http://glottopedia.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=MagnusPH&feedformat=atomGlottopedia - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T15:45:15ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.34.2http://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=Language&diff=11246Language2011-01-11T11:51:36Z<p>MagnusPH: /* Comments */ improve - not just less isolation leads to language death it needs to be coupled with power differentials - multilingual situations can be completely stable</p>
<hr />
<div>The word '''language''' has two rather distinct senses that should be kept apart, corresponding to French ''langue'' 'a particular language' and French ''langage'' 'human language, the ability to speak and understand speech'.<br />
<br />
===Comments===<br />
<br />
In the first sense, a language is defined as a system for face-to-face communication among humans that is used in everyday interaction and allows people to exchange their thoughts about any imaginable topic. The great majority of languages use the articulatory apparatus of the mouth, the acoustic medium, and the perceptual apparatus of the ear, but this is not part of the definition. Sign languages, which use manual and facial articulation and the visual channel, a languages in the full sense of the word, just like spoken languages. The great majority of languages are acquired by most of their speakers in early childhood (as "native languages", as misleading term because "native" suggests that speakers are born with it), in a seemingly effortless, or at least untaught way, as part of ordinary interaction with caretakers and older children. But languages can be acquired also through classroom teaching, and some languages are studied by more adolescent or adult learners than acquired "naturally" by children (e.g. Irish, Maori, Hawaiian, and perhaps English). There are also some languages that are exclusively (or almost exclusively) acquired in this way, among them classical languages such as Sanskrit or Latin, artificial languages such as Esperanto, and recently extinct emblematic languages, such as Cornish and Chinuk Wawa. These are also full languages by the definition above, and the way in which they are normally acquired could change, as it has in the case of Hebrew, which for centuries was acquired more like Sanskrit, but is now widely used as an everyday language and acquired in early childhood.<br />
<br />
There are also many cases of "languages" that are not fully included by our definition, and there seems to be widespread agreement that these are not languages in the full sense of the term. "Animal languages" are not used among humans and are invariably quite restricted; nonhuman animals are not able to exchange information and views about any imaginable topic (at least not about any topic imaginable by humans). "Programming languages" are used only for communication with machines, and only for highly restricted contents. These are languages only in an improper, extended sense. Sometimes the terms "natural language" and "artificial language" are used, and animal languages would of course fall under the former, while programming languages would fall under the latter. But this division is not very useful for languages in the full sense. One might say about Esperanto that it is "artificial" because it was created by a single individual in very recent history (just as programming languages have a well known history), but it is a little odd to define a kind of language by the way it originated. We do not know how other languages originated, and it is possible (though admittedly unlikely) that other languages such as Basque or Japanese were also created in this way. What is crucial is how it is used, and Esperanto is used very much like other languages. The term "natural language" is also used by logicians and computer scientists for "language", to stress the contrast between the programming and formal languages with which they are centrally concerned.<br />
<br />
Languages are generally opposed to dialects, which linguists define as speech forms that differ from each other, but not sufficiently to prevent mutual comprehensibility. This definition often conflicts with nontechnical usage. For example, Norwegian and Danish are generally considered two different languages, but they differ less from each other than the German dialects of Bavaria and the Rhineland (which are not really mutually intelligible). And whether a speech form is a dialect or just a subdialect is likewise often undecidable. Linguists use the term "lect" for any kind of speech form, from the most concrete idiolect (the speech form of a single person) to the most abstract language. Whether two lects are considered dialects of the same language or two different languages depends on what the speakers think, and linguists are not so rigid in applying their definitions that they would insist on talking about the "Norwegian-Danish" language (though sometimes the umbrella term "Continental Scandinavian" is used, including Swedish but exclusing Icelandic), on about the "Bavarian language".<br />
<br />
"Language" in the second sense refers to the ability to use a language (in the first sense). In the second sense, the word is used without an article in English. This ability comprises several subsystems that all need to be in place: an articulatory system, an auditory system, a perceptual system, an inventory of words, and inventory of grammatical patterns, semantic knowledge, and pragmatic and social abilities. If any of these subsystems is lacking or not working properly, language use breaks down. Linguists have generally focused their attention on the inventory of words and the grammatical patterns, but they have tended to isolate these from the other interacting subsystems, thus often making it harder to understand how the entire system works and how the more external systems influence the more internal ones.<br />
