What is necessary for the birth of a new language? In the first place there is a purely linguistic prerequisite. The language has to have a name. A language without a name does not exist, for the simple reason that it is not possible to talk about it. The name may come into being in various ways, either through invention or through redefinition of a name that existed before. Anyhow, it seems to be a rule without exception in our time that the language name appears when the language is first used as a written language, or soon after that. It is the written language that is perceived as existing in its own right.
Secondly, a language is much helped if it has a political base. Haitian and Afrikaans, Norwegian and Setswana have very different histories, but they are all main languages in independent states. In two of the cases, Norwegian and Afrikaans, it is obvious that the emerging states needed languages of their own to strengthen national identity. However, this kind of backing is not an absolute requirement. Sepedi emerged around the same time as Setswana and in approximately the same way, although it did not have the support of an independent state, and there are several such examples.
Thirdly, it does not matter much how similar the language is to other languages. Language change does not in itself necessarily create new languages. Several of these are not regarded as languages of their own by anyone except a small number of linguists, in spite of the fact that they may be quite dissimilar to other language forms. On the other hand, Norwegian is close to both Danish and Swedish, and did not change very dramatically in the nineteenth century. What happened was mostly a change in the politics of language, not a language change.
15
Translate the text at sight
PROFESSIONAL TIMELINE
Multilingual simultaneous interpretation is now taken for granted by delegates of different countries and cultures attending international conferences. Yet the highly skilled profession and technical system that has made it possible for speakers to be understood, whatever the language, is fairly recent.
In the 18th and 19th century, international business and particularly diplomacy was most often conducted in French, the language of the cultured at that time. Between the two World Wars, the League of Nations held its meetings in French and English with consecutive interpretation. The interpreter would take notes of a speech, often very lengthy, then re-deliver it in the other language, thus doubling its time.
After World War II there was an immediate and urgent need for interpretation in English, French, Russian and German at the Nuremberg Trials of German war criminals. To rely on consecutive interpretation would have been lengthy and cumbersome (). The job of finding a solution was given to Colonel Leon Dostert, a former interpreter to General Eisenhower and completely bilingual. Dostert was convinced that it was possible to listen to a speaker and convey his message in another language at the same time. He also understood the importance for interpreters to see the speakers and to be able to follow the whole proceedings so as to understand what was going on.
The next main advances in interpreting came more recently, in the 20th century. In particular, at the International Labour Conference in Geneva, Switzerland in 1927, simultaneous interpreting was used for the very first time. However, following the conference the method of simultaneous interpreting was too costly and complicated to use during WWII, so it was not put into use until 1945, in the Nuremberg war crimes trial. This event marked the introduction of simultaneous interpreting into nearly every meeting, conference and trial from then on. In fact, shortly after the trial ended, in 1947, the United Nations' Resolution established simultaneous interpreting as a permanent service for the UN.
16
Translate the text at sight
