gnomi and chaoswrangler, have you ever heard of Edenics?
I hadn't heard of the term "Edenics" but I've seen the idea before. I've yet to see an account that covers subsystems of a language* rather than just throwing out semi-random examples and calling that proof.
*[geek alert] A standard linguistic method for identifying related languages is to compare simple vocabulary words (e.g. low numbers, simple family relations, basic body parts) that are likely to be (a) in any human language, (b) learned early by native speakers, and (c) less likely to be replaced by words borrowed from another language.
So, allowing for differences in writing and pronunciation (since I don't have an easy way to represent linguistic symbols): one-un, two-deux, three-trois, six-six, seven-sept, nine-neuf is somewhat convincing (since 4, 5, and 8 had to be skipped) while six-shesh, seven-sheva is not (since 1-5 and 8-9 had to be left out). So I'm less skeptical about English being (closely) related to French than to Hebrew.
Another basic tactic is to show that certain sounds in one language often correspond to related sounds in a second language. For example Hebrew "sh"-Aramaic "t": shalosh-t'lat (three), sheleg-t'lag (snow), and shor-tor (ox) - all basic words/concepts. I've yet to see a good example of a sound shift that's consistent between Hebrew and English.
Did the speaker you heard use either of these tactics or just random examples?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
linguistic geeking
Date: 2007-01-08 06:14 pm (UTC)I hadn't heard of the term "Edenics" but I've seen the idea before. I've yet to see an account that covers subsystems of a language* rather than just throwing out semi-random examples and calling that proof.
*[geek alert]
A standard linguistic method for identifying related languages is to compare simple vocabulary words (e.g. low numbers, simple family relations, basic body parts) that are likely to be (a) in any human language, (b) learned early by native speakers, and (c) less likely to be replaced by words borrowed from another language.
So, allowing for differences in writing and pronunciation (since I don't have an easy way to represent linguistic symbols): one-un, two-deux, three-trois, six-six, seven-sept, nine-neuf is somewhat convincing (since 4, 5, and 8 had to be skipped) while six-shesh, seven-sheva is not (since 1-5 and 8-9 had to be left out). So I'm less skeptical about English being (closely) related to French than to Hebrew.
Another basic tactic is to show that certain sounds in one language often correspond to related sounds in a second language. For example Hebrew "sh"-Aramaic "t": shalosh-t'lat (three), sheleg-t'lag (snow), and shor-tor (ox) - all basic words/concepts. I've yet to see a good example of a sound shift that's consistent between Hebrew and English.
Did the speaker you heard use either of these tactics or just random examples?