<br />
It is not obvious at first glance why different people should use different speech forms, i.e. different lects and different languages. Communication is such a basic human skill and need that it would seem to be more straightforward if all humans used the same speech form, just as all humans have the same body parts and bodily functions. However, the reason for this linguistic diversity evidently is that language as such is not innate. All the component systems are based on biological prerequisites that were mostly in place for a long time before language, and it was only fairly recently in human history that everything was brought together. At that time, human existence was already strongly dependent on cultural transmission of knowledge, and cultural transmission of language implies its mutability, and diversity if populations are isolated. The past few centuries have seen less and less isolation of populations combined with stronger and stronger political hegemonies of a few majority languages, leading to a dramatic loss of linguistic diversity.<br />
<br />
===Other languages===<br />
French [[langue]], [[langage]] German [[Sprache]]<br />
<br />
{{dc}}<br />
[[Category:General]]</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=Language&diff=11245Language2011-01-11T11:50:01Z<p>MagnusPH: this is pure speculation and I don't think anyone actually considers it remotely likely to happen</p>
<hr />
<div>The word '''language''' has two rather distinct senses that should be kept apart, corresponding to French ''langue'' 'a particular language' and French ''langage'' 'human language, the ability to speak and understand speech'.<br />
<br />
===Comments===<br />
<br />
In the first sense, a language is defined as a system for face-to-face communication among humans that is used in everyday interaction and allows people to exchange their thoughts about any imaginable topic. The great majority of languages use the articulatory apparatus of the mouth, the acoustic medium, and the perceptual apparatus of the ear, but this is not part of the definition. Sign languages, which use manual and facial articulation and the visual channel, a languages in the full sense of the word, just like spoken languages. The great majority of languages are acquired by most of their speakers in early childhood (as "native languages", as misleading term because "native" suggests that speakers are born with it), in a seemingly effortless, or at least untaught way, as part of ordinary interaction with caretakers and older children. But languages can be acquired also through classroom teaching, and some languages are studied by more adolescent or adult learners than acquired "naturally" by children (e.g. Irish, Maori, Hawaiian, and perhaps English). There are also some languages that are exclusively (or almost exclusively) acquired in this way, among them classical languages such as Sanskrit or Latin, artificial languages such as Esperanto, and recently extinct emblematic languages, such as Cornish and Chinuk Wawa. These are also full languages by the definition above, and the way in which they are normally acquired could change, as it has in the case of Hebrew, which for centuries was acquired more like Sanskrit, but is now widely used as an everyday language and acquired in early childhood.<br />
<br />
There are also many cases of "languages" that are not fully included by our definition, and there seems to be widespread agreement that these are not languages in the full sense of the term. "Animal languages" are not used among humans and are invariably quite restricted; nonhuman animals are not able to exchange information and views about any imaginable topic (at least not about any topic imaginable by humans). "Programming languages" are used only for communication with machines, and only for highly restricted contents. These are languages only in an improper, extended sense. Sometimes the terms "natural language" and "artificial language" are used, and animal languages would of course fall under the former, while programming languages would fall under the latter. But this division is not very useful for languages in the full sense. One might say about Esperanto that it is "artificial" because it was created by a single individual in very recent history (just as programming languages have a well known history), but it is a little odd to define a kind of language by the way it originated. We do not know how other languages originated, and it is possible (though admittedly unlikely) that other languages such as Basque or Japanese were also created in this way. What is crucial is how it is used, and Esperanto is used very much like other languages. The term "natural language" is also used by logicians and computer scientists for "language", to stress the contrast between the programming and formal languages with which they are centrally concerned.<br />
<br />
