Editor for this issue: Ann Dizdar <dizdar
tam2000.tamu.edu>
To the multiple recipients of the list: Antonio Ruiz Mariscal's recent posting about Mezzofanti mentioned "Californian". Since languages belonging to 20 different groups were spoken in California at that time, some clarification may be welcome. I suspect that the language referred to is Luisen~o, a Takic (and therefore Uto-Aztecan) language of San Luis Rey, which still has a handful of speakers. That there were people who spoke that language in Rome is known for a fact, since at least two students who were Luisen~o-speakers were sent to Rome to study for the priesthood. (I know of two, and there may have been more.) The most famous was Pablo Tac, who died aged nineteen, and who compiled a grammatical description and part of a dictionary of Luisen~o. The dictionary fragment was published by Carlo Tagliavini in the 1930s, and his grammar was extensively discussed in an article in the International Journal of American Linguistics by Sandra Chung in 1974. Tac knew Latin, Spanish and Italian in addition to his native language. As for modern polyglots, I'd say that Eric Hamp, of the University of Chicago, should figure in any listing. I met him in Amsterdam in December 1994 and heard him use at least six languages in one day. To my certain knowledge, the languages which he's comfortable in speaking include Serbo-Croat, Scots Gaelic and Albanian. Dr Anthony P. Grant University of BradfordMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Thanks to Dick and Juergen for excellent messages on this perennially fascinating subject. Dick is so right to point out the lack of research data -- get to work, colleagues! Non-language learners such as myself (an inability I share with Dick) can only marvel and share anecdotes. So when Juergen points out that it is a matter of "communicative competence", whatever that is, I can only applaud. And if Dick can tolerate one more anecdote, it seems to me that neither behavioral inventories of data one needs to master to "know" a language nor simple tallies will suffice. There is an ability, I have always felt iot to be related to that of mimicry or the"double-talk" mastered by some comic performers (e.g. Americans Danny Kaye, Sid Caesar, Robin Williams) which is preeminent in communicative competence. The idea is not necessarily have real fluency in the language, but the ability, if this does not sound too mystical, to convey the impression that you do have it. My wife and I spent long enough abroad with our four daughters in two countries that all of us got to get along fairly well in the languages involved: Japanese and Italian. We all progressed apace during these experiences, although the adults were predicatably slower and generally less competent. But one of our four daughters involved was taken by natives to be a fluent speaker from a very early stage, though I believe she was no more fluent than the others. Foreign friends would say, "Oh, J... really know hows to speak Japanese [Italian]." Said daughter later became, and is, a lawyer, a profession where "communciative competence" may not be irrelevant. Excuse me, Dick and friends, no researchdata here, but still perhaps an insight into the nature of "multilinguality". Yours, kvtMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue