FINAL PROJECT

BY:

GEDE SUTRISNA
(02. 3659. 09)

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

STKIP-AH SINGARAJA
2011
 Language change and evolution
Dr. C. George Boeree

Languages change, usually very slowly, sometimes very rapidly. There are many reasons a
language might change. One obvious reason is interaction with other languages. If one tribe of
people trades with another, they will pick up specific words and phrases for trade objects, for
example. If a small but powerful tribe subdues a larger one, we find that the language of the elite
often shows the influence of constant interaction with the majority, while the majority language
imports vocabulary and speaking styles from the elite language. Often one or the other simply
disappears, leaving behind a profoundly altered "victor." English is, in fact, an example of this:
The Norman French of the conquerers has long disappeared, but not before changing Anglo-
Saxon into, well, a highly Frenchified English.

If a people are isolated on islands or mountain valleys, language can change very slowly indeed.
But it still changes. For example, in the highlands of Papua New Guinea are many dozens of
languages, each quite different from its neighbors. But they are apparently the results of long-
term isolation rather than mutual influence. The same has happened in the Caucasus Mountains
between Russia and Turkey and Iran.

The slower mechanisms of change seem to include the "battle" between simplicity and
expressiveness. We want our languages to communicate as much information as possible, and
yet do so economically. We want our languages rich yet concise. How many prepositions or
cases do we need? How many are too much? How many verb forms do we need, and how many
strain the brain? How many suffixes, prefixes, and irregularities can children take before they
begin to simplify? What combinations of sounds are easily pronounced and easily understood?
And so on.

One surprising aspect of language change is the influence of fashion and even of individual
idiosyncracies. Although the story is apocryphal, some say that the th pronunciation of Castillian
Spanish was due to courtiers imitating the lisp of a young king! In my own family, we refer to
Christmas as Wikis because of one of children's inability to say Christmas. Imagine if we were a
part of a tightly knit tribal village: If others thought it was as cute as we did, the word Christmas
could morph into Wikis in one generation! That has probably happened millions of times in
human history.

Let's look at a real example of a very influential people:

Around 5000 bc, between the Danube river valley and the steppes of what is now the Ukraine,
there lived small tribes of primitive farmers who all spoke the same language. They cultivated
rye and oats, and kept pigs, geese, and cows. They would soon become the first people on earth
to tame the local wild horses -- an accomplishment that would make them a significant part of
history for thousands of years to come. And their proximity to the culturally more advance
people of Asia Minor -- what is now Turkey -- would allow them to learn the metal working
invented there, beginning with copper.
Beginning around 3000 bc, these people would spread into Europe and the Russian steppes.
Around 1500 bc, they would continue into Persia and India, even as far as western China. Later
still (in the last 500 years), they would spread to the Americas, Australia, the Pacific islands, and
parts of Africa. They would take their language with them, although it would gradually change
into hundreds of mutually unintelligible languages, including English, German, French, Spanish,
Russian, Persian, Hindi and many more.

By examining the oldest examples of modern and classical languages such as Greek, Latin, and
Sanskrit, linguists have been able to reconstruct an educated guess as to what the language of
these ancient people was like. They call the language Proto-Indo-European. The work that went
into reconstructing Proto-Indo-European has led to efforts to reconstruct other prehistorical
language ancestors as well.

To show you how these linguists did this, let's start with a simple example: Italian, Spanish,
Portuguese, French, and Rumanian all come from Latin, which we still have many records of.
Words with -ct- in the middle in Latin changed in a systematic way, like this:

Latin Italian Spanish Portuguese French English

dicto detto dicho dito dit said
lacte latte leche leite lait milk
lecto letto lecho leito lit bed
nocte notte noche noite nuit night

So one "rule" could be that a "difficult" combination of letters like -ct- change in certain ways to
end up "simpler." In most of the descendent languages, it just became -t-; in Spanish, it became
ch. Another example: Words that began with pl-, cl-, or fl- in Latin changed in a systematic way
as well. In this case the initial consonant combinations "simplified" in different ways in Italian,
Spanish, and Portuguese, but remained the same in French. In Italian, the l became an i, in
Spanish they became ll (pronounced like y), and in Portuguese they became ch (pronounced like
sh):

Latin Italian Spanish Portuguese French English

pleno pieno lleno cheio plein full
clave chiave llave chave clef key
flamma fiamma llama chama flamme flame

The relationships among the Germanic languages are often obvious, and linguists have
reconstructed what they call Proto-Germanic:

English Dutch German Danish Norwegian Swedish Icelandic

book boek buch bog bok bok bók
 come komen kommen komme komme komma koma
drink drinken trinken drikke drikke dricka drekka

And among the Slavic languages, the relationships are more obvious still, and they have
reconstructed a Proto-Slavic:

