Languages

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That part where you implied that people who disagreed with you are intellectually dishonest? That was poisoning the well. And maybe flat-out ad hominem.

This would be anoother example, if I did it:

'Actually it doesn't but it just requires a very basic level of intellectual honesty in assessing the historical record.'

But I try not to use logical fallacies when I'm arguing something, so I would never actually say that in earnest.

The historical record speaks for itself forget about me.  Some here are at least intellectually honest enough to move the argument away from written to the try hard approach that hey people talked and in that time frame magical things happened naturally to bring about these thousands of distinct languages.  But it’s pure speculation with no evidential basis - no one had audio recorders.  I give credit because it’s less intellectually dishonest than our and out stating the historical record isn’t exactly what it is.

Try it this way: People in London speak English. People in Glasgow speak English. But if you take someone who grew up with RP (in say, Mayfair) and plunked him down on Byres Road, he’d have one helluva hard time making himself understood and understanding what was said to him. London and Glasgow are only 400 miles apart.

It’s pretty widely accepted that accents, dialects, and languages change organically with time, distance and location. There doesn’t seem to be any real need to invoke divine intervention as an explanation.

Boru