Languages are generally opposed to dialects, which linguists define as speech forms that differ from each other, but not sufficiently to prevent mutual comprehensibility. This definition often conflicts with nontechnical usage. For example, Norwegian and Danish are generally considered two different languages, but they differ less from each other than the German dialects of Bavaria and the Rhineland (which are not really mutually intelligible). And whether a speech form is a dialect or just a subdialect is likewise often undecidable. Linguists use the term "lect" for any kind of speech form, from the most concrete idiolect (the speech form of a single person) to the most abstract language. Whether two lects are considered dialects of the same language or two different languages depends on what the speakers think, and linguists are not so rigid in applying their definitions that they would insist on talking about the "Norwegian-Danish" language (though sometimes the umbrella term "Continental Scandinavian" is used, including Swedish but exclusing Icelandic), on about the "Bavarian language".<br />
<br />
"Language" in the second sense refers to the ability to use a language (in the first sense). In the second sense, the word is used without an article in English. This ability comprises several subsystems that all need to be in place: an articulatory system, an auditory system, a perceptual system, an inventory of words, and inventory of grammatical patterns, semantic knowledge, and pragmatic and social abilities. If any of these subsystems is lacking or not working properly, language use breaks down. Linguists have generally focused their attention on the inventory of words and the grammatical patterns, but they have tended to isolate these from the other interacting subsystems, thus often making it harder to understand how the entire system works and how the more external systems influence the more internal ones.<br />
<br />
It is not obvious at first glance why different people should use different speech forms, i.e. different lects and different languages. Communication is such a basic human skill and need that it would seem to be more straightforward if all humans used the same speech form, just as all humans have the same body parts and bodily functions. However, the reason for this linguistic diversity evidently is that language as such is not innate. All the component systems are based on biological prerequisites that were mostly in place for a long time before language, and it was only fairly recently in human history that everything was brought together. At that time, human existence was already strongly dependent on cultural transmission of knowledge, and cultural transmission of language implies its mutability, and diversity if populations are isolated. The past few centuries have seen less and less isolation of populations, leading to a dramatic loss of linguistic diversity. This would mean that there would be no more need for the first sense of the term "language" (in nonhistorical contexts), because having language in the second sense would mean using the only language that exists.<br />
<br />
===Other languages===<br />
French [[langue]], [[langage]] German [[Sprache]]<br />
<br />
{{dc}}<br />
[[Category:General]]</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=User:MagnusPH&diff=11069User:MagnusPH2010-08-25T20:17:33Z<p>MagnusPH: update</p>
<hr />
<div>Magnus Pharao Hansen, MA. from University of Copenhagen. Currently graduate student of Linguistic Anthropology at Brown University.</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=Nonconfigurationality&diff=5217Nonconfigurationality2008-01-11T11:57:50Z<p>MagnusPH: spelling</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Nonconfigurationality''' is a term used to describe the syntax of those languages that allow [[free word order]], the use of [[syntactically discountinous expression]]s and extensive use of [[null-anaphora]]. The term was coined by [[Kenneth C. Hale]] in order to better describe the syntax of some languages of Australia and the Americas.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
*Golumbia, David. 2004. The interpretation of nonconfigurationality. Language and Communication 24. pp. 1-22.</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Portal:List_of_portals&diff=5215Talk:Portal:List of portals2008-01-10T20:16:52Z<p>MagnusPH: question about a possible portal for typology</p>
<hr />
<div>At the very least Glottopedia needs a portal for "Historical Linguistics" and I would advocate one for "Linguistic Classification" as well. At this point I don't feel close enough to the project to actually edit in these changes. [[User:Dkleinecke|Dkleinecke]] 00:21, 27 October 2007 (CEST)<br />
<br />
:Note that there is a proposed portal called "Diachrony" (this is also the name of the corresponding category). You might want to make a case to rename it, but I find it more elegant than "historical linguistics" (and note that one can study languages like Latin or Sumerian purely synchronically). As for "classification", I would prefer the term "genealogical classification", because it is more precise.--[[User:Haspelmath|Haspelmath]] 18:13, 28 October 2007 (CET)<br />
<br />
:How about one for typology?[[User:MagnusPH|MagnusPH]] 21:16, 10 January 2008 (CET)</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=Glottopedia:How_to_contribute&diff=5214Glottopedia:How to contribute2008-01-10T19:15:54Z<p>MagnusPH: /* Create a new article */</p>
<hr />
<div>Thank you for your interest in Glottopedia! Contributing to this free encyclopedia of linguistics is easy. Please take the following steps:<br />
<br />
==Getting started==<br />
<br />
Before you can modify or write an article, you have to log in, and if you don't have an account yet, you need to [[Glottopedia:Creating an account|create an account]]. Click on '''log in/create account''' in the upper right corner of the page. Then enter a user name (your real name, or an abbreviation of it, not a pseudonym please), a password, your e-mail address, and your real name. Then an e-mail will be sent to you to verify your e-mail address. After confirming it, you can start editing.<br />
