Reviews from Amazon

Reviews elsewhere on the web:

John McWhorter

The Power of Babel

There are about 6000 languages spoken on earth today. Where did this diversity come from? Will it survive in a world in which English is becoming ever more dominant? In The Power of Babel John McWhorter takes a wide ranging look at such questions.

The book starts with a look at how languages change and goes on to consider the formation of dialects. McWhorter makes the point that there is no effective distinction between what is a dialect of a language and what is a separate language. Although the evolution of languages is often thought of as a tree, it is clear that the branches can fuse together again - a language will inevitably be greatly influenced by neighbouring languages. Thus the book gets on to pidgins, formed when people of different languages need some way of communication, and to creoles, which are often the 'next generation' of a pidgin, and are much more like true languages. McWhorter goes on to consider how some languages develop intricate rules such as multiple genders and inflections, but, interestingly, not those of the industrialised world which are basically pretty simple but have a different sort of complexity in their use in writing compound sentences. The book concludes with a look at the possibility of finding the 'original language' of mankind.

Sometimes I found book was hard going. Partly this was because reading a book which has so many different languages can be challenging (although the book is clearly aimed at a general readership). But also I felt that McWhorter wasn't always clear where he was going - at the start he says that this won't be an exposé of the folly of blackboard grammar rules - but I thought that it often was. Overall, though I liked the book - it seemed to me that, although other books may disagree, this is what 'real linguistics' should be about.

Amazon.com info

Paperback 352 pages
ISBN: 006052085X
Salesrank: 42349
Weight:0.5 lbs

Published: 2003 Harper Perennial

Amazon price $12.59

Marketplace:New from $7.95:Used from $7.38

Buy from Amazon.com

Amazon.co.uk info

Paperback 352 pages
ISBN: 006052085X
Salesrank: 747599
Weight:0.5 lbs

Published: 2003 Harper Perennial

Marketplace::Used from £5.87

Buy from Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.ca info

Paperback 352 pages
ISBN: 006052085X
Salesrank: 82624
Weight:0.5 lbs

Published: 2003 Harper Perennial

Amazon price CDN$ 12.05

Marketplace:New from CDN$ 9.11:Used from CDN$ 7.50

Buy from Amazon.ca

Product Description
There are approximately six thousand languages on Earth today, each a descendant of the tongue first spoken by Homo sapiens some 150,000 years ago.While laying out how languages mix and mutate over time, linguistics professor John McWhorter reminds us of the variety within the species that speaks them, and argues that, contrary to popular perception, language is not immutable and hidebound, but a living, dynamic entity that adapts itself to an ever-changing human environment. Full of humor and imaginative insight, The Power of Babel draws its illustrative examples from languages around the world, including pidgins, Creoles, and nonstandard dialects.

Product Description

There are approximately six thousand languages on Earth today, each a descendant of the tongue first spoken by Homo sapiens some 150,000 years ago.While laying out how languages mix and mutate over time, linguistics professor John McWhorter reminds us of the variety within the species that speaks them, and argues that, contrary to popular perception, language is not immutable and hidebound, but a living, dynamic entity that adapts itself to an ever-changing human environment.

Full of humor and imaginative insight, The Power of Babel draws its illustrative examples from languages around the world, including pidgins, Creoles, and nonstandard dialects.

how languages change *****
The book starts from the idea that there was an original language, back when humans came to be. This seems to me, a non-linguist, to be rather speculative, but McWhorter gives a few arguments for that, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. The most interesting parts of the book are those that detail the ways in which languages change over time. It turns out that most of the change is random, and has little to do with culture. McWhorter gives 5 ways in which languages change: the first involves the tendency of unaccented vowels to get dropped over time, such that the Latin 'femina' becomes 'femme' in French. The other interesting parts of the book have to do with the way languages break down (in pidgin) and get recreated (as creoles). The new language has very streamlined grammar, which leads people like McWhorter to speculate that the first, original language, was likewise streamlined. There are many other fascinating tidbits in this book, but, overall, I enjoyed the grand picture: that of language as almost an organic process of perpetual (but regular and understandable) change. Enjoy!

how languages change *****

The book starts from the idea that there was an original language, back when humans came to be. This seems to me, a non-linguist, to be rather speculative, but McWhorter gives a few arguments for that, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. The most interesting parts of the book are those that detail the ways in which languages change over time. It turns out that most of the change is random, and has little to do with culture. McWhorter gives 5 ways in which languages change: the first involves the tendency of unaccented vowels to get dropped over time, such that the Latin 'femina' becomes 'femme' in French.
The other interesting parts of the book have to do with the way languages break down (in pidgin) and get recreated (as creoles). The new language has very streamlined grammar, which leads people like McWhorter to speculate that the first, original language, was likewise streamlined.
There are many other fascinating tidbits in this book, but, overall, I enjoyed the grand picture: that of language as almost an organic process of perpetual (but regular and understandable) change.
Enjoy!

