Again a fascinating interview. As a rank amateur though enduringly curious about such fields of study I find myself attempting to apply the insights from the past into the present and future. In that regard I have two observations from present day Texas(where I am native and now 80 years old)
First: Texas is experiencing population growth and prosperity growth at amazing rates. There have been two major contributing sources - from the south for escape from poverty and the draw of enterprise from other parts of the nation. I would argue both are the appeal of a combination of liberty and innovation.
Texas is historically an agricultural, Wild West culture but now the large 3-4 cities have ballooned in size and riches. There is a dynamic and intense conflict between cultures - city vs “true Texans. This is reflected in language, politics, food, expectations etc. And regarding your discipline: language.
There is a widely accepted attitude among natives: all these new folks are fine but they need to learn how to be Texans and leave California, New York and Mexico behind. (I once sat at a table at a Christian missionary conference next to a young man. We were having a good conversation. People were there from literally all over the world. I had some difficulty understanding his accent. I asked where he was from. He answered “The Bronx” hah!
It was drawing on this observation about Texas I pictured what was happening in EurAsia 5000 years ago as it manifests today. What happens next with our society is an interesting thought exercise.
Second: last year the establishment of a Dallas stock market was announced. The result has been a dramatic influx of major expansion of financial offices here. The shift is not merely aspirational but very real. Now there is talk of a shift from “Wall Street “ to “Y’all Street”. (Linguists a few hundred years hence may grapple with that).
In the case of Texas, the process is happening in reverse: it's the horse-riding people in the countryside who are experiencing an influx of more settled, city dwellers! Have you noticed a change in the accent(s) as a result of the change in population?
The change of accents is quite noticeable- accent and vocabulary. I’d question the use of “settled” regarding city dwellers vs “horse-riders”. Texas natives are well settled and while many drive $70k pickups, they have no need of a truck- it’s a preference. The immigrants(whether from the US or elsewhere) are of two brands - the wealthy here for the economic boom and the poor in hopes of affluence.
It is an interesting mix of cultures
I grew up on a cattle ranch, went away for a near Ivy League education , returned to Dallas as it was emerging from small townish history following the JFK assassination transitioning into a financial hub. (The mayor at the time realized Dallas was the largest city in the world not on a navigable body of water - built DFW Airport in response.). Following a 30 year career in municipal administration I retreated to semi-rural life 30 miles away. Pardon my ignorance of linguistics but by gravitating from ranch to city, back to exurbia I have retained my authentic Texas accent - I just use bigger words now.
Utterly delightful interview😊, thank you so much. I've shared it on all my social webs.
I've been in love with Indo-european studies since I was 27 (I'm 65:-)), the more time goes by, the more we find out new layers of this fascinating subject, the many unsuspected surviving elements showing surprising connections among our own Indo-european cultures!
I already had this book on my wish list but now I will move it up higher!
I'm in agreement with the Italic-Celtic family grouping. I took Latin in high school and then a couple of decades later, Scottish Gaelic. It struck me immediately how similar they felt to each other even though I hadn't heard that actual smart people thought so as well. And it isn't only in the obvious borrowings from church terminology.
The Italo-Celtic hypothesis is really interesting — it rests primarily on a few striking similarities in grammatical endings, including the superlative suffix that Latin has as -issimus and the passive ending in -tur (compare the Irish impersonal form -tar/tear).
A lot of the other words kind of fit as well. It was just a feeling I got almost right away with Gaidhlig, not having heard this as a reputable IE theory yet.
Possibly not surprising since Northern Italy was considered Celtic into historic times, with the Gauls proper right next door.
I read a book in the 1980s called "Archaeology and Language" by Colin Renfrew while studying at UCL, and have been obsessed with the subject ever since. Love your Substack!
I would love to see a well researched piece on what conditions predict language replacement when there is already a settled population speaking a different language in a region and the population itself is not replaced.
Why did Latin take over the regions of present day France and Iberia and almost totally replace the languages previously spoken?
Why then did Latin not replace the Celtic language spoken in England during the late Roman Empire, yet this Celtic language was soon replaced by the language of the Anglo-Saxon invaders that followed? why does England not speak a French-based language after 400 years of Norman rule (there is a lot of influence on vocabulary but no replacement)? Why did the Irish lose their ability to speak the Irish language natively, in the case of 99% of the population?
