Discussion:
World's 10 oldest languages
(too old to reply)
Dingbat
2017-12-07 00:47:43 UTC
Permalink
World's 10 oldest languages


How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
António Marques
2017-12-07 02:07:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
The easy answer is that that's meaningless. The other one is that by that
term people are referring to something that actually exists. I suppose you
can find the temporal window within which a living language has a written
form recognisable as mostly the same throughout and use that as its life
span. That would mean Latin lived from about 300 BCE to 500 CE (earlier
Latin is recognisable but with significant differences), English and French
were born in the 1300s and are still around...
But like with a dialect continuum, just where to place the cutoff point can
be debatable.
b***@ihug.co.nz
2017-12-07 02:13:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough, but the whole concept
of a "Top 10" is senseless.

(What have they done to the speaker's voice to make him sound like
a robot? Is it because of Stephen Hawking that it conveys an impression
of authority?)

And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like 600 BC for
Korean -- are very unclear.
Dingbat
2017-12-07 04:39:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough, but the whole concept
of a "Top 10" is senseless.
(What have they done to the speaker's voice to make him sound like
a robot? Is it because of Stephen Hawking that it conveys an impression
of authority?)
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
Perhaps you have never been exposed to a Tamil chauvinist holding forth.
I don't know how much you can find with this search but it's a start:
https://www.google.com/search?q=tamil+chauvinism
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like 600 BC for
Korean -- are very unclear.
b***@ihug.co.nz
2017-12-07 09:47:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dingbat
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough, but the whole concept
of a "Top 10" is senseless.
(What have they done to the speaker's voice to make him sound like
a robot? Is it because of Stephen Hawking that it conveys an impression
of authority?)
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
Perhaps you have never been exposed to a Tamil chauvinist holding forth.
https://www.google.com/search?q=tamil+chauvinism
I can see plenty of them in the "Comments" below that video -- a veritable
"festival of ignorance", and not just from Tamils.

So is it Tamils who are responsible for "Fact Desk Media"?
Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski
2017-12-07 08:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough, but the whole concept
of a "Top 10" is senseless.
(What have they done to the speaker's voice to make him sound like
a robot? Is it because of Stephen Hawking that it conveys an impression
of authority?)
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like 600 BC for
Korean -- are very unclear.
Tamil does have a surprisingly long literary history.
Dingbat
2017-12-07 10:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough, but the whole concept
of a "Top 10" is senseless.
(What have they done to the speaker's voice to make him sound like
a robot? Is it because of Stephen Hawking that it conveys an impression
of authority?)
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like 600 BC
for Korean -- are very unclear.
Tamil does have a surprisingly long literary history.
I haven't seen this way to learn a language suggested - participating in
animal rescue with speakers of the language. Tamil is the language spoken
in this video of a leopard rescued from a well:

Joe Bernstein
2017-12-29 23:08:18 UTC
Permalink
On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 1:47:45 PM UTC+13, Dingbat
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough
Sanskrit is the literary language of the Sikhs? Of the Jains?
Say what?
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
The rankings don't appear to have any actual correlation either
with what the narrator says or with reality. Armenian is older
than Latin?
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like
600 BC for Korean -- are very unclear.
I spent a fair amount of time a few months ago studying Korean
archaeology. My laptop was then stolen, so I'm to a certain
extent talking out of my hat here, but anyway, 600 B.C. is before
several important *prehistoric* events. Gina Barnes's
<Archaeology of East Asia>, 2015 edition, cites a paper that
claims Korean didn't even appear in the peninsula until the
previous inhabitants left to become the Yayoi of Japan. That
problematic claim aside, I didn't find anyone claiming we had
evidence of the Korean language - as opposed to written evidence
of circumstances in Korea - much before A.D. 300, when the
inscriptions kick in.

For a reasonably current view of Korean archaeology see
<http://muse.jhu.edu/issue/32860>, or if that doesn't work for
you, volume 54, number 1 of <Asian Perspectives>, a journal out of
Hawaii..

The widespread claim that Korean civilisation is 5000 years old
refers to a legend first written down in the 13th century A.D.
(We think.) This legend is very hard to reconcile with the
archaeology, unsurprising since the putative founder's parents
were a god and a bear. But not even those who promote this legend
claim to have written evidence of Korean older than the
inscriptions, or at most a few brief poems claimed to date back to
the 1st century A.D.

There's even debate over whether the people of Koguryo (roughly,
North Korea) spoke Korean or something else, and if so, what that
something else was.

The video claims to come from "Factdesk Media". Well, they
probably have desks, and evidently do media, but I'm not sure they
could spot a fact at ten inches.

