The scientific community could usually read a number of languages, amongst which Latin, French and, often, Dutch (the Netherlands at the time acted as something of a free haven for many innovative thinkers). If you wrote in Latin, you also know what community you were writing for - the highly educated.Yeah that sounds good
I wonder, though, why on earth scientists published their work in latin even in the 17th century. I mean if I had found out sth that important I would want to spread the knowledge. But if you write in Latin you'll reach only a small group of people
Latin is dead and well dead (except when some people like us decide to make it some kind of a living dead). Romance languages are but pieces of the corpse. Or "children" if you prefer a more optimistic tone, but I wouldn't call them forms of Latin, they're far too different, the resemblance is only in the look of words.What is more, its newer forms (i.e., the romance languages) have expanded around the globe.
It depends on how you look at it, I think. I experience Anglo-Saxon, Middle Dutch, Modern German and Modern Dutch as representatives of the same language, for instance. Despite the fact that they are not mutually intelligible, there is a lot you recognise if you know one of these languages and then begin to study one of the others. To illustrate what I mean I've translated the first sentence of the Dutch romance of 'Karel ende Elegast' into Moder Dutch, Modern German en Modern English below. Modern English, of course, is interesting as its largely romance vocabulary sets it somewhat apart from the other Germanic languages.Latin is dead and well dead (except when some people like us decide to make it some kind of a living dead). Romance languages are but pieces of the corpse. Or "children" if you prefer a more optimistic tone, but I wouldn't call them forms of Latin, they're far too different, the ressemblance is only in the look of words.
Latin was revived during the Renaissance, and became the language of learning.Yeah that sounds good
I wonder, though, why on earth scientists published their work in latin even in the 17th century. I mean if I had found out sth that important I would want to spread the knowledge. But if you write in Latin you'll reach only a small group of people
Looks pretty spiffy to me.Here's how vulgar "Latin"/some kind of Romance must have looked like in the 8th century:
ipsa cuppa frangant la tota, ad illo botiliario frangant lo cabo, at illo scanciono tollant lis potionis.
It's the first time I see an authentic bit of it having reached such a state.
Interesting here.
I recently read through the first 2/3rds of that and second the recommendation, I enjoyed it. For a more detailed discussion though I really recommend J Adams "The Regional Diversification of Latin". Though it is an industry standard so hard to get hold of outside of academic libraries and you'd need a good knowledge of Latin and linguistics.May I suggest two very good books:
---> A Biography of Latin, by Nicholas Ostler, a thorough, in-depth study of the language from its inception to the present day
But that is an awful book it essentially comes down to "waah modern Classicists privelege a Greek/Roman context for their readings and not an American one!" and "waah I don't understand modern scholarship".---> Who Killed Homer, written by Victor Davis Hanson and John Heath, an account of the present, declining state of Classical studies; it also provides good reason why the Greeks (and Romans, for that matter) ought not to lie neglected. HIGHLY recommended.
Even before. First there was diversity, then a relative unification of the language happened under the empire, thanks to communication all over the empire, administration etc., to then split again as we all know. But indeed a certain diversity was always there. It couldn't have been otherwise over such a large area I think. Partly about that, this book is interesting. Unfortunately it's in French. So just in case anybody who knows French is interested.Back to the topic at hand, its worth pointing out that standardisation in Latin was always...tentative, even from the high Empire we see some discrepancies.
All right, that is just an opinion. But is there any truth to what the authors are saying about the current status of a dying discipline?Joking aside, its a godawful book.
Even before. First there was diversity, then a relative unification of the language happened under the empire, thanks to communication all over the empire, administration etc., to then split again as we all know. But indeed a certain diversity was always there. It couldn't have been otherwise over such a large area I think. Partly about that, this book is interesting. Unfortunately it's in French. So just in case anybody who knows French is interested.
It's hard to gauge that due to how many insane claims and silly mistakes are made, the authors just come off as incompetent. How do we assess whether a discipline is dying? In terms of work done, the discipline has never seen better work. In fact that the level of work being done can challenge the author's simplistic views and make them feel so threatened...is great.All right, that is just an opinion. But is there any truth to what the authors are saying about the current status of a dying discipline?