(Sigh) A language is dead if no-one speaks it. Talk to me in Etruscan,
please. If a scholar happens to know a few words of a language does not
constitute its being "alive". Latin is not "dead", because there are
many people who can read, write, and speak it, and until the 20th
century, it was widely used.
One could, perhaps, call Latin "un-dead" because the Roman empire used
it as an "everyday" language, and the Church took it over as a "holy"
tongue thereafter, giving it new "life", much as a vampire's "life" is
extended beyond the norm, but this analogy fails to recognize that
Latin never really "died".
--- "Hrant H. Papazian" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> John Ahlstrom wrote:
> > Are there really degrees or kinds of un-deadness?
> Well, sure: a wraith is a lot less undead than a
> lich... ;-)
> > Then we can endlessly discuss whether the use by
> > one community or another constitutes un-deadness.
> Exactly. Instead of that mess, just use "dormant".
You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader 3.0 or later to read the Acrobat PDF file attached. If you do not have Acrobat reader, you can get it free from Adobe. Please refer to:
The Adobe Acrobat PDF format allows you to view this formatted document electronically on most computers. The freely available Adobe Acrobat reader is required to view and print PDF files.
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com