Joe Bernstein
--
Joe Bernstein, writer <***@gmail.com>
Peter T. Daniels
2017-12-30 04:03:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Bernstein
On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 1:47:45 PM UTC+13, Dingbat
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough
Sanskrit is the literary language of the Sikhs? Of the Jains?
Say what?
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
The rankings don't appear to have any actual correlation either
with what the narrator says or with reality. Armenian is older
than Latin?
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like
600 BC for Korean -- are very unclear.
I spent a fair amount of time a few months ago studying Korean
archaeology. My laptop was then stolen, so I'm to a certain
extent talking out of my hat here, but anyway, 600 B.C. is before
several important *prehistoric* events. Gina Barnes's
<Archaeology of East Asia>, 2015 edition, cites a paper that
claims Korean didn't even appear in the peninsula until the
previous inhabitants left to become the Yayoi of Japan. That
problematic claim aside, I didn't find anyone claiming we had
evidence of the Korean language - as opposed to written evidence
of circumstances in Korea - much before A.D. 300, when the
inscriptions kick in.
For a reasonably current view of Korean archaeology see
<http://muse.jhu.edu/issue/32860>, or if that doesn't work for
you, volume 54, number 1 of <Asian Perspectives>, a journal out of
Hawaii..
The widespread claim that Korean civilisation is 5000 years old
refers to a legend first written down in the 13th century A.D.
(We think.) This legend is very hard to reconcile with the
archaeology, unsurprising since the putative founder's parents
were a god and a bear. But not even those who promote this legend
claim to have written evidence of Korean older than the
inscriptions, or at most a few brief poems claimed to date back to
the 1st century A.D.
There's even debate over whether the people of Koguryo (roughly,
North Korea) spoke Korean or something else, and if so, what that
something else was.
The video claims to come from "Factdesk Media". Well, they
probably have desks, and evidently do media, but I'm not sure they
could spot a fact at ten inches.
That's alternative facts, Ms. Conway.

Is there any consensus on relatives of the Korean language? If "Altaic" were
actually a phylum, then Korean and Japanese might be associated with it, but
that hasn't been proven.
Arnaud Fournet
2017-12-30 12:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joe Bernstein
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
How can the age of a language be measured? How old are English and French?
Good questions. Never even raised in this silly video.
A lot of the factual details are correct enough
Sanskrit is the literary language of the Sikhs? Of the Jains?
Say what?
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
And how the hell did Tamil get to be No.1?
(You might have noticed that they think Sanskrit is derived from Tamil.)
The rankings don't appear to have any actual correlation either
with what the narrator says or with reality. Armenian is older
than Latin?
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates -- like
600 BC for Korean -- are very unclear.
I spent a fair amount of time a few months ago studying Korean
archaeology. My laptop was then stolen, so I'm to a certain
extent talking out of my hat here, but anyway, 600 B.C. is before
several important *prehistoric* events. Gina Barnes's
<Archaeology of East Asia>, 2015 edition, cites a paper that
claims Korean didn't even appear in the peninsula until the
previous inhabitants left to become the Yayoi of Japan. That
problematic claim aside, I didn't find anyone claiming we had
evidence of the Korean language - as opposed to written evidence
of circumstances in Korea - much before A.D. 300, when the
inscriptions kick in.
For a reasonably current view of Korean archaeology see
<http://muse.jhu.edu/issue/32860>, or if that doesn't work for
you, volume 54, number 1 of <Asian Perspectives>, a journal out of
Hawaii..
The widespread claim that Korean civilisation is 5000 years old
refers to a legend first written down in the 13th century A.D.
(We think.) This legend is very hard to reconcile with the
archaeology, unsurprising since the putative founder's parents
were a god and a bear. But not even those who promote this legend
claim to have written evidence of Korean older than the
inscriptions, or at most a few brief poems claimed to date back to
the 1st century A.D.
There's even debate over whether the people of Koguryo (roughly,
North Korea) spoke Korean or something else, and if so, what that
something else was.
The video claims to come from "Factdesk Media". Well, they
probably have desks, and evidently do media, but I'm not sure they
could spot a fact at ten inches.
That's alternative facts, Ms. Conway.
Is there any consensus on relatives of the Korean language? If "Altaic" were
actually a phylum, then Korean and Japanese might be associated with it, but
that hasn't been proven.
Read papers recently written by Alexander Vovin on Korean.
A.
Joe Bernstein
2017-12-31 00:48:13 UTC
Permalink
Snipping down to what I presume is under discussion.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joe Bernstein
On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 1:47:45 PM UTC+13, Dingbat
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates --
like 600 BC for Korean -- are very unclear.
Gina Barnes's
<Archaeology of East Asia>, 2015 edition, cites a paper that
claims Korean didn't even appear in the peninsula until the
previous inhabitants left to become the Yayoi of Japan. That
problematic claim aside, I didn't find anyone claiming we had
evidence of the Korean language - as opposed to written
evidence of circumstances in Korea - much before A.D. 300,
when the inscriptions kick in.
The video claims to come from "Factdesk Media". Well, they
probably have desks, and evidently do media, but I'm not sure
they could spot a fact at ten inches.
That's alternative facts, Ms. Conway.
Were you addressing me, someone else in the thread, or the YouTube
video's creators? If me, I'd appreciate knowing to what you
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is there any consensus on relatives of the Korean language? If
"Altaic" were actually a phylum, then Korean and Japanese might
be associated with it, but that hasn't been proven.
What I often see in linguists' writings about Korean is these two
things:

1) It's an isolate.
2) Its closest living relative (details like Jeju Island's
language aside) is Japanese.

