Latin, the Enlightenment, and science
in [Math]
|
Prev: Latin, the Enlightenment, and science
Next: question on Artwork and what is legal in altering a signed painting #24 South Dakota cat laws
From: Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. on 26 Dec 2009 23:11 On Dec 26, 7:17 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote: > > > On Dec 25, 7:03 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > >> Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote: > > >>> On Dec 24, 8:05 am, chazwin <chazwy...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>> On Dec 24, 1:57 pm, Andrew Usher <k_over_hb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>> The use of Latin in the sciences and other learned fields basically > >>>>> ceased in the 18th and 19th centuries. I have long wondered why people > >>>>> accepted the use of national languages exclusively in this endeavor > >>>>> where international understanding is more imperative than any other.. > >>>>> It is true, that the use of Latin by 1700 had already passed almost > >>>>> everywhere else, but its last remaining use should still have been > >>>>> enough to support it, given that Latin was the one language that every > >>>>> educated man in the Western world knew, and that Latin, having such a > >>>>> long tradition of use, was at least suitable for scientific and > >>>>> technical purposes as any other language at the time. > >>>>> And so, some explanations suggest themselves. The first is that the > >>>>> predominant advocates and defenders of Latin, from the Renaissance to > >>>>> now, are from the humanities; and so once Latin had disappeared from > >>>>> live literary use, their support was no longer important. The second > >>>>> is to blame it on the French: they abandoned Latin earlier than anyone > >>>>> else, and are well-known to have an inflated view of the greatness of > >>>>> their own language. But that does not seem to explain how it happened > >>>>> everywhere else: had they wanted to emulate the French, they would > >>>>> have started writing in French, and if they had wanted to oppose them, > >>>>> they should have re-emphasised the role of Latin. > >>>>> Now, of course, I can't propose the revival of Latin for these > >>>>> purposes: English has virtually replaced it as the international > >>>>> scientific language. But it look a long time during which dealing with > >>>>> many different languages was a considerable problem, and it seems as > >>>>> though this should have been avoided. > >>>>> Andrew Usher > >>>> Latin provided an invaluable tool for the transmission of ideas > >>>> throughout Europe, not bound my the restrictions of parochial > >>>> languages long before the Enlightenment. This together with the > >>>> invention of printing was the way that the Reformation exploded right > >>>> across Europe without the need for learning all the various languages > >>>> that were still unformed. > >>>> Latin's use was maintained long into the 18thC. It use continued in > >>>> Botany and other sciences in the coining of neologisms , and is still > >>>> in use to this day. > >>>> The 19thC saw the domination of English > >>> In what field? Certainly not in math, science, philosophy, music, art, > >>> cuisine, etc. > >>> French was the overall lingua franca among educated people in the 19th > >>> century. English dominated relatively minor fields like tea-drinking > >>> and crumpet-making. > >> And it stultified. France elides all words which aren't French to this > >> day. Thus word creation and new meanings are expunged from the > >> language. > > > What is the relevance between what I said and what you wrote? > > I thought I was having a conversation. The French make it > almost impossible to do useful things in an efficient manner. > You are not allowed to create new words until they are > approved by some commission years later (can't recall the > name). > Why do you care?
From: John Stafford on 26 Dec 2009 23:20 I have come into this thread late with a poor browser. Excuse me if I ask a stupid question. When Latin fell from favor for international communication, scholarly or other, in what field (if any in particular) did it fail first? Was Latin particularly useful in the physical sciences or the philosophical discourse when it began its decline? TIA
From: Marvin the Martian on 26 Dec 2009 23:40 On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:17:37 -0500, jmfbahciv wrote: > The French make it almost > impossible to do useful things in an efficient manner. You are not > allowed to create new words until they are approved by some commission > years later (can't recall the name). Academie francaise. Sorry, I can't do the French characters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionnaire_de_l%27Acad%C3%A9mie_fran%C3% A7aise This does have advantages. For one thing, the Engs and the Americans butcher the English language. Real English has a limited set of phonemes, but the Engs and the Americans have this nasty habit of using every phoneme from every language. And they're starting to insist that foreign pronunciations be used. They're completely ignorant that there often are more than one dialect in a language; for example, Spanish. Another benefit is that the Engs (Engs live in Eng-land, right?) and Americans use words incorrectly, and the incorrect usage becomes "correct" because they're so fond of "descriptive" dictionaries rather than proscriptive dictionaries. It's very democratic, the idiots get to decide what words mean. It's one big Archie Bunker joke. For example, to "protest" means to testify FOR something. In idiot speak, to "protest the war" means to speak against the war when the real meaning is to speak FOR the war. Lastly, it is hoped that having a panel such as the French Academy would prevent fad gibberish words like "bling-bling" from reaching the dictionary. Don't even get me started on how "Ebonics" is being passed off as English. The only real downside to the French Academy is that idiots who don't use the language properly are called idiots. Is that so wrong?
From: Marvin the Martian on 26 Dec 2009 23:43 On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:23:08 -0800, chazwin wrote: > On Dec 24, 5:58 pm, Marvin the Martian <mar...(a)ontomars.org> wrote: >> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 08:05:35 -0800, chazwin wrote: >> > The 19thC saw the domination of English mainly because nearly all the >> > decent innovations, discoveries and inventions all came from Britain. >> > The French and the Germans had to take a back seat. The Germans >> > seemed to have concentrated on philosophy whilst the French spent the >> > whole century licking their wounds after the Napoleonic defeats. >> >> So, Georg Ohm, Heinrich Hertz, Hermann von Helmholtz, Rudolf Clausius, >> and Heinrich Lenz took a "back seat"? (All big name 19th century German >> physicist) > Yep -minor players. > > > >> As did Augustin Fresnel, Pierre Dulong, Alexis Petit, Pierre Curie, and >> Andre Ampere? (Big name 19th century French Physicist) > > And them too. > > > > >> How... droll. English Chauvinism is not dead. >> >> Yes, there is a reason why back in the 1960s you had to be able to read >> a foreign language, usually German or French, to get a degree in >> physics at an accredited college in the English speaking United States. > > Yes but it did not matter which one. In Germany and France English was > essential. > > > > >> And after WW II, the only reason why we had a scientific jump on the >> Russians is because our captured German scientist were better than the >> Russian captured German scientists. :-D > > Can I remind you I was talking about the 19thCentury not the 20thC? You had me going. I thought you were serious. I see it is just silly nationalistic posturing.
From: Peter T. Daniels on 27 Dec 2009 00:20
On Dec 26, 11:20 pm, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.ten> wrote: > I have come into this thread late with a poor browser. Excuse me if I > ask a stupid question. > > When Latin fell from favor for international communication, scholarly or > other, in what field (if any in particular) did it fail first? Was Latin > particularly useful in the physical sciences or the philosophical > discourse when it began its decline? Well, Goethe, Hegel, and Kant didn't write in Latin, and they were certainly influential in philosophy (and probably not the first to abandon Latin). |