Why did Catalan survive in Spain despite official repression? How did Castilian Spanish and other Spanish languages survive the Muslim conquest?
What ultimately makes mothers start talking to their babies in a language that’s not the mother’s own native language? How does the first generation that mostly speaks a new native language get formed, if most people learn their language on their mother’s knee, and mothers are naturally apt to speak to infants in the language they are most comfortable in?
Was replacement more an okd historical pattern that’s unlikely to be repeated given modern communications, literacy levels, and sensibilities against cultural conquest?I know that there is a lot of evidence right now of very small, minority, languages, dying, and the recent historical example of Hebrew being revived, but I can’t think of any examples of full scale
language replacement in the last few hundred years, except for the case of Irish.
I would also like to read such an account! I wonder if there is a general theory of language replacement or if too much is a matter of historical contingency to make general claims. If anyone reading this knows of a good book, please let us know!
Of course there are any number of Arabic words in Castilian and descendants, same as chunks of French in English. All the words beginning with "al-" because apparently your average Spanish person didn't ever knock off that definite article. And for some reason they seem to have also kept the Basque word for "left" (direction).
Quite unlike the Celtic Gauls and the later Germanic colonists who gave France its name
The British kept both sets, Germanic and Romance, so we have twice as many words for many things.
I think the Romans had such a tenuous hold on most of Britain that the Celtic languages survived more easily.
It is surprising to me that Arab invaders spread the Arabic language all the way from the Arabian peninsula to Morocco and didn’t leave an Arabic-speaking population in neighboring Spain. Or perhaps they did and it converted back to Spanish after the re-conquest
That's exactly what happened in the years after the final fall of the Muslim states in Iberia: Arabic was banned and there were policies of forced conversion and expulsion.
Yes, that was going to be my reply too; after the Reconquista, the Muslims (and Jews) all got thrown out. Even the descendants of converted people weren't regarded as "true" Spaniards, no matter how many generations their families had been practicing Christians. Same for Portugal.
Obligatory "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"
Official repression seems to be an important variable.
I am still puzzled by the case of Basque and Catalan/Provençal. Both languages straddle the French-Spanish border (*I know Catalan and Provençal are not the same but they used to be part of the same dialect continuum.) These had a lot more staying power in Spain than in France, despite repression under Fascist Spain.
(In earlier posts, when I said I cannot think of a recent case of replacement other than Irish, I forgot about the example of Ukrainian, which over time, seemed to be following the history of Ireland, with fewer Ukrainian speakers every generation, though I read that is reversing due to antipathy to Russia and Russian.)
One of the weirdest things is that the word “Caucasian” has long been used in the US to describe the peoples of European and South Asian origin and now there is linguistic evidence all such people have roots in the Caucasus. That is purely by chance because term was invented based on no evidence by an 18th century German.
Second interview I’ve seen/heard with her on this topic (and her book): you asked some great questions, and got a totally different perspective from her. Brilliant!
Laura Spinney was also on a recent podcast episode of The Ancients, so more of a history spin to those questions. Very cool to get the different angles, and really shows her thorough understanding of the subject matter. I am looking forward to reading the book.
Thank you! I went through Laura's previous interviews as I prepared for this one and tried to find some things no one else had asked her (beyond the first few introductory questions).
The funny thing about languages is that we have the example of England, where first the Anglo-Saxons replaced the language before them, and then the Normans -- didn't. So it can go either way.
Excellent example! It's difficult to fathom all of the factors that go into determining what language ends up prevailing in these kinds of situations. I'm not sure we'll ever have a general theory of it, so it allows us lots of room to manoeuvre when making theories about the distant past.
I read a book in the 1980s called "Archaeology and Language" by Colin Renfrew while studying at UCL, and have been obsessed with the subject ever since. Love your Substack!
Thanks for the article/interview! The point about the importance of reciprocal hospitality to the Indo-Europeans is driven home by the fact that the words "host" and "guest" come from the same root - two sides of the same coin.
Again a fascinating interview. As a rank amateur though enduringly curious about such fields of study I find myself attempting to apply the insights from the past into the present and future. In that regard I have two observations from present day Texas(where I am native and now 80 years old)
First: Texas is experiencing population growth and prosperity growth at amazing rates. There have been two major contributing sources - from the south for escape from poverty and the draw of enterprise from other parts of the nation. I would argue both are the appeal of a combination of liberty and innovation.
Texas is historically an agricultural, Wild West culture but now the large 3-4 cities have ballooned in size and riches. There is a dynamic and intense conflict between cultures - city vs “true Texans. This is reflected in language, politics, food, expectations etc. And regarding your discipline: language.
There is a widely accepted attitude among natives: all these new folks are fine but they need to learn how to be Texans and leave California, New York and Mexico behind. (I once sat at a table at a Christian missionary conference next to a young man. We were having a good conversation. People were there from literally all over the world. I had some difficulty understanding his accent. I asked where he was from. He answered “The Bronx” hah!
It was drawing on this observation about Texas I pictured what was happening in EurAsia 5000 years ago as it manifests today. What happens next with our society is an interesting thought exercise.
Second: last year the establishment of a Dallas stock market was announced. The result has been a dramatic influx of major expansion of financial offices here. The shift is not merely aspirational but very real. Now there is talk of a shift from “Wall Street “ to “Y’all Street”. (Linguists a few hundred years hence may grapple with that).
In the case of Texas, the process is happening in reverse: it's the horse-riding people in the countryside who are experiencing an influx of more settled, city dwellers! Have you noticed a change in the accent(s) as a result of the change in population?
The change of accents is quite noticeable- accent and vocabulary. I’d question the use of “settled” regarding city dwellers vs “horse-riders”. Texas natives are well settled and while many drive $70k pickups, they have no need of a truck- it’s a preference. The immigrants(whether from the US or elsewhere) are of two brands - the wealthy here for the economic boom and the poor in hopes of affluence.
It is an interesting mix of cultures
I grew up on a cattle ranch, went away for a near Ivy League education , returned to Dallas as it was emerging from small townish history following the JFK assassination transitioning into a financial hub. (The mayor at the time realized Dallas was the largest city in the world not on a navigable body of water - built DFW Airport in response.). Following a 30 year career in municipal administration I retreated to semi-rural life 30 miles away. Pardon my ignorance of linguistics but by gravitating from ranch to city, back to exurbia I have retained my authentic Texas accent - I just use bigger words now.
Utterly delightful interview😊, thank you so much. I've shared it on all my social webs.
I've been in love with Indo-european studies since I was 27 (I'm 65:-)), the more time goes by, the more we find out new layers of this fascinating subject, the many unsuspected surviving elements showing surprising connections among our own Indo-european cultures!
Thank you, Jo! I'm glad you enjoyed it — I also enjoyed talking to Laura a lot!
I already had this book on my wish list but now I will move it up higher!
I'm in agreement with the Italic-Celtic family grouping. I took Latin in high school and then a couple of decades later, Scottish Gaelic. It struck me immediately how similar they felt to each other even though I hadn't heard that actual smart people thought so as well. And it isn't only in the obvious borrowings from church terminology.
The Italo-Celtic hypothesis is really interesting — it rests primarily on a few striking similarities in grammatical endings, including the superlative suffix that Latin has as -issimus and the passive ending in -tur (compare the Irish impersonal form -tar/tear).
A lot of the other words kind of fit as well. It was just a feeling I got almost right away with Gaidhlig, not having heard this as a reputable IE theory yet.
Possibly not surprising since Northern Italy was considered Celtic into historic times, with the Gauls proper right next door.
I read a book in the 1980s called "Archaeology and Language" by Colin Renfrew while studying at UCL, and have been obsessed with the subject ever since. Love your Substack!
I would love to see a well researched piece on what conditions predict language replacement when there is already a settled population speaking a different language in a region and the population itself is not replaced.
Why did Latin take over the regions of present day France and Iberia and almost totally replace the languages previously spoken?
Why then did Latin not replace the Celtic language spoken in England during the late Roman Empire, yet this Celtic language was soon replaced by the language of the Anglo-Saxon invaders that followed? why does England not speak a French-based language after 400 years of Norman rule (there is a lot of influence on vocabulary but no replacement)? Why did the Irish lose their ability to speak the Irish language natively, in the case of 99% of the population?
Why did Catalan survive in Spain despite official repression? How did Castilian Spanish and other Spanish languages survive the Muslim conquest?
What ultimately makes mothers start talking to their babies in a language that’s not the mother’s own native language? How does the first generation that mostly speaks a new native language get formed, if most people learn their language on their mother’s knee, and mothers are naturally apt to speak to infants in the language they are most comfortable in?
Was replacement more an okd historical pattern that’s unlikely to be repeated given modern communications, literacy levels, and sensibilities against cultural conquest?I know that there is a lot of evidence right now of very small, minority, languages, dying, and the recent historical example of Hebrew being revived, but I can’t think of any examples of full scale
language replacement in the last few hundred years, except for the case of Irish.
I would also like to read such an account! I wonder if there is a general theory of language replacement or if too much is a matter of historical contingency to make general claims. If anyone reading this knows of a good book, please let us know!
Of course there are any number of Arabic words in Castilian and descendants, same as chunks of French in English. All the words beginning with "al-" because apparently your average Spanish person didn't ever knock off that definite article. And for some reason they seem to have also kept the Basque word for "left" (direction).
Quite unlike the Celtic Gauls and the later Germanic colonists who gave France its name
The British kept both sets, Germanic and Romance, so we have twice as many words for many things.
I think the Romans had such a tenuous hold on most of Britain that the Celtic languages survived more easily.
It is surprising to me that Arab invaders spread the Arabic language all the way from the Arabian peninsula to Morocco and didn’t leave an Arabic-speaking population in neighboring Spain. Or perhaps they did and it converted back to Spanish after the re-conquest
That's exactly what happened in the years after the final fall of the Muslim states in Iberia: Arabic was banned and there were policies of forced conversion and expulsion.
Yes, that was going to be my reply too; after the Reconquista, the Muslims (and Jews) all got thrown out. Even the descendants of converted people weren't regarded as "true" Spaniards, no matter how many generations their families had been practicing Christians. Same for Portugal.
Obligatory "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"
Official repression seems to be an important variable.
I am still puzzled by the case of Basque and Catalan/Provençal. Both languages straddle the French-Spanish border (*I know Catalan and Provençal are not the same but they used to be part of the same dialect continuum.) These had a lot more staying power in Spain than in France, despite repression under Fascist Spain.
(In earlier posts, when I said I cannot think of a recent case of replacement other than Irish, I forgot about the example of Ukrainian, which over time, seemed to be following the history of Ireland, with fewer Ukrainian speakers every generation, though I read that is reversing due to antipathy to Russia and Russian.)
One of the weirdest things is that the word “Caucasian” has long been used in the US to describe the peoples of European and South Asian origin and now there is linguistic evidence all such people have roots in the Caucasus. That is purely by chance because term was invented based on no evidence by an 18th century German.
Truly bizarre! Even a stopped clock...
Huh. I only ever heard it as referring to European and a bit of extreme West Asian. But perhaps it's expanded.
At the top of my croft there's the remains of a stone circle. Who built it, the pre-PIEs?
That would depend on where you live!
Hebrides so I think they are 5.5 thousand years here
In that case, they'd likely have been non-IE speakers. Amazing!
Ooh, yes, that'd be before the IE folk got there, I'd guess.
(Love the Hebrides. Only place outwith home that I'm ever homesick for.)
Non-PIEs
Second interview I’ve seen/heard with her on this topic (and her book): you asked some great questions, and got a totally different perspective from her. Brilliant!
Laura Spinney was also on a recent podcast episode of The Ancients, so more of a history spin to those questions. Very cool to get the different angles, and really shows her thorough understanding of the subject matter. I am looking forward to reading the book.
Thank you! I went through Laura's previous interviews as I prepared for this one and tried to find some things no one else had asked her (beyond the first few introductory questions).
It really showed - thank you for taking the time, and sharing your process. I find that interesting too ☺️
The funny thing about languages is that we have the example of England, where first the Anglo-Saxons replaced the language before them, and then the Normans -- didn't. So it can go either way.
Excellent example! It's difficult to fathom all of the factors that go into determining what language ends up prevailing in these kinds of situations. I'm not sure we'll ever have a general theory of it, so it allows us lots of room to manoeuvre when making theories about the distant past.
I read a book in the 1980s called "Archaeology and Language" by Colin Renfrew while studying at UCL, and have been obsessed with the subject ever since. Love your Substack!
Thanks, Brian! It was fun to hear Renfrew pop up in the interview too!
Thanks for the article/interview! The point about the importance of reciprocal hospitality to the Indo-Europeans is driven home by the fact that the words "host" and "guest" come from the same root - two sides of the same coin.
Interesting that she thinks colonialism only started in 1492; has she heard of Islam?