Rudimentary and flippant -- why did I buy this? **
This book is written at an _extremely_ rudimentary level; everything covered here can be learned much more easily and concisely, with a much less galling and obnoxious authorial voice, in any halfway-decent discussion of language. In my case, I found that already being familiar with the "Language Construction Kit" ([...]), oriented towards the building of fictional languages, gave me enough grounding that this was like reading Dr. Seuss after learning feline biology, or reading Jared Diamond after reading Fernand Braudel. In a word: If you the vaguest idea what a creole is, or know that sounds change regularly over time, or recognize the word 'ablaut,' you'll find yourself wasting your time with this book -- especially when McWorter irresponsibly endorses Proto-World. For those not familiar with the subject already, there is some useful information here, but the sheer level of flippancy would be galling nonetheless; I recommend the Language Construction Kit and a good biography of JRR Tolkien (or, better, Tom Shippey's _The Road to Middle-Earth_) instead.

Rudimentary and flippant -- why did I buy this? **

This book is written at an _extremely_ rudimentary level; everything covered here can be learned much more easily and concisely, with a much less galling and obnoxious authorial voice, in any halfway-decent discussion of language. In my case, I found that already being familiar with the "Language Construction Kit" ([...]), oriented towards the building of fictional languages, gave me enough grounding that this was like reading Dr. Seuss after learning feline biology, or reading Jared Diamond after reading Fernand Braudel.

In a word: If you the vaguest idea what a creole is, or know that sounds change regularly over time, or recognize the word 'ablaut,' you'll find yourself wasting your time with this book -- especially when McWorter irresponsibly endorses Proto-World.

For those not familiar with the subject already, there is some useful information here, but the sheer level of flippancy would be galling nonetheless; I recommend the Language Construction Kit and a good biography of JRR Tolkien (or, better, Tom Shippey's _The Road to Middle-Earth_) instead.

Adam Spoke Creole ****
John McWhorter's fascinating book on the transformation of languages, The Power of Babel, explores how language changes through time, the mechanisms behind those changes, and the essential mutability of this thing we all use, all the time, human verbal communication. Readable, though at times dense, McWhorter is not afraid to mix semi-complex discussions of linguistics with various subjects, from comic books to popular songs. Perhaps his most interesting suggestion is on the subject of the first language. What language did the first Homo Sapiens who evolved in Africa over 150,000 years ago speak? McWhorter finds reconstructions of this language based on current languages without merit. Languages are too mutable for that; he posits that the first language probably resembled today's "creole" languages. Pidgin and Creoles, the stew which creates new languages, was the basis of the six thousand languages spoken today. Add time, distance, and the human mutability, and we have a post-babel world

Adam Spoke Creole ****

John McWhorter's fascinating book on the transformation of languages, The Power of Babel, explores how language changes through time, the mechanisms behind those changes, and the essential mutability of this thing we all use, all the time, human verbal communication. Readable, though at times dense, McWhorter is not afraid to mix semi-complex discussions of linguistics with various subjects, from comic books to popular songs. Perhaps his most interesting suggestion is on the subject of the first language. What language did the first Homo Sapiens who evolved in Africa over 150,000 years ago speak? McWhorter finds reconstructions of this language based on current languages without merit. Languages are too mutable for that; he posits that the first language probably resembled today's "creole" languages. Pidgin and Creoles, the stew which creates new languages, was the basis of the six thousand languages spoken today. Add time, distance, and the human mutability, and we have a post-babel world

Objective Attainable ****
Dr. McWhorter successfully, in his own right, presents his information as an historical series of linguistic sparks, any one of which can induce further reading in other places. His style and copious examples follow the inter- and intra-connectivities and patterns of language itself. His humor, though not well captured personally in print, portray a genuine interest in his non-linguist audience. I highly recommend purchasing his DVD lectures to appreciate his personality and passion, not to mention greater detail to language study.

Objective Attainable ****

Dr. McWhorter successfully, in his own right, presents his information as an historical series of linguistic sparks, any one of which can induce further reading in other places. His style and copious examples follow the inter- and intra-connectivities and patterns of language itself. His humor, though not well captured personally in print, portray a genuine interest in his non-linguist audience. I highly recommend purchasing his DVD lectures to appreciate his personality and passion, not to mention greater detail to language study.

