3 ms·

> The argument for sticking with Latin is that it's a relatively unchanging language This is as much of an argument against Latin, given that there's no way to

> The argument for sticking with Latin is that it's a relatively unchanging language This is as much of an argument against Latin, given that there's no way to say "transistor" or "x-ray" without falling back on pidgin. Translation is part of the scientific process, insofar as science itself isn't static and can't be expressed throughout the ages with a single vocabulary. (Besides, why stop there? How can we expect today's scientists to truly grasp Plotinus's the One without mastering Koine Greek?)

Amezarak 2y ago
Transistor is a portmanteau of "transfer" (from the Latin transferre) and resistor (from the Latin resistere), I think it still works. ;) (I think even resistor may be OK Latin according to the etymology I'm looking at, but I don't have enough faith in my Latin grammar to say so.)
- woodruffw 2y ago
  Yes, that’s what I meant by pidgin :-). English is full of Latin cognates.
marginalia_nu 2y ago
Latin has been extended with new concepts before, e.g. Newton didn't write classical latin like Cicero, but a post-renaissance latin with extended vocabulary. Koine greek would be another option, being another dead language, but Latin has the benefit of already having a large heritage of scientific writing. Carefully extending a dead language does have the strong benefit that you can keep it understandible across time. Even mid 19th century English is noticeably more difficult to read, and that's saying nothing about the 16th century English of Shakespeare. Here's a microcosm of what a waste this is: Benjamin Jowett has translated the complete works of Plato to English, and they're public domain! Great! Free Plato for everyone! ... except this was written in the 19th century, and they're written in an archaic prose that contemporary readers struggle to read, so everyone who wants to read Plato still has to get a modern translation. We're still translating texts that have been readily accessible for half a milennium. Sure there may have been a new insight or a better phrasing here and there, but primarily it's to get it into a language that is accessible to the contemporary reader. Sticking with English we're losing access to generational talents of the past because we can no longer understand what they're saying.
- woodruffw 2y ago
  > Even mid 19th century English is noticeably more difficult to read, and that's saying nothing about the 16th century English of Shakespeare. You perceive this because you read modern English; you don’t perceive similar differences in Latin because (I presume) you’re not fluent in Latin. I studied mostly Classical Latin, which yields pretty much the same experience when reading Ecclesiastical or Old Latin as modern English speakers have when reading Shakespearean English. Or in other words: there are foundational shifts that only become legible once the language itself is legible. The fact that I could retcon “x-ray” into Latin today does not make the version of Latin that Livy spoke uniquely valuable to science. All in all, I’d give us a better chance of preserving the sum total of human knowledge, including all versions of Latin, in fastidiously translating them into today’s dominant languages. This will be true of English too, whenever English stops being the lingua franca.
psychoslave 2y ago
Let’s not underestimate the power of human whims: https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistrum https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistrum https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roentgeniani_radii https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roentgeniani_radii
- woodruffw 2y ago
  Note the latinitas dubia on the first: we can calque anything between languages; that doesn't make Latin uniquely suitable for scientific conversation. (It also doesn't make it uniquely unsuitable: what makes it unsuitable is the fact that the only people who speak it are the pope, a handful of bishops, and a bunch of dorks.)

Amezarak 2y ago

Transistor is a portmanteau of "transfer" (from the Latin transferre) and resistor (from the Latin resistere), I think it still works. ;) (I think even resistor may be OK Latin according to the etymology I'm looking at, but I don't have enough faith in my Latin grammar to say so.)

woodruffw 2y ago
Yes, that’s what I meant by pidgin :-). English is full of Latin cognates.

marginalia_nu 2y ago

Latin has been extended with new concepts before, e.g. Newton didn't write classical latin like Cicero, but a post-renaissance latin with extended vocabulary. Koine greek would be another option, being another dead language, but Latin has the benefit of already having a large heritage of scientific writing. Carefully extending a dead language does have the strong benefit that you can keep it understandible across time. Even mid 19th century English is noticeably more difficult to read, and that's saying nothing about the 16th century English of Shakespeare. Here's a microcosm of what a waste this is: Benjamin Jowett has translated the complete works of Plato to English, and they're public domain! Great! Free Plato for everyone! ... except this was written in the 19th century, and they're written in an archaic prose that contemporary readers struggle to read, so everyone who wants to read Plato still has to get a modern translation. We're still translating texts that have been readily accessible for half a milennium. Sure there may have been a new insight or a better phrasing here and there, but primarily it's to get it into a language that is accessible to the contemporary reader. Sticking with English we're losing access to generational talents of the past because we can no longer understand what they're saying.

woodruffw 2y ago
> Even mid 19th century English is noticeably more difficult to read, and that's saying nothing about the 16th century English of Shakespeare. You perceive this because you read modern English; you don’t perceive similar differences in Latin because (I presume) you’re not fluent in Latin. I studied mostly Classical Latin, which yields pretty much the same experience when reading Ecclesiastical or Old Latin as modern English speakers have when reading Shakespearean English. Or in other words: there are foundational shifts that only become legible once the language itself is legible. The fact that I could retcon “x-ray” into Latin today does not make the version of Latin that Livy spoke uniquely valuable to science. All in all, I’d give us a better chance of preserving the sum total of human knowledge, including all versions of Latin, in fastidiously translating them into today’s dominant languages. This will be true of English too, whenever English stops being the lingua franca.

psychoslave 2y ago

Let’s not underestimate the power of human whims: https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistrum https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistrum https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roentgeniani_radii https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roentgeniani_radii

woodruffw 2y ago
Note the latinitas dubia on the first: we can calque anything between languages; that doesn't make Latin uniquely suitable for scientific conversation. (It also doesn't make it uniquely unsuitable: what makes it unsuitable is the fact that the only people who speak it are the pope, a handful of bishops, and a bunch of dorks.)