06-06-2003, 05:27 PM
Hi,
There are static languages.. dead languages are static. Like Latin. Latin is static because it is no longer used.
Not really. The Latin of Cicero and Caesar (first century BCE) and that of Aquinas (13th century CE) and of Newton (18th century CE) are all very different. If one wants to read the Principia in the original, a knowledge of the Commentaries is almost useless.
So, Latin is static just as Chaucer and Shakespeare and Dickens are static. It is dynamic just as any language is dynamic. That the dynamism of Latin is now slow is undeniable, but it is not non-existent. All the taxonomic inventions are adding on an almost daily basis to the Latin language. I doubt that Cicero, Caesar, Aquinas, or Newton would know what "Australopithecus africanus" means (although Scipio the Elder (and probably the Younger, too) could probably make a good guess at the "africanus" part :) )
--Pete
There are static languages.. dead languages are static. Like Latin. Latin is static because it is no longer used.
Not really. The Latin of Cicero and Caesar (first century BCE) and that of Aquinas (13th century CE) and of Newton (18th century CE) are all very different. If one wants to read the Principia in the original, a knowledge of the Commentaries is almost useless.
So, Latin is static just as Chaucer and Shakespeare and Dickens are static. It is dynamic just as any language is dynamic. That the dynamism of Latin is now slow is undeniable, but it is not non-existent. All the taxonomic inventions are adding on an almost daily basis to the Latin language. I doubt that Cicero, Caesar, Aquinas, or Newton would know what "Australopithecus africanus" means (although Scipio the Elder (and probably the Younger, too) could probably make a good guess at the "africanus" part :) )
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?