My view of linguistics

A forum for guides, lessons and sharing of useful information.
Locked
User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 3015
Joined: 29 Apr 2013 04:06

My view of linguistics

Post by Shemtov »

I understand if this post gets deleted, as it's heavily Religion based, but I think my view needs explanation for further interaction with me.
I am an Orthodox Jew, and I believe in Babel text as the word of G-d. However, this is a very different view then the Christian one. Basically, pre-Babel, their we're two languages, Hebrew, used only for sacred purpose, and"Aramaic", which really was what linguists call Proto-Semitic. The latter was G-D's way of corrupting the language of creation, Hebrew, so it wouldn't be used as a vulgar tongue. After Babel, the world divided into many proto-languages, that had split into 70 by the time of Moses. Afro-Asiatic does not exist, as not only is Semitic a root family, but so are Egyptian (Mitzri) and Berber (Ludi?). It is possible that Cushitic, Omotic and Chadic, are one North-African family, but whatever the case, I admit to an Afro-Asiatic sprachbund.
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1959
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: My view of linguistics

Post by Salmoneus »

I think the important thing to note here is that none of this is true.

User avatar
Parlox
greek
greek
Posts: 497
Joined: 10 Feb 2017 20:28
Location: Ehh

Re: My view of linguistics

Post by Parlox »

Salmoneus wrote:
16 Feb 2018 02:58
I think the important thing to note here is that none of this is true.
I agree.
  • :con: Gondolan, the pride of the Gondolan empire.
  • :con: Tsodanian, a tri-cons language with heavy armenian influence.
  • :con: Yaponese, an isolated language in Japan.
  • :con: Mothaukan, crazy tonal language.

User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 3015
Joined: 29 Apr 2013 04:06

Re: My view of linguistics

Post by Shemtov »

Salmoneus wrote:
16 Feb 2018 02:58
I think the important thing to note here is that none of this is true.
I only posted it so people would understand why I tend not to talk about Diachronic Semitic or Afroasiatic, or why I refer to Afroasiatic as "So-called Afroasiatic".
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien

User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4025
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

Re: My view of linguistics

Post by Ahzoh »

I don't how one can study so much about linguistics and how languages change over time but still believe the Babel story, let alone believe a descendant was around at the time of its ancient ancestor.

I guess this is what happens when belief supersedes reason.
Image Ӯсцьӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Śāt Wērxālu (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1054
Joined: 16 May 2010 00:25

Re: My view of linguistics

Post by Xonen »

Locking this thread before it degenerates into a full-blown flamewar.

Shemtov, if your religion forbids you from discussing a subject without violating the "controversial or extraordinary claims" part of the house rules, then I suggest you refrain from discussing such subjects on this board.

Everyone, I suggest you refrain from entering discussions with people on subjects where said people have announced that their views are based on religion. That tends to be the point where the possibility for civil, rational discussion flies out the window.

User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1054
Joined: 16 May 2010 00:25

Re: My view of linguistics

Post by Xonen »

Right, Shemtov sent me a PM explaining that it's not all of historical linguistics he rejects, just Afro-Asiatic. I still think a literal interpretation of the Babel text leads to problems with time frames, if nothing else, but I'll admit avoiding all of historical linguistics is going too far. I've edited my previous post.

Locked