Serbo-
Russian Belarus Ukrainian Polish Czech Slovak Slovenian Makedonian Bulgarian
Croatian
mat' maci maty matka matka matka mati mati majka maika
vera vera vira wiara vira viera vera vjera vera vjara
son son son sen sen sen sen san son san

Over time, the linguists learned the patterns of change, and have used them to reconstruct
languages whose original versions we no longer have any record of -- such as Proto-Indo-
European! They are able to use some of the oldest versions of the different branches of the Indo-
European languages as a foundation:

Old Church
English Sanskrit Greek Latin Old Irish Gothic Lithuanian
Slavic
four chaturtha tettares quattuor cethair fidwor keturi chetyre
five pancha pente quinque coic fimf penki peti
mother maatra mater mater mathir modhir mote mati
brother bhrataa phrater fratera brathair brothar brolis bratu

These examples are nowhere near as obviously related -- but they are, in fact, related. The words
for brother are clearer than the others: You can see that the first sound varies between b, bh (a
breathy b), ph (a breathy p), and f. The first vowel varies between a and o. The middle
consonant varies between t and th. In all but the last two languages, the words end in some
variation of ar or er. Notice that the examples include Sanskrit (ancestor of the languages of
northern India), Greek, Old Irish, and Lithuanian! Gothic is the oldest recorded version of the
Germanic languages, and Old Church Slavic the oldest of the Slavic languages. There are, in
fact, even more relatives, including Albanian, Armenian, the languages of Iran, and many
languages which haven't survived.

By examining the patterns in many languages and many words, linguists have reconstructed the
Proto-Indo-European forms of these and many other words:

Proto-indoeuropean
kwetwer
 penkwe
mater
bhrater

For a few more examples, here are the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European numbers from one to
ten:

oino, dwo, trei, kwetker, penkwe, sweks, sept, oktou, newn, dekm.
Look vaguely familiar?

Linguists have reconstructed other "Proto" languages for other language families. Some, such as
the Polynesian languages, are relatively easy, because those languages only diverged about 1000
years ago. Others are nearly impossible, either because of a lack of older written material, or
because it isn't even certain that the languages are truly related!

Many linguists believe that it is hard to go much further than 5000 years, even with a good set of
vocabularies to work with. In fact, many suggest that over 10,000 years, the changes that occur
are so thorough that no clear connection can be established between two languages that separated
that long ago. But saying something is impossible has never stopped us before! Some other
linguists have indeed taken the leap and used certain specialized statistical tools to project back
to a language that (supposedly) is the ancestor not only of Proto-indoeuropean, but of the
language groups Afro-Asiatic (e.g. Arabic, Hebrew, and ancient Egyptian), Uralic (e.g. Finnish
and Hungarian), Altaic (e.g. Turkish and Mongolian), Dravidian (the languages of southern
India), Korean, Japanese, the languages of eastern Siberia, and Eskimo-Aleut!

They call the reconstruction Nostratic (meaning "ours"), and suggest that it may have existed
some 15,000 to 20,000 years ago. Some examples of words that may have been a part of
Nostratic include küjna (dog), p'at (foot), haku (water), and küni (woman). Perhaps you
recognize them from words like canine (and hound!), pedicure (and foot!), aqua (and water!),
and gynecologist (and queen!).

To do this, some linguists have used a different set of techniques. Instead of looking at a vast
collection of words, they look at a smaller collection of words that have shown a certain stability
in languages such as the Indo-European languages. They then look at statistical patterns over a
large number of languages. It is techniques like this that have allowed linguists to suggest, for
example, that most North and South American Indian languages are part of a language group
they called Amerindian -- something the older, more meticulous methods could not do, and many
linguists still do not trust.

But wait! Why stop there? Take a look at the reconstructed words from Proto-Amerindian for
dog, foot, water, and woman: akuan, pet, haku, and kuna! These look like the Nostratic küjna,
p'at, haku, and küni, don't they? Some linguists go way out on a limb and suggest that we can
actually reconstruct at least a little bit of what they call Proto-World, presumed to exist perhaps
100,000 years ago! Kujan is the suggested proto-world for dog; pat is foot, haku is water; kuni is
woman. It sounds unbelievable, and that's exactly what the majority of linguists think it is:
unbelievable. There are way too many opportunities for false similarities to creep in and distort
the results!

Nevertheless, it is likely that, "once upon a time," there was indeed only one language, one with
a limited vocabulary and simple rules for combining words into sentences. As the need arose,
the vocabulary could expand by combining old words or inventing new ones, and the rules could
become more and more detailed. At some point, long ago, the vocabulary and the grammar
apparently levelled off: All languages today, no matter how "primitive" the people, appear to be
equal in their abilities to express the nuances and complexities of human life.

