Talk:Lists of extinct languages

message: That support a continuous Greek language of four (or five) historical periods:
*L. Roussel, Grammaire descriptive du romeique litteraire (Paris 1922)
*M. Perides, The Greek language and its contemporary form (Athens 1959)
*A. Mirambel, La langue grecque moderne - Description et analyse (Paris 1950)
*da Somavera, Treasures of the Frankish and Romaic language (Paris 1709)
*N.P.Andriotes, Great dictionary of the Greek language (Athens 1949-1950)
*K. Krumbacher, The problem of the modern Greek literary language (1902)
*V. Rotolo, A. Korais and the linguistic question in Greece (Palermo 1965)
During the early 19th century a school of linguists who were trying to categorise the so-called "Roman"  language (Modern Greek), supported a theory that it was a mixture of ancient Aeolic and Doric. Some strong supporters of this view were:
*F. Mullach - Grammar of the Aeolo-Doric, id est the contemporary Greek language.
*M. Deffner
*A. Christopoulos
*D. Mavrofrudes
The established theory is the one of Heilmaier and N. Hatzidakis, which states that contemporary Greek speech is a form of Koine Greek, hence the presence of Aeolo-Doric elements.
Miskin 8 July 2005 08:02 (UTC)
:Well, it seems to me that this is a case where both positions are correct according to perspective and definition, which is why I can view Greek as a continuous living language (it is) while at the same time admitting that in a strict sense, Ancient Greek is extinct, because it evolved into new forms (also correct). The same is true for many other languages. Now, the question is, what do we do with the article. Decius 8 July 2005 08:06 (UTC)
::Ancient Greek can't be treated in the same way as Latin because it's part of a living language. As I said before, there are forms of Greek speech which are occasionally given a separate language status, but Ancient Greek is simply not one of them. I don't know what you mean by strict sense, this categorisation is pretty clear. One of the reason that Modern Greek is a historical period of Greek rather than a simple ancestor (what Romance is to Latin), is because the dialects of Modern Greek are mutually intelligible. On the other hand the languages of Romance are not mutually intelligible, and therefore Romance gains a "language group" status, (as opposed to the "dialect group" of Modern Greek). Miskin 8 July 2005 08:29 (UTC)
:The 'strict sense' that I and others are referring to is: no ancient Greek dialect is natively spoken in their old forms any more, which is why extinct may be applied according to that definition. Decius 8 July 2005 08:34 (UTC)
::Decius you keep making the same mistake by giving Ancient Greek a separate language status. You could give Mycenaean Greek a separate language status, I wanted to do that and if you notice I always mention four historical periods of Greek, but other (non-Greek) editors preferred to give it a period status. Ancient Greek has an undisputed "period status", so you can't talk refer to it as an extinct language by definition. Your definition of 'extinct' (no ancient Greek dialect is natively spoken in their old forms any more) doesn't make any sense, because by that logic no ancient dialect X of any ancient language Y is not natively spoken in their older forms anymore, so what's the point of keeping a list in the first place? By separating languages into historical periods we aim to point out that they did evolve without being extinct. Miskin 8 July 2005 09:43 (UTC)
:Perhaps we could make a further distinction, between "Languages that have evolved into new forms", which would include ancient Greek, Old French, Old English, etc. and "Languages that have evolved into new languages", i.e. Latin. I maintain that Latin is a special case but Old French is more or less the equivalent of ancient Greek.--Theathenae 8 July 2005 08:55 (UTC)
Modern English has three roots: Old English, Latin and Greek. Multiple roots are probably another factor which give a separate language status to a child language. That's probably the case with Latin and Romance as well. I haven't checked on Old French and Norse yet, but I suspect it's something similar. Miskin 8 July 2005 09:43 (UTC)
:The problem there is that a number of linguists argue (rather correctly) that Modern Greek is a new language that evolved from Koine. I don't know these linguists by name, but I'm pretty sure their writings can be found. Decius 8 July 2005 08:59 (UTC)
::Amongst other reasons, Modern Greek has a 'period status' because it has no other roots other than Greek. Miskin 8 July 2005 09:43 (UTC)
:And Theathenae, I can't miss this opportunity to point out your hypocrisy and double-standards: you accept that Modern Greek and Ancient Greek are the same language, but Arvanitic has became a separate language from Tosk according to you, though it is classified as a dialect of Tosk. Decius 8 July 2005 09:14 (UTC)
::Arvanitic has become a separate language by virtue of the centuries of deep penetration by Greek, and the self-identification of its speakers. As for modern Greek being a new language rather than the natural evolution of ancient Greek, support for such a theory would be marginal. Perhaps we could have a separate paragraph altogether for Latin, explaining the idiosyncrasies of its situation. As a Latin Lover myself, I find the idea of Latin being "extinct" rather repugnant.--Theathenae 8 July 2005 09:31 (UTC)
I think that the problem is trying to apply a uniform, rigid criterion to vastly different situations.  In this sense, Dab's suggestion is very good.  I know nothing of Old French, but Old English is so different from Modern English because of the Norman Invasion and the subsequent large-scale grafting of French onto a Germanic language.  (Not that it's the only grafting that occurred: last night I heard a London Underground bombing casualty say on camera "There was an explosion, and then hysteria, which turned into pandemonium".  When the going gets tough, it's time for Greek.  :-)))  Anyhow, I don't see how one can separate Koine from Attic, and Koine is intelligible to illiterate 90-year old little ladies in church, so what now?  Chronographos 8 July 2005 10:04 (UTC)  (There are a few passages in Homer that any Greek can understand prima vista, and other passages that will send someone like me scrambling for a dictionary.  I did a test last Monday: I told my 12 year old nephew, who's smart and a good student but hadn't had any Ancient Greek classes yet, Pythia's reply to Julian, in flawless Doric.  "Είπατε τω βασιλεί, χαμαί πέσε δαίδαλος αυλά, ουκέτι Φοίβος έχει καλύβαν, ου μάντιδα δάφνην, ου παγάν λαλέουσαν, απέσβετο και λάλον ύδωρ". He couldn't get δαίδαλος and παγάν, although he knew who Daidalos was and needed me to tell him that παγάν meant πηγήν, and he predictably thought that πέσε was a command rather that an unaugmented Aorist.)
:Explosion is Latin! :P--Theathenae 8 July 2005 10:16 (UTC)
::Yes.  That's the terrorist part.  The human feelings are the Greek part. :-)) Chronographos 8 July 2005 10:19 (UTC)
:This would be more persuasive if δάφνην and βασιλεί were Doric, instead of Attic.... Septentrionalis 05:52, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources on Greek 

