Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!ellis!deb5
From: deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: What is a Language
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: midway.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <DpoFBH.K3v@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <315A8928.7C30@innet.be> <4jes73$q9j@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <4ken97$j9n@altrade.nijmegen.inter.nl.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 02:38:04 GMT
Lines: 25

In article <4ken97$j9n@altrade.nijmegen.inter.nl.net>,
T.T. Gerritsen <T.Gerritsen@inter.nl.net> wrote:

>It may seem strange, but mutual intelligibility is in fact one of the
>worst criteria in determining whether something is a dialect or a
>language.  
[example of Czech and Slovak deleted]

It all depends on whose definition of "dialect" and "language" you
are using.  It certainly won't help you predict which speech varieties
are considered dialects of which languages by the world community,
since this is determined by geopolitics rather than linguistic analysis.

>So it involves a lot of, especially
>historical, research in determining more substantial criteria. But the
>discussion will remain, I think... :-)

How are diachronic sound shifts "more substantial criteria" than mutual
intelligibility?  They are one of the factors which influence whether two
varieties are mutually intelligible.  (The most important seems to be the
attitude of the speakers of the varieties involved.)
-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
