Farewell the Tranquil Mind, Farewell Content, or Then Farewell Frost, and Welcome Heat!

Hehe, it's another pun... (These are both lines from Shakespeare; the first I made into a pun with "content," and in the second, I juxtaposed "heat" and "frost" because I'm headed back to the South after finishing exams!)

Although all four types of knowledge discussed in class- folk, oral, written, and print- have their own specialized uses in different areas, their uses today play a very different role than in the past. One's use has become very different from the others' in the modern age in terms of what knowledge it continues to preserve and deliver: oral knowledge has ceased to become an effective method of learning new knowledge but has instead taken the role of preserving past cultural knowledge.

Class Recitation of King Benjamin's Speech

Great job group 1, and great job class! This was a really cool experience, once we overcame intense levels of anxiety and stress.

Writing and Education

           We have thoroughly explored the idea that writing is necessary for the preservation of knowledge, particularly oral knowledge. Our group focus of language provided ample examples of knowledge dying out due to the lack of proper documentation or preservation thereof.

            Class discussions have enlightened us on various oral-learning techniques that have appeared throughout history. “Miss Karen” (Professor Burton's talented wife) showed us an effective teaching technique called choral responding, and Professor Burton taught us about the methods of Ancient Greek Education including the Socratic method.

The King's Conference

As Dr. Burton mentioned in the instructor post Monday, we're kind of developing our own subject for our posts this week. I had an idea come to mind earlier today while listening to the class's performance of King Benjamin's speech regarding how the text is the way it is because of its oral nature despite the fact that we have a textual record of it. I am going to focus mainly on the verses that I had to recite/perform because these are the ones I am most familiar with and I think these will be sufficient enough to get my point across.

Transition from Oral to Written Knowledge

Looking back, my first blog for the Oral Language unit was a frustrated one; one where I had not yet grasped the beauty and importance of oral language. I thought it was pointless without the written, and saw things with a very narrow minded perspective. I struggled and struggled. I could not find anything online, I tried contacting three professors, and I just could not get the understanding I needed. Gradually, very gradually, through all of your blog posts and class discussions have I become passionate about what oral knowledge holds and the importance of preserving it.

Oral language, a free flowing dialogue, has qualities unlike any other form of communication. It is like the ebb and flow of an ocean tide, able to move freely and change, and return to the same conversation over and over again; because nothing is set in stone. It is not confined to words on a page. It is malleable and amendable. Like Dr. Burton mentions in his post about syllabi, the absence of a syllabus is beneficial because it allows the course to be adaptable and cater to the student's true learning, by giving them the autonomy to take learning into their own hands. This is all because we do not have to follow the strict instructions that often cause us to view our learning as an item on our agenda instead of the innumerable worlds waiting to be explored.

Another benefit to oral knowledge is illustrated by the rare occasion when professors ask us to stop taking notes and we actually listen (imagine that!). We take in what they are saying. We break free of the robotic transfer of information going in our ears and out on paper without it entering our brains, and are given the chance to think and to process it. To understand it. To own it. And of course we may not remember everything we hear, but at least we remember something.

Oral knowledge also has a heightened ability to enhance communication with those around us; there is something remarkable about hearing the intonations in peoples' voices and seeing the expressions on their faces that helps us truly listen, understand, and communicate better. Think of texting. I am sure there have been plenty of times where you have second guessed the sender's intentions, and it may have possibly caused a conflict. Of course this miscommuincation is still possible with oral language, but not as likely, seeing as over 50% of communication is through body language.

Now onto the more spiritual aspect; like Brianne has mentioned in her blog(s) about reenacting scenes from the New Testament, and like our class reciting of King Benjamin's speech, there is power and spirit behind words when they are spoken out loud. We have the ability to feel because we can sense the emotion through the intonations annd expressions like previously mentioned. I am sure everyone in the room today felt the power of the Spirit that was delivered through the spoken word.

Now, as you can see, oral language has its unique benefits, but like most civilizations have discovered, oral is not complete without the written component. It is like the Yin and the Yang, both needing each other to be balanced, and yet having a part of the other. To me, this statement holds true because of the patterns I have noticed civilizations repeat in all parts of the world and in all different centuries: almost all civilizations have written records of their language. You can see how their writing style has changed over the course of the years, and even the material that was written on. Take the Egyptian for example: (Click here for source)

• Old Egyptian - up to about 2100BC
• Old Egyptian was spoken and written during the time of the pyramids. 
• The writings inside the pyramids- the Pyramid Texts - are in this language. 

• Middle Egyptian- 2100-1550BC 
• This is the classical Egyptian writing. 
• Most Egyptian literature was written in this language (it's quite similar to Old Egyptian). 
• Even after people stopped speaking it around 1550BC, it was still used on monuments and temple inscriptions and writings by priests.

• Late Egyptian - 1550-700BC 
  • In the New Kingdom people started talking a new version of Egyptian, although Middle Egyptian was still used  in writing until about 1350BC (just before the time of Tutankhamun). So Tut would have spoken Late Egyptian. Writing on temple walls was still Middle Egyptian, though.

• Demotic - 700BC - AD250 
  • Demotic began to be written and spoken about 700BC, when the people of Kush (Ethiopia) briefly ruled Egypt. 
  • After Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332BC, some people also started to speak spoken Greek.
• Coptic - After AD 250 
  • The Copts were the Christian descendents of the ancient Egyptians. 
  • Coptic has some similarities to the ancient Egyptian language, and today scholars get clues to the meaning of hieroglyphic words by looking at Coptic. 
  • Nowadays Coptic is only used in some churches, and though it is read out it is not understood
• Arabic - after AD 640 
  • After the Arabs conquered Egypt in AD 640, Arabic became the official language - and it still is today. 
  • The following place names are all Arabic: Cairo, Luxor, Aswan, Deir el Bahari, Giza, Amarna, and Karnak .
   

You can see that their language has changed greatly over the years; once Egyptian, now Arabic. How could we have known today what language was spoken thousands of years ago if it were not written down? How would we have known that the Egyptians often wrote in two line prose? How would would we have any window of insight without the aid of the written language? Like the Rosetta Stone, written language is like a key to understand the oral. One should not exist without the other.

Early Mesopotamia and Sumerian Language Interview

The following transcription is an abridgement of the interview I conducted with instructor Ed Stratford whose area of expertise is Ancient Near East studies. