Mutually Intelligible Languages or Varieties of One Language
There is no formal distinction between two distinct languages and two varieties of a single language, but linguists generally use mutual intelligibility as one of the primary factors in deciding between the two cases. Some linguists claim that mutual intelligibility is, ideally at least, the primary criterion separating languages from dialects. On the other hand, speakers of closely related languages can often communicate with each other to a fair degree; thus there are varying degrees of mutual intelligibility, and often other criteria are also used. As an example, in the case of a linear dialect chain that shades gradually between varieties, where speakers near the center can understand the varieties at both ends, but speakers at one end cannot understand the speakers at the other end, the entire chain is often considered a single language. If the central varieties then die out and only the varieties at both ends survive, they may then be reclassified as two languages, even though no actual language change has occurred.
In addition, political and social conventions often override considerations of mutual intelligibility. For example, the varieties of Chinese and of Arabic are often each considered a single language even though there is often no mutual intelligibility between geographically separated varieties. In contrast, there is often significant intelligibility between different Scandinavian languages, but as each of them has its own standard form, they are classified as separate languages. To deal with the conflict in cases such as Arabic, Chinese, and German, the term Dachsprache (a sociolinguistic 'umbrella' language) is sometimes seen: Arabic, Chinese, and German are languages in the sociolinguistic sense even though some speakers cannot understand each other without recourse to a standard or prestige form.
Read more about this topic: Mutual Intelligibility
Famous quotes containing the words mutually, intelligible, languages, varieties and/or language:
“For the support of this declaration we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, & our sacred honour.”
—Thomas Jefferson (17431826)
“Fine art is the subtlest, the most seductive, the most effective instrument of moral propaganda in the world, excepting only the example of personal conduct; and I waive even this exception in favor of the art of the stage, because it works by exhibiting examples of personal conduct made intelligible and moving to crowds of unobservant unreflecting people to whom real life means nothing.”
—George Bernard Shaw (18561950)
“I am always sorry when any language is lost, because languages are the pedigree of nations.”
—Samuel Johnson (17091784)
“Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone.”
—Bible: New Testament, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6.
“Experiment is necessary in establishing an academy, but certain principles must apply to this business of art as to any other business which affects the artis tic sense of the community. Great art speaks a language which every intelligent person can understand. The people who call themselves modernists today speak a different language.”
—Robert Menzies (18941978)