© Copyright 2003, C. George Boeree

 I. SUMMARY

Language change and evolution

Dr. C. George Boeree

Languages can change in certain condition. It usually changes very slowly, but in
the other side it sometimes changes very rapidly. There are many reasons a language might
change. One of them is interaction with other languages. It is usually happening when one
tribe of people use specific words and phrases in order to trade the objects. The writer find
that the language of the elite often shows the influence of constant interaction with the
majority, while the majority language imports vocabulary and speaking styles from the elite
language.

Language can change very slowly if a people live in isolated area like islands, mountain or
valleys. The language seems like the results of long-term isolation. It is different than
mutual influence commonly. As the example, there are many kinds of languages in the
highlands of Papua New Guinea and in the Caucasus Mountains. But each of those
languages is quite different next to the other.

As the simplicity and expressiveness, in the other hand we want the languages can be used
to catch as much information as possible within right structure, and economically.
Language change is also influenced by fashion and individual behavior. As the example,
the writer’s said that one of his children said Christmas as Wikis because that child was
unable to say Christmas. The writer then predict that the word Christmas could morph into
Wikis in the future if the others thought it was as cute as they did.

That kind of story has probably happened millions of times in human history. Around 5000
bc, lived small tribes of primitive farmers who all spoke the same language in the steppes
of what is now the Ukraine. But later when these people spread into Europe and the
Russian steppes, their language gradually change into hundreds of mutually unintelligible
languages, including English, German, French, Spanish, Russian, Persian, Hindi and many
more.

Nowadays, by examining the oldest examples of modern and classical languages such as
Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, linguists call the language of these ancient people as Proto-
Indo-European. They also reconstruct the other languages such as Germanic languages that
they call Proto-Germanic and Slavic languages that they call Proto-Slavic. Furthermore, the
linguists learned the patterns of change which they used them to reconstruct languages.
They use some of the oldest versions of the different branches of the Indo-European
languages as a foundation such as Sanskrit (ancestor of the languages of northern India),
Greek, Old Irish, Lithuanian, Gothic (the oldest recorded version of the Germanic
languages), and Old Church Slavic (the oldest of the Slavic languages).

Linguists have reconstructed other Proto languages for other language families. Each of
them has their own characteristics, such as Polynesian languages which are relatively easy,
whereas the others are nearly impossible.

The linguists have used certain specialized statistical tools to project back the language of
ancestor beside Proto-Indo-European, such as Afro-Asiatic (e.g. Arabic, Hebrew, and
ancient Egyptian), Uralic (e.g. Finnish and Hungarian), Altaic (e.g. Turkish and
Mongolian), Dravidian (the languages of southern India), Korean, Japanese, the languages
of eastern Siberia, and Eskimo-Aleut.

It is like a different set of techniques because they look at a smaller collection of words that
have shown certain stability in languages such as the Indo-European languages, instead of
looking at a vast collection of words. They then look at statistical patterns over a large
number of languages. But in the other side, there are many linguists still do not trust to use
these techniques.
 The reconstructed words for dog, foot, water, and woman: akuan, pet, haku, and kuna
from Proto-Amerindian look like the Nostratic küjna, p'at, haku, and küni. Kujan is the
suggested proto-world for dog; pat is foot, haku is water; kuni is woman. The
linguists presumed that it existed perhaps 100,000 years ago. It sounds unbelievable, and
that's exactly what the majority of linguists think it is: unbelievable. There are way too
many opportunities for false similarities to creep in and distort the results!

After all, the linguists then conclude that once upon a time there was indeed only one
language, one with a limited vocabulary and simple rules for combining words into
sentences. As the need arose, the vocabulary could expand by combining old words or
inventing new ones, and the rules could become more and more detailed. At some point,
long ago, the vocabulary and the grammar apparently leveled off: All languages today, no
matter how "primitive" the people, appear to be equal in their abilities to express the
nuances and complexities of human life.
 II. THE REASON

I choose this article because I think it’s interesting and impressive. The topic is
about language change and evolution. In this article I know how the language
change, the history of ancient languages, and the way how the linguists reconstruct
them into various languages nowadays.

III. THE ARGUMENT

• STRENGTH

The writer explains about how the linguists reconstruct the ancient language
into various languages clearly. As the example, it is explained how the
linguists reconstruct Latin into Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and
Rumanian.

• WEAKNESS

The writer doesn’t mention and explain the cause of language change and
evolution clearly. He just explains one cause in simple way and it does not
cover all of the material.

IV. THE SIGNIFICANT

• We know how do the language change

• We know how the linguists reconstruct the language of the ancient people in
a systematic way.
• We know many kind of the ancient language and the change of them in the
future.
V. REFERENCE

http://www.prel.hawaii.edu