Really good, even if not exactly what some would expect *****
The Power of Babel is really a well-written and engaging book about language and how it changes, a judgment echoed by many other reviewers. However, I expected it to be a history of the development of language, from the first one to the major language families to the currently spoken ones. Indeed, it has some of it, but it's not its major focus: ultimately, The Power of Babel is about more basic concepts, like what's really a "language" and how languages change with time and mix with one another. It's more about the basic mechanisms that propel languages through history than the history of the changes themselves. And it's quite good at that. That it mismatched my expectations was not a big problem: as I am quite interested in language (in general) and languages, the book was indeed much fun to read. So, I assume, it should be for other language buffs out there. But some people may get disappointed, as it seems to be the case for some other reviewer. It also didn't bother me that the text is sprinkled with pop references and jokes; I rather liked it, even if I didn't get some of them by virtue of not having grown in the USA. The text is agile and quite pleasant to read. Furthermore, it has very curious and interesting tidbits about English and French, e.g., I found in Mcwhorter's book why in French you use two words (ne and pas) for negation, something none of my French teachers told me. So if you are interested in language, I'd seriously recommend this book, even if it's not a history of language development. Rather, it's quite more general than that, but with a great many examples of language change and evolution from all around the world. All that, and it's quite fun to read.

Really good, even if not exactly what some would expect *****

The Power of Babel is really a well-written and engaging book about language and how it changes, a judgment echoed by many other reviewers. However, I expected it to be a history of the development of language, from the first one to the major language families to the currently spoken ones. Indeed, it has some of it, but it's not its major focus: ultimately, The Power of Babel is about more basic concepts, like what's really a "language" and how languages change with time and mix with one another. It's more about the basic mechanisms that propel languages through history than the history of the changes themselves. And it's quite good at that.

That it mismatched my expectations was not a big problem: as I am quite interested in language (in general) and languages, the book was indeed much fun to read. So, I assume, it should be for other language buffs out there. But some people may get disappointed, as it seems to be the case for some other reviewer.

It also didn't bother me that the text is sprinkled with pop references and jokes; I rather liked it, even if I didn't get some of them by virtue of not having grown in the USA. The text is agile and quite pleasant to read. Furthermore, it has very curious and interesting tidbits about English and French, e.g., I found in Mcwhorter's book why in French you use two words (ne and pas) for negation, something none of my French teachers told me.

So if you are interested in language, I'd seriously recommend this book, even if it's not a history of language development. Rather, it's quite more general than that, but with a great many examples of language change and evolution from all around the world. All that, and it's quite fun to read.

Fascinating subject, poor presentation ***
Although the subject matter of this book is one of enormous and lifelong interest to me, I had only dipped into this before now and this was my first attempt to read through the whole book. This largely didn't work for me - the chapters are too long and rambling, and poorly structured, with excessive use of long-winded examples. The editor should really have taken a good look at this and produced a more tightly structured book of half or two thirds the length. For this UK reader, there were also too many slightly flippant and highly irritating and unnecessary contemporary or near contemporary American cultural references that spoiled the flow of the book. Could have been a good deal better.

Fascinating subject, poor presentation ***

Although the subject matter of this book is one of enormous and lifelong interest to me, I had only dipped into this before now and this was my first attempt to read through the whole book. This largely didn't work for me - the chapters are too long and rambling, and poorly structured, with excessive use of long-winded examples. The editor should really have taken a good look at this and produced a more tightly structured book of half or two thirds the length. For this UK reader, there were also too many slightly flippant and highly irritating and unnecessary contemporary or near contemporary American cultural references that spoiled the flow of the book. Could have been a good deal better.

Meandering review of author's pet subjects ***
It's difficult to know where to begin with this tome. It's kinda like "Will & Grace" meets sociolinguistics. There is a serious work in there on linguistics, but this is somewhat overwhelmed by McWhorter's immaculate scholarship and bizarre errors. "Welsh [hangs on] in England" (p256) - sorry, Wales is in Great Britain not England. And there are many Welsh for whom English is not a first language. The book is as much about a bibliomaniac sitting in his appartment with his cat, eyebrows and DVD collection, as it is about the history (or non-history)of language. Anyone hoping for a helicopter view on historical linguistics will have to look elsewhere. There is rather more about pidgins and creoles than the book's thesis might warrant, and in the end I found McWhorter's lack of understanding of balanced bilingualism rather sad and annoying. Overall it's a reasonably enjoyable read if you enjoy languages and 20th century TV. To be honest there are much better sources of information.

