Eduard,

With my question I was taking the Aitchins position, one that is very
widely held in linguistics.  As to loss and gain in the lexicon, a
culture tends to have the vocabulary it needs.  Without getting into
what Geoffrey Pullum has properly called "The Great Eskimo Vocabulary
Hoax," we can look at domains like kinship terms.  I'm sure that in the
languages you know different relationships are named that are not the
same from language to language.  In Yoruba, for example, there is no
word for brother or sister.  The contrast is based on age relative to
ego, so egbon means "senior sibling" and aburo means "junior sibling",
rather than on sex as in English.  If young people are losing the
distinctions among "soil", "land", "ground", and "mud" it may be that
those distinctions are no longer salient in a highly urbanized culture.
At the same time they are developing and acquiring names for myriad
devices that we didn't know about at their age.  Whether this loss is
good or bad depends on whether you have talk about a domain in which
those distinctions are important.  For most people today, that set may
be less salient than it used to be.  But notice that as young people
specialize, they very quickly acquire the new vocabulary they're going
to need in their discipline or hobby.

Herb

-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Eduard C. Hanganu
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 10:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Language Change

Dear Herb:

Aitchins (and others)claim that language change is neither positive 
nor negative. I disagree. One language change that is definitely 
negative is loss of words due to cumulating (or collapsing)multiple 
senses into one single word.  

I the region where I live, for example, people have been using more 
and more the word "dirt" to describe "soil, "land," "ground," "mud," 
and "garbage." While some of these words have overlapping senses, 
each term has its own specific use. Collapsing all these words into 
one word is a lexical loss for the language, and leads to a survival 
lexicon.

Eduard 


On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Herbert F.W. Stahlke wrote...