This all precedes the whole "Altaic" issue. I'm not clear on
whether linguists have tried to figure out which so-called Altaic
family is closest to Korean, but archaeologists just love to talk
about the Tungusic peoples.

That said, I don't have a strong opinion on this, because I'm not
a linguist. I'm not an archaeologist, either, but I can read
archaeology books, and Gina Barnes's really does refer to the
paper I described, which really does say that a gap in the Korean
archaeological record in the mid-last millennium BC resulted from
everyone leaving for Japan and becoming the Japanese. The
linguistic argument for this is that there are old place names in
northern Korea (I think) which are much easier to explain as
Japonic rather than Koreanic. (Another hypothesis to explain this
is that the language of Koguryo, mentioned in a part of my post
I've snipped, was Japonic.)

I think the paper's argument is bogus. I think the alleged gap is
almost certainly a result of ignoring the radiocarbon gap that
sits exactly in the time period in question (I was compiling
radiocarbon dates with which to demonstrate this, if true, when my
laptop was stolen). Separately, the Yayoi are now known to have
shown up in Japan rather earlier than that.

So in my previous post I called it a "problematic claim".

Did you object to the paper, or to my disagreement with it, or to
what, exactly?

Joe Bernstein
--
Joe Bernstein, writer <***@gmail.com>
Peter T. Daniels
2017-12-31 05:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Bernstein
Snipping down to what I presume is under discussion.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Joe Bernstein
Post by b***@ihug.co.nz
Post by Dingbat
World's 10 oldest languages
http://youtu.be/lPuI9_ctAZU
And the origins of some of the other "beginning" dates --
like 600 BC for Korean -- are very unclear.
Gina Barnes's
<Archaeology of East Asia>, 2015 edition, cites a paper that
claims Korean didn't even appear in the peninsula until the
previous inhabitants left to become the Yayoi of Japan. That
problematic claim aside, I didn't find anyone claiming we had
evidence of the Korean language - as opposed to written
evidence of circumstances in Korea - much before A.D. 300,
when the inscriptions kick in.
The video claims to come from "Factdesk Media". Well, they
probably have desks, and evidently do media, but I'm not sure
they could spot a fact at ten inches.
That's alternative facts, Ms. Conway.
Were you addressing me, someone else in the thread, or the YouTube
video's creators? If me, I'd appreciate knowing to what you
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is there any consensus on relatives of the Korean language? If
"Altaic" were actually a phylum, then Korean and Japanese might
be associated with it, but that hasn't been proven.
What I often see in linguists' writings about Korean is these two
1) It's an isolate.
2) Its closest living relative (details like Jeju Island's
language aside) is Japanese.
This all precedes the whole "Altaic" issue. I'm not clear on
whether linguists have tried to figure out which so-called Altaic
family is closest to Korean, but archaeologists just love to talk
about the Tungusic peoples.
That said, I don't have a strong opinion on this, because I'm not
a linguist. I'm not an archaeologist, either, but I can read
archaeology books, and Gina Barnes's really does refer to the
paper I described, which really does say that a gap in the Korean
archaeological record in the mid-last millennium BC resulted from
everyone leaving for Japan and becoming the Japanese. The
linguistic argument for this is that there are old place names in
northern Korea (I think) which are much easier to explain as
Japonic rather than Koreanic. (Another hypothesis to explain this
is that the language of Koguryo, mentioned in a part of my post
I've snipped, was Japonic.)
I think the paper's argument is bogus. I think the alleged gap is
almost certainly a result of ignoring the radiocarbon gap that
sits exactly in the time period in question (I was compiling
radiocarbon dates with which to demonstrate this, if true, when my
laptop was stolen). Separately, the Yayoi are now known to have
shown up in Japan rather earlier than that.
So in my previous post I called it a "problematic claim".
Did you object to the paper, or to my disagreement with it, or to
what, exactly?
Something called "Factdesk Media."

That seems to be "the video" in question.

Yusuf B Gursey
2017-12-19 02:23:44 UTC
Permalink
There is false information on Sanskrit
Also the comment on language evolving from "grunts"
Neo Aramaic is spoken in SE Turkey
Arabic should have been included.
Loading...