Language shift(s): are there solid rules?

MOESAN

Elite member
Messages
5,844
Reaction score
1,262
Points
113
Location
Brittany
Ethnic group
more celtic
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b - L21/S145*
mtDNA haplogroup
H3c
Languages shifts : do rules exist ?

Here a place to express your thoughts.
In more than a thread here and on other forums and blogs, we find this question : why and how occurs language shift ?
Very often we are tempted to link Y-haplos and dominant language. But the ?rules? of changes of tongue concerning complete populations appear very varied in fact. It seems to me that diverse factors play: number, power, politic organisation, level of culture, type of society, trade?
Even the term ?shift? has to be taken with caution: may we say that english rising in Britain proves the defeat of the Normans (in fact often later French people) tongue in front of the Anglo-Saxons tongue? Let?s give our opinions what will be peaceful because we are speaking here of diverse events where results are far from being tied to leadership or competition. Only a thread to put our brains at works, in absence of a scientist ?s work covering the whole question.
If you are not interested it is not a big problem. I shall know soon.
 
We could try to compare different historical shifts and to weight them and their causes?
 
I think the language shifts before the 20th century were very different from those from the 20th century onwards. For instance:

1. the spread of the IE languages, and the loss of the neolithic European ones;
2. the Celtic to Romance; and
3. the present-day language shifts
are all different from one another.

Besides all the factors already mentioned on this forum, there is also the low self-esteem of the people who abandon their language for another.
 
Very often, the most of the people in a context of competition between unequal levels of culture and economical/political power, choose the "winner" 's side (language), by snobism or economic needs, or both. Low selfesteem is often hidden back this, yes. The adoption of the winner 's saga after a few generations is a way to restablish selfesteem, whatever its worth. As I say often, "great" nations are made of a lot of defeated ones!
But it's a bit simplistic: sometimes, majestic past stays a value a long time, even when on the militarily defated side: look at Franks.
 
Very often, the most of the people in a context of competition between unequal levels of culture and economical/political power, choose the "winner" 's side (language), by snobism or economic needs, or both. Low selfesteem is often hidden back this, yes. The adoption of the winner 's saga after a few generations is a way to restablish selfesteem, whatever its worth. As I say often, "great" nations are made of a lot of defeated ones!

Indeed!

But it's a bit simplistic: sometimes, majestic past stays a value a long time, even when on the militarily defated side: look at Franks.

I've never thought about the Franks, but yes!
 
I think the language shifts before the 20th century were very different from those from the 20th century onwards. For instance:

1. the spread of the IE languages, and the loss of the neolithic European ones;
2. the Celtic to Romance; and
3. the present-day language shifts
are all different from one another.

Besides all the factors already mentioned on this forum, there is also the low self-esteem of the people who abandon their language for another.

Totally agree.
 

This thread has been viewed 4663 times.

Back
Top