>Craig,
>
>I'd like to see more comment on your last clause, "and it may not 
always
>seem for the best."  Therein lies a mammoth body of social 
judgments and
>prescriptivist nostrums.  The question is whether there are language
>changes that are in some definable sense good or bad.
>
>Herb
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
>Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:12 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: comparing superlatives (was: Blue Color; each other)
>
>Paul,
>   I'm with you on one level.  It's a shame when a perfectly fine
>(indeed,
>a unique word) begins to lose its special quality.  You would like 
to
>use it in such a way that everyone knows you mean "one of a kind". 
It's
>the kind of point I enjoy from William Safire in his columns.  Your
>students, though, are used to thinking of it as meaning "unusual"
>because that is a common meaning for it in actual use. I confess I 
have
>probably said "very unique" without thinking about it as
>problematic.>Thanks to your conversation, I have now looked closely 
at
>the dictionary and deepened my understanding.
>   I love the idea that you would talk to your students about it.  
When
>language changes, something is gained and something is lost. You 
care
>about fine shades of meaning, as we all should. Ultimately, I think
>decisions about these sorts of changes are out of our hands.  A word
>means what people think it means. But I also think that sort of
>discussion with students is very productive. Language changes over
>time, and it may not always seem for the best.
>
>
>Craig,
>>
>>   My problem with "very unique" is that unique means (to ME), one 
of a
>> kind (or some emphatic variation of that idea). It is illogical 
to me
>to
>> say that something can be "very one of a kind" or "most one of a
>kind."
>> I'm not sure how I feel about "thoroughly unique" and "absolutely
>> unique;" for some reason, and I am hard pressed to express what 
that
>> reason is, the logic doesn't bother me. Maybe I'm being too fussy
>about
>> that usage. What I really meant to emphasise in my previous post,
>> however, was that many of my students couldn't see the logical 
problem
>> in the expression in the first place.
>>
>>   It's curious that the two most "objectional" examples from the 
OED
>below
>> are first from the voice of a toad (In "The Wind in the Willows") 
and
>> next from an advertisement (Country Life, 1939). I guess that
>fictional
>> toads and real-life ad copy writers have a different sent of 
standards
>> from mine!
>>
>>   So it goes,
>>
>>   Paul D.
>>
>> Craig Hancock <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>   >Paul,
>> I just remembered I can access the OED if I use my UAlbany 
account.
>> Here's a section copied from their entry for "unique". It has been
>> "Objected to", as they say, but a fairly common practice in their 
own
>> examples, dating back well into the nineteenth century.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> From the OED, the second entry for "unique":
>>
>> 2. a. That is or forms the only one of its kind; having no like or
>> equal; standing alone in comparison with others, freq. by reason 
of
>> superior excellence; unequalled, unparalleled, unrivalled.
>> In this sense readopted from French at the end of the 18th c. and
>> regarded as a foreign word down to the middle of the 19th, from 
which
>> date it has been in very common use, with a tendency to take the 
wider
>> meaning of 'uncommon, unusual, remarkable'.
>> The usage in the comparative and superlative, and with advs. as
>> absolutely, most, quite, thoroughly, totally, etc., has been 
objected
>to
>> as tautological.
>>
>> 1618 W. BARCLAY Well at King-horne Avij, This is a soueraigne and
>vnicke
>> remedie for that disease in Women. 1794 R. J. SULIVAN View Nat. 
I. 3 A
>> concentrated, and an unique aggregation of almost all the wonders 
of
>the
>> natural world. 1809 R. K. PORTER Trav. Sk. Russia & Sweden (1813) 
I.
>xxv.
>> 285 As it was thoroughly unique, I cannot forbear presenting you 
with
>so
>> singular a curiosity. 1842 J. P. COLLIER Armin's Nest Ninn. 
Introd., A
>> relic..not only unique in itself, but unprecedented in its kind. 
1866
>> LIDDON Bamp. Lect. v. (1867) 368 [Christ's] relationship to the
>Father..is
>> absolutely unique. 1871 B. TAYLOR Faust (1875) II. II. i. 84 A 
thing
>so
>> totally unique The great collectors would go far to seek. 1885
>Harper's
>> Mag. April 703/1 When..these summer guests found themselves 
defrauded
>of
>> their uniquest recreations. 1908 K. GRAHAME Wind in Willows viii. 
168
>> 'Toad Hall,' said the Toad proudly, 'is an eligible self-contained
>> gentleman's residence, very unique.' 1912 CHESTERTON Manalive I. 
iii.
>86
>> Diana Duke..began putting away the tea things. But it was not 
before
>> Inglewood had seen an instantaneous picture so unique that he 
might
>well
>> have snapshotted it. 1939 Country Life 11 Feb. p. xviii/2 (Advt.),
>Almost
>> the most unique residential site along the south coast. 1960 [see
>DIQUAT].
>> 1980 Verbatim Autumn 15/2 A high-ranking state Alcoholic Beverage
>> Commission official said Friday that Wednesday's retroactive 
renewal
>and
>> transfer of the beverage permit of the rural Bloomington Liars' 
Lodge
>by
>> the Monroe County Alcoholic Beverage Board was 'unique but not
>uncommon'.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Doesn't the 'each' automatically make the 'other' singular?
>>>
>>> Paul D.
>>>
>>> Speaking of redundancy, my students often struggle against the 
notion
>>> that "very unique" doesn't make sense to me.
>>>
>>> stein wrote:
>>>
>>> Here is your posting Joanne.
>>> Thank you, Herb and Paul for responding to my question.
>>> Dalia
>>> -------Original Message-------
>>>
>>> From: Johanna Rubba
>>> Date: 03/15/06 02:51:00
>>> To: stein
>>> Cc: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
>>> Subject: Re: Blue Color; each other
>>>
>>>
>>> Dalia,
>>>
>>> I wonder if you could post this for me: (Thanks!)
>>>
>>> "I like the blue color" could be another example of the tendency
>>> towards redundant expressions which seems to be strong in English
>right
>>> now. My students often write things like "equally as good"; 
there's
>the
>>> old "refer back"; "both my sister and brother share this 
tendency";
>and
>>> others that don't come readily to mind. I can imagine someone
>>> responding to a question like "Which color shirt do you like 
best?"
>>> with "The blue color." "Color" links the answer to the question, 
and
>>> puts the queried word ("which color") in the answer.
>>>
>>> I also have a query about "each other" -- how do we make it
>possessive,
>>> as in
>>>
>>> "They are always snooping into each other's business." Should it 
be <
>>> each others' > ? I keep doing a Gestalt shift on this; right now 
the
>>> first one looks right. How about a clear more-than-two:
>>>
>>> "The students then proofread each other's papers." Here, the <'s>
>looks
>>> wrong; the coreference with the plural "students" is getting in 
the
>>> way.
>>>
>>> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics
>>> Linguistics Minor Advisor
>>> English Department
>>> California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>> Tel.: 805.756.2184
>>> Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596
>>> Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374
>>> URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
>>>
>>> This mail was scanned via Beit Berl PineApp
>>>
>>>
>>> This mail was scanned via Beit Berl PineApp
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>> interface
>>> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and 
select "Join or
>>> leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>> interface
>>> at:
>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>interface
>> at:
>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>interface
>> at:
>>      http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>interface at:
>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>and select "Join or leave the list"
>
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web 
interface at:
>     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>and select "Join or leave the list"
>
>Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/