h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hmm, Ste,

Your subtitle : 'A perspective on species' isn't bad, although it doesn't specifically mention language.

Or - 'Species differentiation and language comparison' - a bit clumsy.

Or - 'A comparison between how species and languages arise'.

Maybe sleep on it!

Hi Ste - nice entry!

There are a couple of additional things that you might want to define in footnotes "genomics" comes particularly to mind but generally it's excellant .

The only point I am concerned about is the use of Mandarin/Cantonese as an analogy for species which are just-about interbreeding. I don't know much about either subject but as far as I can see, the two chinese languages remain distinct, it is just that some people can speak both. If you bring two species together & breed say a zebra with a donkey, you get a zeedonk (ie a mixture) & not just one or the other that can breed with both. I think (but I know v. little about this) that some of the Scandi languages might be better examples. If I remember correctly (& this is by no means certain) Norwegian is about half way between Swedish & Danish to the extent that Norwegians can get by in any of the three countries but a Dane can't talk to a Swede. You may well know more about this than me, but I thought I should raise the point.



Ugi

Zarquon:
Slept on it. Couldn't think of anything

Ugi:
Hi , thanks for you comments. I will add a footnote on genomics. It's the field I work in, so sometimes I forget that there are people out there that don't know what it is .

The thing is with the zeedonk that it is entirely artificial. The zebra and donkey would never interbreed in nature, and that is what makes them a species. Well, that and their genetic distinctness.

I totally get your point about the difference between China and the Scandinavian countries, I had forgotten about them . Do you mind if I use this example in the entry? I think it is much better than mine.



Ste

'How to Identify a Species', or something? There's lots of 'How To' Entries around here...

Hi Ste,

I realised that you never get a natural zeedonk - it was just an example that I thought people might be familiar with. The point is just that you get a blend and it's easier to see in an extreme example like that.

Use anything you wish by the way - I always think the point of contributing to PR is that the author gets the chance to refine what (s)he has written in view of other people's comments. You might need to check up on the Scandi bit a little thou'. What I know about Scandi linguistics you could write on - well on something really pretty small, using a very fat pen



Ugi

Right then!

I have changed the title to "Language and Life - A Perspective on Species". What do you think?

It's undergoing a revision right now, I don't have time to complete it totally right now, but I'll get down to it. The research is done and I know what I'm going to write. I have removed the bit about China after some thought and replaced it with some stuff on Scandinavian languages, which, after some excellent adivce, are far more interesting and relevant.

I'm also in the midst of adding to the conclusion.

I'll get back to you when I'm done

Thanks!

Ste

Alright! Done!

What does everyone think?

-Added a small bit to "Language and Species" about English.

-Removed the China part

-Added a new section on the North Germanic (Scandinavian) countries.

Thanks for the advice

Ste

Oh, and what about the new title?

All looks good to me - reads as a polished, well thought out, entry I would say.

Ugi

, Thanks Ugi.

Ste,

There are a lot of comments I'd like to make about this, particularly about the comparison between the concept of different languages and species. Haven't got time now, but I'll be back this evening.

Jack

Eeek! I just took a look at your userpage and you are a linguistics person.

I'm bracing myself

Ste

I'll be nice. Linguists, in my experience, are pompous enough already

I was thinking you could make two sections about where the comparison works and where it breaks down.

Works:
languages are also becoming extinct at an alarming rate.
language change is caused by interrelation in the same way as populations of a species interrelate.
isolation leads to archaic features. You could compare the tuatara and marsupials with Icelandic (so stagnated that Icelandic speakers can read Old Norse. Icelandic has stood still while the other Norse languages have moved on. But Icelandic is innovative with its words borrowed from other languages.) or the English spoken in places such as Tristan de Cunha (small Atlantic island) - a humourously old-fashioned dialect.
Isolation also leads to innovation - creation of new and new uses of old vocabulary, discarding of unnecessary features.
the definition of what is a language is likewise slippery: "A language is a dialect with an army and navy" (Max Weinreich)
language hybrids (such as English - any linguist will immediately tell you it is a Germanic language. This classification completely disregards the strong influence from French and Latin) could be compared to strangely mixed-up creatures (such as the kiwi - genetically a bird, with two legs, a beak and vestigial wings, but in appearance and functionality more like a rat)

Breaks down:
part of the definition of what is a language is political. To use your example, Swedish, Danish and Norwegian are there separate languages mainly because each belongs to a different sovereign nation. But e.g. the 'dialects' of Italian are more diverse than Swedish, Norwegian & Danish.
natural selection is *arrested* in languages. Unnecessary and illogical elements (English & French spelling, German gender & grammar etc) are maintained as part of the language's written tradition.
But: these elements are always the first to go when pidgins are created. These contact languages are highly innovative and can soon become creoles, languages in their own right. Perhaps this is similar to the mechanism of species creation, or is it always about isolation and adaptation to new environments?
different influences help to create different languages, e.g the strong influence of Arabic on Spanish. But you could maybe relate this to the way different gene pools lead to mutations.

OK, I'm off for a lie down now.
Hope this helps
Jack

Thanks Jack!

Fantastic input . I have added a small(ish) section just before the conclusion that deals with the pros and cons of the analogy and how it stands up. At the moment it is quite basic, I'm not sure if it needs beefing up any, I suspect yes. However, that will have to wait for a few days.

I also added a bit to the germanic languages about icelandics (icelanders?) understanding Old Norse (wow!) and compared it to marsupials and mammals of the africa savannah briefly.

Can I ask... what are "pidgins"? I suspect not the rats with wings that infest central London.

I now feel that this entry needed the perspective from a linguist all along.

Thanks again

Ste<earth.

Sorry about the delay (caused by a game called Zangband. It's horribly addictive.

A pidgin is a language that arises out of trade. People who have no common language communicate via a stripped-down sort of speech, sort of like:

"Want sugar."
"Moolah?"
"Ten."
"No, Fifteen."

Well, you get the idea. This builds up into a mimimal contact language, which has words from all of the speakers' languages. Eventually a pidgin can become a fully-fledged language, used in all situations, in which case it is called a creole.

Glad I could help

Jack

The eMail from the Editors hasn't arrived yet, but if it had, it would have been unmistakably clear: this entry is now recommended


You can check its progress (which might take a couple of weeks more) here: <./>SubEditors-Process</.>




Bossel

Nice one ste

I was just on my way to say thanks to the scout that recommended the entry .

I was getting round to mentioning pidgins eventually. I'll liase with the sub once the entry has got one.



Ste

Congrats, Ste. Looking forward to seeing it on the front page.

Thanks everyone!