Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Patrick Lockerby | May 6th 2009 03:19 PM | 11 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More The Chatter Box articles

All

About Patrick Lockerby

Retired engineer, 60+ years young.
Computer builder and programmer.
Linguist specialising in language acquisition and computational linguistics.
Interested in every human endeavour except the... Full Bio

Mothers Rock!


The Hand That Rocks The Cradle

Blessings on the hand of women!
Angels guard its strength and grace,
In the palace, cottage, hovel,
Oh, no matter where the place;
Would that never storms assailed it,
Rainbows ever gently curled;
For the hand that rocks the cradle
Is the hand that rules the world.

William Ross Wallace

The development of all European languages has been something of a contest between the natural language which children learn from their mothers and the artificial constraints imposed by pedagogs and politicians. These are the two primary forces controlling the evolution of any language - the antagonistic forces of change and stability.

In the natural course of events, babies will pick up words and rules in the family home.   In a society where women stay at home and men work away from home, children's language will be dominated by maternal influences.   The core of the language, its grammar and its most common words will be stabilised by maternal influences.

There is only one force that can overcome the influence of mothers on language, and that force is agendist education. It requires a large degree of snobbery and a huge superiority complex for someone to declare that their own use of language is 'correct', and that everyone else's is flawed, debased or primitive.  The lessons of history show that there has never been a shortage of snobs to sneer and sniff and snipe at the users of natural language.   Unfortunately, they are all too often supported by force of law and arms.

In a previous blog I stated that Latin is dead because it was killed off by an intellectual snobbery which pressed it into too tight a mould. It is a fact that when there are no more mothers speaking a natural language in the presence of their children, that language is dead.   The death of a language most frequently arises when a dominant group imposes its language choices on a subject group.

In the case of French, as with English, the language spoken before the Romans arrived continued to evolve and was eventually restored as the national language. By an ordnance of Villers-Cotterets in 1539, French was made the official language of the courts, supplanting Latin. French at one time comprised over thirty dialects, of which one was eventually adopted as a standard through official policy. English had fewer dialects, and it was more by natural evolution than by diktat that a uniformity of language came to be established.

The English language has had more than its share of critics, decriers of the 'debasement' of the language, the 'encroachment' of foreign words, the 'fact' that most mothers speak appalingly bad English.   Such people would complain on the one hand that children were not learning 'proper English' from their mothers, and on the other hand deny women access to the very education that could enhance their linguistic abilities.

A baby is born knowing no language. Within about five years the child has acquired a command of the grammar of its mother tongue that would put many a grammarian to shame.   Children know intuitively not only how to construct sentences, but the rationale behind the process.   For example, the prescriptive grammarian decries the splitting of the infinitive and the ending of a sentence with a preposition.  On the other hand, a  child might say: "I want some cookies." When asked why, the child might say: "Because I want some." In the case of "I want to play a game.", the question "Why?" will probably provoke the response: "Because I want to." The child understands that 'some' is a cue to an object word, and 'to' is a cue to an action word. A child understands "Where are you going to?" because that is a perfectly normal English construction. The child's grasp of grammar is an intuitive grasp of the slots into which words may be dropped. Without that understanding, a child could never grasp the grammarian's ideas of nouns and verbs, adverbs and adjectives.

The prescriptive grammarian, on the other hand, has no intuitive grasp of how language works. Most especially in the early rise of English as a national language, prescriptive grammarians wrote books in Latin showing how barbaric the English language was, and how it could be improved if only it could be forced into the Latin mould. These people would cite Cicero as a supreme example of a master of a pure language and its literary style. It is somewhat ironic that these Ciceronians failed to observe that Cicero, in his own writings, shows himself as a believer in the superiority of Greek philosophy and rhetoric to that of Rome.


The Mother  Language

Babies acquire language merely by being in the presence of their mothers, siblings, family and friends. For all that people have different vocabularies, different accents and different speech preferences, if they are to communicate they must have a shared fundamental communication code - a grammar.   A grammar is simply a communally shared method for the stringing of sounds together to make meaningful speech.   A child, even a Greek child, needs no instruction in the formalities of synonym, antonym, metaphor, syntax, morphology.   Language is a gift to us from our mothers.   In matters of language, mother knows best.