<br />
Please do not forget to write your real name and your affiliation (or former affiliation, if you don't have a current academic affiliation) on your [[Glottopedia:User page|user page]].<br />
<br />
==Modify an article==<br />
<br />
The first thing to note is that you should not be afraid to make mistakes. Even if you are a novice and you are not familiar with the way the software works, you can hardly do any damage. Even if you accidentally delete a passage that should be kept, this can easily be restored again.<br />
<br />
In all Glottopedia articles (except for project pages like this one or the main page), you find an "Edit" tab at the top margin of the article. If you are [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]], you can edit and save the article after clicking this tab. After editing, you can also see a preview of the article (click on "Show preview"). Once you save the article (by clicking on "Save page"), the system creates a backup of the earlier version in the archive, and you new version is the version that is visible to the readers.<br />
<br />
In the field "Summary" you should describe <u>briefly</u> what you changed and why before saving the article. If you only made a minor edit (such as correcting a typo, adding a link, etc.), check the field "This is a minor edit" and leave the "Summary" field empty.<br />
<br />
While editing an article, you see at the bottom right a link [[Glottopedia:Help|Editing help]]. This will lead you to a page that helps you with explanations of the main features of the software for editing, formatting, adding links, etc. And of course you should observe the [[Glottopedia:Guidelines|Guidelines]] (you also find these in the sidebar under "Guidelines").<br />
<br />
==Create a new article==<br />
<br />
The following page explains how to create a new page in a Mediawiki wiki:<br />
*[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page Starting a new page]<br />
<br />
Suppose in an existing article you see a word that is not linked and that seems worth an article of its own.<br />
<br />
*Edit this article<br />
*Select the word and click on ''Internal Link'' in the editing toolbar.<br />
*Save the article<br />
*Click on the word with the newly created link (it should still be red)<br />
*A new window opens, in which you can write the new article<br />
<br />
This is only an example. It could be that you notice a red link (i.e. there is no article for this word yet), for which you would like to create an article, or maybe you would merely like to correct or add information in an existing article. There are many different ways in which you can help Glottopedia.<br />
<br />
==The structure of Glottopedia articles==<br />
<br />
There are four different types of articles in Glottopedia: <br />
*[[Glottopedia:Dictionary articles]] (which define, exemplify, translate, and comment on general and specific concepts and terms of linguistics<br />
*[[Glottopedia:Survey articles]] (which offer a comprehensive discussion of linguistic concepts and methods)<br />
*[[Glottopedia:Biographical articles]] (about the life and work of linguists)<br />
*[[Glottopedia:Language articles]] (which provide basic information about most natural languages [coming soon])<br />
For each kind of article, there are well-defined standards which specify its structure.<br />
To ensure consistency, all authors should strictly stick to these standards.<br />
<br />
==Copyright Issues==<br />
<br />
Glottopedia exclusively aims at facilitating scientific exchange and has no commercial interests. If you notice any copyright violation in the articles, please alert us immediately by Email so that we can act right away. Do not copy entire passages, images or other copyrighted material into a Glottopedia article. If information is taken from copyrighted works, an indication of the source in the article is required. Please be aware that a violation of these rules can put the entire project in danger.<br />
<br />
==Other languages==<br />
<br />
*German [[Glottopedia:Mitmachen|Mitmachen]]<br />
*Russian [[Glottopedia:содействовать|содействовать]]</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=Nonconfigurationality&diff=5213Nonconfigurationality2008-01-10T19:14:39Z<p>MagnusPH: add page (its small still)</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Nonconfigurationality''' is a term used to describe the syntax of those languages that allow [[free word order]], the use of [[syntactically discountinous expression]] and extensive use of [[null-anaphora]]. The term was coined by [[Kenneth C. Hale]] in order to better describe the syntax of some languages of Australia and the Americas.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
*Golumbia, David. 2004. The interpretation of nonconfigurationality. Language and Communication 24. pp. 1-22.</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=User:MagnusPH&diff=5212User:MagnusPH2008-01-10T19:06:06Z<p>MagnusPH: add</p>
<hr />
<div>Magnus Pharao Hansen, MA. from University of Copenhagen, Department of Native American Languages and Cultures (no current academic affiliation)</div>MagnusPHhttp://glottopedia.org/index.php?title=User:MagnusPH&diff=5211User:MagnusPH2008-01-10T19:05:29Z<p>MagnusPH: create page</p>
<hr />
<div>Magnus Pharao Hansen, MA. from University of Copenhagen, Department of Native American Languages and Cultures</div>MagnusPH