Meandering review of author's pet subjects ***

It's difficult to know where to begin with this tome.
It's kinda like "Will & Grace" meets sociolinguistics. There is a serious work in there on linguistics, but this is somewhat overwhelmed by McWhorter's immaculate scholarship and bizarre errors.
"Welsh [hangs on] in England" (p256) - sorry, Wales is in Great Britain not England. And there are many Welsh for whom English is not a first language.
The book is as much about a bibliomaniac sitting in his appartment with his cat, eyebrows and DVD collection, as it is about the history (or non-history)of language. Anyone hoping for a helicopter view on historical linguistics will have to look elsewhere.
There is rather more about pidgins and creoles than the book's thesis might warrant, and in the end I found McWhorter's lack of understanding of balanced bilingualism rather sad and annoying.

Overall it's a reasonably enjoyable read if you enjoy languages and 20th century TV. To be honest there are much better sources of information.

The power of babel *****
If your interested in historical linguistics from an interested lay-perspective or the subject is new - its well worth the read - informative and enterraining - the Richard Dawkins of historical linguistics

The power of babel *****

If your interested in historical linguistics from an interested lay-perspective or the subject is new - its well worth the read - informative and enterraining - the Richard Dawkins of historical linguistics

Book unsuitable for interested amateurs **
I've been reading books about language and linguistics for many years and have rarely been as disappointed by a book. If you extract all McWhorter's own self-referential little comments about his childhood, stories about television shows and comic books, and "cute" footnotes (example: 6. "Hats off to the 'Simpsons' house composer...." 7. "I like that one too." 9. "Dino fans: Yes, I know....", to take just one chapter), there is scarcely any new or interesting information in his book. Who is the book aimed at? On one hand, the overly colloquial style ("Make no mistake: I love written language deeply and enjoy few things more than composing prose on the page" !!) argues that it is aimed at a reader who knows nothing whatever about the subject and needs to be pulled in by things like analysis of a McDonald's ad in German. On the other hand, the long, long, long sections about creoles and pidgins seem to be aimed at a reader who is already fascinated by that subject. Well, at any rate this book was NOT aimed at me-- an interested and educated amateur.

Book unsuitable for interested amateurs **

I've been reading books about language and linguistics for many years and have rarely been as disappointed by a book. If you extract all McWhorter's own self-referential little comments about his childhood, stories about television shows and comic books, and "cute" footnotes (example: 6. "Hats off to the 'Simpsons' house composer...." 7. "I like that one too." 9. "Dino fans: Yes, I know....", to take just one chapter), there is scarcely any new or interesting information in his book.

Who is the book aimed at? On one hand, the overly colloquial style ("Make no mistake: I love written language deeply and enjoy few things more than composing prose on the page" !!) argues that it is aimed at a reader who knows nothing whatever about the subject and needs to be pulled in by things like analysis of a McDonald's ad in German. On the other hand, the long, long, long sections about creoles and pidgins seem to be aimed at a reader who is already fascinated by that subject. Well, at any rate this book was NOT aimed at me-- an interested and educated amateur.

