fair. Thy both need to shut the hell up on their whining and bitching, stick to the substance, and leave the personal attacks alone.

[Scooter]

No, Andrew dragged in Sean's name into it out of nowhere and THAT was what Sean was responding to. Re-read the post.

[Guinevere]

Ok, I did miss that. So, still no reason for LJ to get all bitchy, or for Andrew to drag Sean into it.

So all of you, lay off the fucking personal attacks, 'Kay.