Zen9
Banned
There are a number of points to make here.
1. Consider Frisian. Modern evidence in the Netherlands shows that there was a population replacement of some sort. The name stays but the people change. What we think of as Frisian is really .....English.....or more accurately Anglo-Saxon/Inguaevonic.
2. France may now seem home to a relatively uniform language. But this was not always the case. Gaulish was not extent over the entirety of the land.
Aquitani in the south west, rather mixed among the Belgae.in the north east.
Unknown in the Alps. Rhaetic has been suggested as a non-Indo-European language in origin.
3. Language change is the outcome of several different factors. Population change is just one.
Another is prestige and economic benefit. Hence why Irish Gaelic lost out to english only a few hundred years ago.
Or why Egypt is now a mostly Arabic speaking country.
The supposed sophistication of a culture and language doesn't ensure survival, hence why dravidian speakers no longer dominate swathe of India.
1. Consider Frisian. Modern evidence in the Netherlands shows that there was a population replacement of some sort. The name stays but the people change. What we think of as Frisian is really .....English.....or more accurately Anglo-Saxon/Inguaevonic.
2. France may now seem home to a relatively uniform language. But this was not always the case. Gaulish was not extent over the entirety of the land.
Aquitani in the south west, rather mixed among the Belgae.in the north east.
Unknown in the Alps. Rhaetic has been suggested as a non-Indo-European language in origin.
3. Language change is the outcome of several different factors. Population change is just one.
Another is prestige and economic benefit. Hence why Irish Gaelic lost out to english only a few hundred years ago.
Or why Egypt is now a mostly Arabic speaking country.
The supposed sophistication of a culture and language doesn't ensure survival, hence why dravidian speakers no longer dominate swathe of India.