On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:24:55 -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote: >li [MacLeod Dave] mi tulis la > > >> We need to bring a few Romans back from the dead to make fun of people >> with that attitude. "What's that you call a clavis now, a clé? What >> the hell is a clé? And how the f*&k did you turn aqua into eau? Start >> using real Latin again and then we can talk about what's corrupt." - >> complete with rolling eyes. > >That's just the point. If S. Europe would have stuck to Latin as a >means of communication and had the backing of universal education then >Latin would be *the* language rather than so many Romance languages. That conceivably could have happened. Look at what happened to German — despite many wide-ranging dialects, standard German remains the unifying language — with the exception of Dutch, which for a number of reasons came to be regarded as not-German, so that much unity was lost. Dialects are fine, and language change is fine. What's not fine is the loss of a unifying language.