The beauty of a language is not something to be imposed by authoritarians. It is not based on the opinions of long dead scholars and artists. The beauty of language is a gift from mother nature. The beauty is in the association of home and mother with all things good.   What country can there be on earth more fair than this, the homeland, the motherland?   What woman can there be more kind, more charming, more fair than a mother?   How does anyone then dare to see an ugliness, a barbarity in a mother tongue?

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the word.


References and resources:
Cicero
Villers Cotterets
European charter for Regional languages TheFrenchCase.pdf
Henri Gregoire

Comments

Becky Jungbauer's picture
The hand that rocks the cradle rules the word.

Every time I click on one of your posts I know I will be educated and entertained. What a wonderful turn of phrase!

logicman's picture
That was quick, Becky!  I only just posted this.  You must be a fast reader.  Obviously, nobody need ever tell you to 'get your skates on'.  :)

Becky Jungbauer's picture
:) I used to get yelled at for "reading too quickly" in elementary school, because I'd sit there with nothing to do in class. Obviously our educational system needs some work.

Gerhard Adam's picture
... that was you???  :))

rholley's picture
Patrick,

The good news is that I very much like your insight into how babies acquire language.  The "slot-drop-into" model might prove a useful one for teaching foreign languages, too.

The bad news is that I think your view of the evolution of languages other than English is somewhat over-simplified and lop-sided.  There is a series of books called "the Great Languages", and if you're interested, I would recommend reading the ones on Latin and Spanish, to see how the one developed into the other (details provided on request.) 

Seriously, I think that you are viewing the matter too much through the lens of La Filosofía Calleporterista.


logicman's picture
Robert:  I wish I could claim credit for the 'slots' model, but it has been in use for decades.  As far as I know, it developed from existing pedagogic grammars as a means of testing children's comprehension skills , and was then re-adopted as a somewhat circular means by which descriptive grammarians categorised words into parts of speech.  My own theorisation in that area is the subject of a future blog on 'quistic grammar'.  This is based on query categories: who, what, where etc.  The idea of quistic, or query-based grammar is that each word in a construct is treated as the answer to a hypothetical question.  The objective of the grammar is to form a construct which doesn't trigger an obvious question.  e.g. Went to the shop.  If no context is given, the question 'who?' is triggered.

As to the evolution of languages: it is difficult to write a brief blog on such a deep topic.  It is generally true that the actual or attempted supplanting of one language by another is the result of a deliberate policy by a ruling elite.  It is also generally true that suppressed languages can revive if enough people continue to learn the original language at home.   Language is a strong unifying force.  Colonial powers have often taken children from their homes for this very reason.   The Australian example of this is notorious.

In the matter of national languages, it is more common to find a language imposed by law, less common to find a natural evolution towards a standard.  English was made a national language initially by statute, but its grammar has never been officially defined by law.  French is a language with an officially defined version enforced by law.  From many languages and dialects, not all related in any way to Latin, the rulers chose and imposed an arbitrary standard.  From Basque, Breton, Catalan, Corsican, Flemish, Franco-Provencal, French, German, Occitan and  Walloon, in all of their many regional variants, the ruling elite selected French to be the national language.  Whilst natural evolution tends to mix languages which are shared in a nation, political pedagogy aims to prevent this as a matter of strict policy.

Ultimately, all attempts to fix a language 'for all time' are futile for as long as babies learn language from their mothers and playmates.  Politicians are well aware of this, hence they often repress minority languages by excluding them from schools and nurseries.  To the best of my knowledge, France has never ratified the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and it remains policy to either disallow the teaching of minority languages, or to limit teaching to trivial amounts.

Anyone interested in the history of the French language may find that this resource is a gold mine.

btw, I've never been a fan of Jeanette RoadCarrier.  :)

Becky Jungbauer's picture
Ha! :)

Robert, I'm curious which aspects of the filosofia you think is imbuing Patrick's article.

rholley's picture
I have to draw a clear distinction here.  I am NOT in any way referring to Street-Porter's attitude problem, which stands out by a mile.

What I am thinking of is the philosophical trope whose effect lingers long after the TV has been turned off, namely that there is something "four legs good, two legs bad" in the comparison between natural speech such as the children bring to school as against the formal English taught by the school.

Patrick is quite right about trying to force English grammar into the Latin mode.  We were taught that there are three tenses, past, present and future, but we never even heard of the aspects, simple, continuous and perfect.  I only realized these things when learning foreign languages, and it was brought into stark relief when I tried to get deeper into Spanish by studying it backwards, using a Curso Internacional de Inglés.

This über-Lateinische Altlast certainly does not help when teaching English to people from outside the linguistic Indo-Eurosphere.  http://www.personal.reading.ac.uk/~spsolley/ca/grammar.htm#have

rholley's picture
Patrick and Becky,

I have heard it said that the ancient Persians used to debate every topic twice, once when they were drunk and once when they were sober.

Now I hadn't partaken of any "substance", not even ethanol, last night, but I think what I wrote then does need a bit of explanation.  The morning gap between breakfast and (today) paper-writing is hardly enough to explain in depth, but here goes:

As far back in the 70s, my circle of friends included a large proportion of students from beyond Europe and North America, and one doing a PhD in linguistics told me about his supervisor, who proclaimed himself to be working-class and had a large chip on his shoulder about not having done Latin at school.  Now the doing of Latin came with a lot of baggage.  In the 18th century Euler 1707 - 1783 published in Latin, although himself a native German speaker, because that gave him the widest audience.  Euler was in no manner a snob.  But with advent of an army of translators the necessity of Latin decreased, and in the first half of the 19th Gauss 1777 - 1855 continued to write in Latin because he considered that anyone who hadn't acquired Latin was not fit to read his work.

Regarding Cicero, the irony is not lost on me.  But Cicero did a good job in his time.  If I have read my Barfield correctly, he invented words such as qualitas to translate the Greek poiotes, itself a creation of Plato.  Let not the fact that the Romans were soldiers and poets hide the fact that at heart they were a nation of politicians and plutocrats, and they certainly needed a bit of "kulcher".

What brought Janet Street-Porter to mind was that a few days ago I saw her giving an Apologia pro vita sua, on The One Show I think.  Driven by her own bolshie nature, she has been an advocate of replacing everything traditional by 'yoof' culture

Bewteen breakfast and  paper-writing, washing up! While doing that, I'll try to think how to explain La Filosofía comes into it.


logicman's picture
I have heard it said that the ancient Persians used to debate every
topic twice, once when they were drunk and once when they were sober.

Robert:  are you sure you weren't thinking of the Scots?

I laughed out loud when I read your comment.  Thank you for a nice kick-start to my day.

There is most definitely a lot of snobbery attached to Latin.  However, I am opposed to the politicians and 'yoof kulcha' proponents who declare that the teaching of Latin is somehow elitist.  A groundwork in Latin is a great boost in the acquisition of the Romance languages.  My only complaint is that teachers of language studies continue to promote the myth that just because these languages have so many Latin word roots they must be derived from latin.  Like so many things in science, this boils down to an appeal to ancient authorities which is not backed up by adequate recent studies.

It cannot be disputed that English has a large core of words which came directly or indirectly from Latin.  However, most of these words were incorporated into English long after the last natural born Latin speaker had died.  The same is broadly true for all languages with a core of Latin words with the possible exception of Italian and Romanian.

Returning to the topic of alcohol: it has been demonstrated that recall is enhanced by a return to the conditions prevailing when the memory was encoded.  So, if you think you may have lost your keys at the pub, get smashed and you'll almost certainly remember where you left them.

Becky Jungbauer's picture
Hmm. So if you meet someone at a bar and really like him/her, get married and then stop caring about that person, all you have to do is get smashed every day and you'll have a happy marriage? :)

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.