Content deleted Content added
Megaman en m (talk | contribs) Removed template; I believe most of the primary sources have been weeded out. |
Megaman en m (talk | contribs) added secondary source |
||
Line 43:
== History ==
Throughout the 19th century, differential complexity was taken for granted. The classical languages [[Latin]] and [[Greek language|Greek]], as well as [[Sanskrit]], were considered to possess qualities which could be achieved by the rising European [[national language]]s only through an elaboration that would give them the necessary structural and lexical complexity that would meet the requirements of an advanced civilization. At the same time, languages described as 'primitive' were naturally considered to reflect the simplicity of their speakers.<ref name="Joseph2012" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Arkadiev|first=Peter|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1197563838|title=The complexities of morphology|last2=Gardani|first2=Francesco|publisher=|others=|year=2020|isbn=978-0-19-260551-1|edition=|___location=Oxford|pages=1-2|oclc=1197563838}}</ref> On the other hand, [[Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel|Friedrich Schlegel]] noted that some nations "which appear to be at the very lowest grade of intellectual culture", such as [[Basque language|Basque]], [[Sámi languages|Sámi]] and some [[native American languages]], possess a striking degree of elaborateness.<ref name="Joseph2012" />
[[Charles Darwin|Darwin]] considered the apparent complexity of many non-[[Western countries|Western]] languages as problematic for [[evolution theory]] which in his time held that less advanced people should have less complex languages. Darwin's suggestion was that simplicity and irregularities were the result of extensive [[language contact]] while "the extremely complex and regular construction of many barbarous languages" should be seen as an utmost perfection of the one and same evolutionary process.<ref>{{cite book
| |||