English, Russian and other languages - really great book. *****
As a man whose mother tongue is Russian I feel very happy that English is a language I learnt as foreign one and not the other way around. The reason is that grammatically English language is enormously simpler than Russian and I am a pretty lazy guy. Russian has six cases for nouns - English has none (objective case does not really count due to extreme simplicity). Russian has three genders (male, female and neutral or "middle" as high school teachers call it) - English has none (with couple of grotesque examples like ship referred to as "she"). Russian has intricate rules of how endings are governed depending on plural or single - in English it is always static no matter how complex a sentence is. After the reading of Mr. McWhorter's book I did realize that even with all its complexity Russian is hardly one of the most difficult languages to study. This book is probably one of the very few on popular science (I guess anybody who read the book will not disagree that linguistics is definitely a science) I would advise to include into the list of mandatory reading parents create for their kids. It has an extremely rich historical background for many languages as well as for language as a mainstream mean of communication. The author is almost encyclopedically knowledgeable in pretty much every aspect of it and it reads very easily. Frequent manifestations of author's sense of humor are also improves readability. Several things though I guess may need some clarifications. Author mentions about Russia as about "highly insular nation for most of its history" (page 101). I have to disagree with this statement. Yes, 20th century was marked by insularism due to well-known political processes. But before and after that Russia was and is quite open for its neighbors for mutual interactions and it definitely includes word loaning from other languages. Yes, there are much less Latin loans in Russian language comparing to English. But at the same time there are tons of loans from Turkic family, notably from Tatar. Medieval history of Russia marked by warfare, trade and periods of political dependence from Golden Horde and because of that many basic words like money (den'gi - from tan'ga), cap (kolpak - from kolpak), strongman (bogatir' - from bagatur), chest (soondook - from sundik) to name few are loaned into Russian from Tatar. It would probably fair to say that Golden Horde played for Russian language the role similar to what has been played by Normans after 1066 for English. In my opinion, Mr. McWhorter oversimplifies the relationship between Russian and Ukrainian, saying "mastering Ukrainian is more a matter of adjustment than precisely learning" (page 72). Yes, those languages are quite close as well as they are close enough to Polish, Serbian and Belarusian but they are far enough to prevent one from good understanding when the other language speaker speaks fast. I remember, when I was a kid in Kyrgyzstan I visited a little village of Poltavka where descendants of Cossacks sent by Tsar in early 19th century to guard outskirts of Russian Empire still speak a strange mix of old Ukrainian and old Russian. Even though I have spent some time there trying to pick up the language it was still not very understandable as a whole despite on some words and even sentences were clear sometimes. Also, Mr. McWhorter's examples of certain words usage and phrases are somewhat outdated. For example, on the same page a phrase "pokojnoj noci" is described as a way Russian speakers say "Good Night". In fact it is 19th century way of saying good night. If my girlfriend would say to me "pokojnoj noci dorogoi" (Good night honey) my first reaction would be "Why the hell she speaks like Anna Karenina?". The contemporary way of saying good night is "spokojnoj noci" - one additional sound makes a huge difference. The same is applicable to the word "strashyj" (page 24), which may be in days of Nabokov was used exclusively for depicting really frightful things, like let's say grizzly attack. Nowadays it can be used pretty much the same way the English word terrible is used - one can say "strashno dorogo" meaning "terribly costly" and it would be quite normal and understandable. But in general Mr. McWhorter's observations regarding Russian language are very true. He mentions about articles as a stumbling bloc. After several years of existence in English environment I still make mistakes with proper usage of those as this text I am sure confirms eloquently. Even when I feel I supposed to use "a" or "the" here or there a strange feeling of something unnatural nagging me inside. The thing is articles are perceived as something grotesquely redundant, the same way a letter "d" should be in the word "boulevard" for orthographic correctness. On the other hand I can only guess what English speakers think of all that convolution of Russian grammar with its multiple genders and cases. Having said that, I feel like we all can consider ourselves lucky due to a mere fact that a mother tongue of Mr. McWhorter is English. Because of that his profoundly enjoyable book is easily available for our comprehension. How would it be if this great book is written and published in, let's say, Mandinka or Evenki? The cruel truth is a writer's talent should always be accompanied by a mother tongue whose market penetration is competitive enough with other 6000 or so counterparts. Only then it can be truly beneficial for readers audience and writer's wellbeing.

English, Russian and other languages - really great book. *****

As a man whose mother tongue is Russian I feel very happy that English is a language I learnt as foreign one and not the other way around. The reason is that grammatically English language is enormously simpler than Russian and I am a pretty lazy guy. Russian has six cases for nouns - English has none (objective case does not really count due to extreme simplicity). Russian has three genders (male, female and neutral or "middle" as high school teachers call it) - English has none (with couple of grotesque examples like ship referred to as "she"). Russian has intricate rules of how endings are governed depending on plural or single - in English it is always static no matter how complex a sentence is. After the reading of Mr. McWhorter's book I did realize that even with all its complexity Russian is hardly one of the most difficult languages to study.
This book is probably one of the very few on popular science (I guess anybody who read the book will not disagree that linguistics is definitely a science) I would advise to include into the list of mandatory reading parents create for their kids. It has an extremely rich historical background for many languages as well as for language as a mainstream mean of communication. The author is almost encyclopedically knowledgeable in pretty much every aspect of it and it reads very easily. Frequent manifestations of author's sense of humor are also improves readability.
Several things though I guess may need some clarifications.
Author mentions about Russia as about "highly insular nation for most of its history" (page 101). I have to disagree with this statement. Yes, 20th century was marked by insularism due to well-known political processes. But before and after that Russia was and is quite open for its neighbors for mutual interactions and it definitely includes word loaning from other languages. Yes, there are much less Latin loans in Russian language comparing to English. But at the same time there are tons of loans from Turkic family, notably from Tatar. Medieval history of Russia marked by warfare, trade and periods of political dependence from Golden Horde and because of that many basic words like money (den'gi - from tan'ga), cap (kolpak - from kolpak), strongman (bogatir' - from bagatur), chest (soondook - from sundik) to name few are loaned into Russian from Tatar. It would probably fair to say that Golden Horde played for Russian language the role similar to what has been played by Normans after 1066 for English.
In my opinion, Mr. McWhorter oversimplifies the relationship between Russian and Ukrainian, saying "mastering Ukrainian is more a matter of adjustment than precisely learning" (page 72). Yes, those languages are quite close as well as they are close enough to Polish, Serbian and Belarusian but they are far enough to prevent one from good understanding when the other language speaker speaks fast. I remember, when I was a kid in Kyrgyzstan I visited a little village of Poltavka where descendants of Cossacks sent by Tsar in early 19th century to guard outskirts of Russian Empire still speak a strange mix of old Ukrainian and old Russian. Even though I have spent some time there trying to pick up the language it was still not very understandable as a whole despite on some words and even sentences were clear sometimes.
Also, Mr. McWhorter's examples of certain words usage and phrases are somewhat outdated. For example, on the same page a phrase "pokojnoj noci" is described as a way Russian speakers say "Good Night". In fact it is 19th century way of saying good night. If my girlfriend would say to me "pokojnoj noci dorogoi" (Good night honey) my first reaction would be "Why the hell she speaks like Anna Karenina?". The contemporary way of saying good night is "spokojnoj noci" - one additional sound makes a huge difference. The same is applicable to the word "strashyj" (page 24), which may be in days of Nabokov was used exclusively for depicting really frightful things, like let's say grizzly attack. Nowadays it can be used pretty much the same way the English word terrible is used - one can say "strashno dorogo" meaning "terribly costly" and it would be quite normal and understandable.
But in general Mr. McWhorter's observations regarding Russian language are very true. He mentions about articles as a stumbling bloc. After several years of existence in English environment I still make mistakes with proper usage of those as this text I am sure confirms eloquently. Even when I feel I supposed to use "a" or "the" here or there a strange feeling of something unnatural nagging me inside. The thing is articles are perceived as something grotesquely redundant, the same way a letter "d" should be in the word "boulevard" for orthographic correctness. On the other hand I can only guess what English speakers think of all that convolution of Russian grammar with its multiple genders and cases.
Having said that, I feel like we all can consider ourselves lucky due to a mere fact that a mother tongue of Mr. McWhorter is English. Because of that his profoundly enjoyable book is easily available for our comprehension. How would it be if this great book is written and published in, let's say, Mandinka or Evenki? The cruel truth is a writer's talent should always be accompanied by a mother tongue whose market penetration is competitive enough with other 6000 or so counterparts. Only then it can be truly beneficial for readers audience and writer's wellbeing.

What was the first language ever spoken? *****
If you like to consider fascinating questions, then consider this: What was the first language ever spoken? Since its inception, our species has had the same capacity for speech yet we only have an understanding of languages that only descends a few thousand years into the past. This book excellently surveys a sampling the currently existing six thousand languages with an eye towards issues pertaining to their development and change over time. What happens when two diverse peoples start interacting? This book tells you. When happens when two similar groups of people separate? This book tells you. What was the first language? This book posits an answer. It is therefore nothing less than a wonderful introduction to a fascinating topic.

What was the first language ever spoken? *****

If you like to consider fascinating questions, then consider this: What was the first language ever spoken? Since its inception, our species has had the same capacity for speech yet we only have an understanding of languages that only descends a few thousand years into the past. This book excellently surveys a sampling the currently existing six thousand languages with an eye towards issues pertaining to their development and change over time. What happens when two diverse peoples start interacting? This book tells you. When happens when two similar groups of people separate? This book tells you. What was the first language? This book posits an answer. It is therefore nothing less than a wonderful introduction to a fascinating topic.

Very good popular-level treatment *****
I was at first a bit unsure as to whether to give this book a full 5 stars. Sure, I liked it a lot, but it does need some negative comments here. But I decided I liked it enough to give it 5. At first, I felt that the book was not as well integrated as I'd like. With further reading it grew on me. McWhorter covers a lot of topics in comparative/historical linguistics, and does so in a very readable style, but the breadth of his coverage seemed to me at first to be just too great. As I said, as I read further, I changed my mind somewhat. I still think that it could be somewhat better integrated, but I think it's not as badly integrated as I first thought. One thing that I can fault McWhorter on is that if you have read his other book, "The Word on the Street," you'll find him repeating some of his ideas. They aren't at the same level of prominence: major theses he advances in the earlier book become minor points here. But it does seem he could at least change his examples. He gives the SAME example of a sentence that is traditionally considered ungrammatical which everyone naturally uses, and the SAME example of a passage in Shakespeare that is universally misunderstood because of semantic change over time, that he used in the other book. But he's not as bad as Keith Devlin, who has published popularizations of math with whole chapters taken verbatim from earlier books. So again, I can't fault McWhorter that much. Other than these two comments, however, I have only positive things to say. I think that this book is a good treatment of historical and comparative linguistics, of dialect variation and pidgin/creole structure, and such at a level accessible to the interested general public. And so I recommend it to all interested readers.

Very good popular-level treatment *****

I was at first a bit unsure as to whether to give this book a full 5 stars. Sure, I liked it a lot, but it does need some negative comments here. But I decided I liked it enough to give it 5.

At first, I felt that the book was not as well integrated as I'd like. With further reading it grew on me. McWhorter covers a lot of topics in comparative/historical linguistics, and does so in a very readable style, but the breadth of his coverage seemed to me at first to be just too great. As I said, as I read further, I changed my mind somewhat. I still think that it could be somewhat better integrated, but I think it's not as badly integrated as I first thought.

One thing that I can fault McWhorter on is that if you have read his other book, "The Word on the Street," you'll find him repeating some of his ideas. They aren't at the same level of prominence: major theses he advances in the earlier book become minor points here. But it does seem he could at least change his examples. He gives the SAME example of a sentence that is traditionally considered ungrammatical which everyone naturally uses, and the SAME example of a passage in Shakespeare that is universally misunderstood because of semantic change over time, that he used in the other book. But he's not as bad as Keith Devlin, who has published popularizations of math with whole chapters taken verbatim from earlier books. So again, I can't fault McWhorter that much.

Other than these two comments, however, I have only positive things to say. I think that this book is a good treatment of historical and comparative linguistics, of dialect variation and pidgin/creole structure, and such at a level accessible to the interested general public. And so I recommend it to all interested readers.

An uncertain alchemy of lead and gold ***
Have you noticed how prevalent the word "got" has become? As in "I've got a cold" (instead of "I have a cold") or "What's he got that I don't?" (instead of "What does he have that I don't?"). Or the versatile phrase, "You got it." (Which has various possible meanings: You have understood what I mean. You have mucho mojo. I will do as you ask.) On one hand, pairing "have" and "get" is grammatically excessive, but on the other hand, the syllables flow more easily off the tongue. It's easy to see why Americans would trend toward the easier locution. All language is in a constant process of simplifying itself, or perhaps it's more accurate to say streamlining, and spoken language leads the way, with writing a slow follower. The Power of Babel embraces that reality. McWhorter is a linguistics professor at Berkeley and the author of Authentically Black, so he's got [sic] the chops. The book is filled with illuminating tidbits, such as the notion of "idea packets" - the brief units of information we present in spoken language, which are often run together with "and" or "so" and are less grammatically structured than they would be in written communication. One analysis concludes that the average idea packet is seven words long. Or take "diglossia," the term for the practice, typical in European countries, of speaking the standard version of the language in public and the local dialect at home. This leads to a discussion about the difference between "language" and "dialect," with McWhorter arguing that all language is dialect. He clearly explains the distinction between pidgin (a broken version of a language) and creole (a new language combining at least two others), and gives examples of both. The book's driving premise is that our 6,000 languages evolved out of a single, original language. I'm not convinced, but the linguistic history he includes is very interesting. The Power of Babel is an "entertaining romp" according to the blurb, which may put up a red flag for some seriously information-seeking readers. It's a consciously mass-appeal book, filled with pop culture references that produce some excruciatingly misjudged attempts at wit such as when, in a discussion of sound change, the author refers to "the French 'cher' (pronounced like Chastity Bono's mother's name)." Ouch! It's the reading equivalent of stubbing your toe. McWhorter mentions Monica Lewinsky, Marlo Thomas, and Dick Cavett, too, all in an apparent bid to make the book outdated as soon as possible. I have a friend who doesn't follow popular culture and found many of the ephemeral references baffling rather than illuminating. McWhorter evidently hoped such silliness would help alleviate some of the very dense linguistics talk he indulges in, but it's a distracting miscalculation that detracts from the many parts of his book that are genuinely worthwhile. The Power of Babel would be more successful if he had managed to strike a better balance between the two.

An uncertain alchemy of lead and gold ***

Have you noticed how prevalent the word "got" has become? As in "I've got a cold" (instead of "I have a cold") or "What's he got that I don't?" (instead of "What does he have that I don't?"). Or the versatile phrase, "You got it." (Which has various possible meanings: You have understood what I mean. You have mucho mojo. I will do as you ask.) On one hand, pairing "have" and "get" is grammatically excessive, but on the other hand, the syllables flow more easily off the tongue. It's easy to see why Americans would trend toward the easier locution. All language is in a constant process of simplifying itself, or perhaps it's more accurate to say streamlining, and spoken language leads the way, with writing a slow follower. The Power of Babel embraces that reality.

McWhorter is a linguistics professor at Berkeley and the author of Authentically Black, so he's got [sic] the chops. The book is filled with illuminating tidbits, such as the notion of "idea packets" - the brief units of information we present in spoken language, which are often run together with "and" or "so" and are less grammatically structured than they would be in written communication. One analysis concludes that the average idea packet is seven words long.

Or take "diglossia," the term for the practice, typical in European countries, of speaking the standard version of the language in public and the local dialect at home. This leads to a discussion about the difference between "language" and "dialect," with McWhorter arguing that all language is dialect. He clearly explains the distinction between pidgin (a broken version of a language) and creole (a new language combining at least two others), and gives examples of both. The book's driving premise is that our 6,000 languages evolved out of a single, original language. I'm not convinced, but the linguistic history he includes is very interesting.

The Power of Babel is an "entertaining romp" according to the blurb, which may put up a red flag for some seriously information-seeking readers. It's a consciously mass-appeal book, filled with pop culture references that produce some excruciatingly misjudged attempts at wit such as when, in a discussion of sound change, the author refers to "the French 'cher' (pronounced like Chastity Bono's mother's name)." Ouch! It's the reading equivalent of stubbing your toe.

McWhorter mentions Monica Lewinsky, Marlo Thomas, and Dick Cavett, too, all in an apparent bid to make the book outdated as soon as possible. I have a friend who doesn't follow popular culture and found many of the ephemeral references baffling rather than illuminating. McWhorter evidently hoped such silliness would help alleviate some of the very dense linguistics talk he indulges in, but it's a distracting miscalculation that detracts from the many parts of his book that are genuinely worthwhile. The Power of Babel would be more successful if he had managed to strike a better balance between the two.

Language change is the norm *****
This is a very good natured book. As a child McWhorter tried to learn Hebrew. Seeing a chart at the back of a dictionary, he thought it was absolutely necessary to translate "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" into French, Spanish, Italian, German, Swedish, and Yiddish. Human language is unique in its ability to communicate, to convey. Language is eternally and inherently changeable. The five faces of language change are sound change, extension, rebracketing, expressiveness, and semantic change. Language change leaves foot prints. Culture and language are weakly related. Most languages are bundles of variations--dialects. Linguistically homogenizing tendancies are printing, education, and the communication revolution. Sometimes for political reasons dialects are considered separate languages. Some of the so-called languages are mutually intelligible such as Macedonian and Bulgarian, Swedish and Danish and Norwegian, Russian and Ukranian and Belorussian, and Romanian and Moldavan. The Vikings scattered about a thousand words into English. After 1066 the Normans introduced seventy five hundred words into English. When pidgin expands to creole the language is no longer simple. Creole is not strictly speaking an intertwined language. The Gullah language is a creole. All languages are complex to some degree. Sometimes standardization and literacy congeal freezing a language. There has been large-scale language death. Not all European languages are Indo-European. Finnish, Estonian, Lappish and Hungarian belong to another group, the Uralic.

Language change is the norm *****

This is a very good natured book. As a child McWhorter tried to learn Hebrew. Seeing a chart at the back of a dictionary, he thought it was absolutely necessary to translate "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" into French, Spanish, Italian, German, Swedish, and Yiddish.

Human language is unique in its ability to communicate, to convey. Language is eternally and inherently changeable. The five faces of language change are sound change, extension, rebracketing, expressiveness, and semantic change.

Language change leaves foot prints. Culture and language are weakly related. Most languages are bundles of variations--dialects. Linguistically homogenizing tendancies are printing, education, and the communication revolution.

Sometimes for political reasons dialects are considered separate languages. Some of the so-called languages are mutually intelligible such as Macedonian and Bulgarian, Swedish and Danish and Norwegian, Russian and Ukranian and Belorussian, and Romanian and Moldavan.

The Vikings scattered about a thousand words into English. After 1066 the Normans introduced seventy five hundred words into English. When pidgin expands to creole the language is no longer simple. Creole is not strictly speaking an intertwined language. The Gullah language is a creole.

All languages are complex to some degree. Sometimes standardization and literacy congeal freezing a language. There has been large-scale language death. Not all European languages are Indo-European. Finnish, Estonian, Lappish and Hungarian belong to another group, the Uralic.