message: So...why do we allow the listing of Old Church Slavonic but not Ancient Greek? Ridiculous double standards. Old Church Slavonic is close to Bulgarian. I propose modifying the parameters of the article. Languages with descendants should not be listed: Old Church Slavonic, Old English, Old Norse, and even Latin. Alexander 007 08:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree most with dab, above, when he says that he considers this article to be inherently flawed. There is no perfect solution to this. — mark ✎ 09:01, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the original conception was extremely flawed. It may be salvageable if we set a stricter definition. However, even this may have problems. And there are languages such as Aquitanian which may be a direct ancestor of a spoken language (in the case of Aquitanian, the Basque language). Alexander 007 09:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And should we list Sanskrit and the Ge'ez language for example? They are still used as Liturgical languages, and Sanskrit even beyond that. Alexander 007 09:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: BTW, dab also suggested a redefining of the parameters for this list; see Talk:Historical language. It's the best solution so far, unless we decide to eliminate all the lists and allow Categories to sort them. Alexander 007 10:44, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I added the Old Church Slavonic without much of thinking, apology from me. Thanks for spotting this and the cleanup. Pavel Vozenilek 15:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems

message: While in many cases it is useful to list things "all on one page" (oh wow), in many cases where the lists will be extremely long, it is overwhelming and often hinders one from appreciating and actually benefiting from a list; hence, I created separate specialized articles (see :Category:Lists of extinct languages). Alexander 007 15:07, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The one reason for this stub may be so List of extinct languages will direct to it, since it can't be directed to the Category...I wouldn't mind having it deleted, however. Alexander 007 15:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as it is now, it looks to me as if the subject would be better served by categories alone. — mark ✎ 15:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, Categories can do it alone. Especially since one can have text and images on the Category page. I'll probably do this later, unless someone else beats me to it. Alexander 007 15:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: However, a drawback of Categories: you can't list languages or dialects unless they have separate articles already started. Alexander 007 15:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another one is that categories only list articles by alphabetic order. Lists have other utilities: for example, a chronological ordered list of Europe extinct languages could help someone who wants to see what languages disappeared in Europe since the 15th century... Ash Crow 02:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate lists

message: I was looking for a list of extinct languages by time of extinction, but I didn't find anything like that. In my opinion there should be, though. I'm especially interested in the languages gone extinct recently... — N-true (talk) 22:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I simply created the article myself: List of languages by time of extinction. — N-true (talk) 00:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of extinct languages ordered by time of extinction 

message: This should be here, in this list of lists of extinct languages. As of 21/12/21, there are several immediately identifiable from the List of languages by time of extinction.
Bonomiu (talk) 12:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Exctinct Languages of Oceania?