Please note that Shakespeare did _not_ write in 'Old English', but in an 'early version' of modern english. 'Full chance' in the notorious Chaosium language default rules (well, maybe something like 2/3...). (Beowulf is OE, and completely incomprehensible (unless you speak Old German/fluent gargling); Chaucer is Middle English, much later, and only medium-incomprehensible). Here endeth the picky digression...
> As regards Auld Wyrmish, I am putting forward the possibility that a
> mass-marketable derivative of this was used as the common tongue in the
> EWF, and it was not the same as the language dragonewts spoke/speak.
> (Otherwise many people without good linguistic/mystic capability would
> be unable to speak it.)
But the point of the EWF _was_ to spread (apparently, allegedly, some sort of a, other qualifiers and disclaimers) mystic capability in 'the masses', to wit whatever the heck their take on 'draconic consciousness' was -- hence all the the bifurcations of brains, as well as tongues. Spreading 'Auld Wyrmish Lite', which _didn't_ in any way require (or assist in gaining) said state of mind/being would be pretty purposeless.
Bob Stancliff writes:
> Let's define some terms: "Old Pavic" is the city language in the glory
> days of the 1100's and was brought from EWF. "Pavic" is the current, or
> 1600's version of the same language after being used by the (mostly
> illiterate) Rubble population for 500 years.
I believe this is known in philosophical and rhetorical circles as 'begging the quuestion'. The question is precisely whether those _are_ reasonable or 'correct' definitions of those terms, as they crop up in the sources, especially as used in contradistinction to each other.
> I -do- believe that Pavic has lost most of the words that are not used in
> daily life, and has added local words for concepts that didn't exist in
> Dragon Pass. This merging of a foreign language with local concepts is
> how Latin turned into Spanish, French, and Italian.
And that seems a rather specious comparison to me. I don't think that 'Pavic' and 'Old Pavic' (by your definitions) are anything like as distinct as that. I'd not take it as a given that Old Pavic and _Sartarite_ were even as distinct as that, if both are Manirian languages.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail