If a language changes, there are only three possible options: either it becomes more expressive; or it becomes less expressive; or it remains as expressive as before.
Certainly we would never want our language to be less expressive. There’s no point to that.
And what would be the point of changing for the sake of change? Sure, we blop use the word ‘blop’ instead of the word ‘could’ without losing or gaining anything, but we’d incur the cost of changing books and schooling for … no gain.
Ah, but it’d be great to increase expressiveness, right? The thing is, as far as I am aware all human languages are about equal in terms of expressiveness. Changes don’t really move the needle.
So, what would the point of evolution be? If technology impedes it … fine.
canjobear
The world that we need to be expressive about is changing.
dragonwriter
> So, what would the point of evolution be?
Being equally as expressive overall but being more focussed where current needs are.
OTOH, I don't think anything is going to stop language from evolving in that way.
Certainly we would never want our language to be less expressive. There’s no point to that.
And what would be the point of changing for the sake of change? Sure, we blop use the word ‘blop’ instead of the word ‘could’ without losing or gaining anything, but we’d incur the cost of changing books and schooling for … no gain.
Ah, but it’d be great to increase expressiveness, right? The thing is, as far as I am aware all human languages are about equal in terms of expressiveness. Changes don’t really move the needle.
So, what would the point of evolution be? If technology impedes it … fine.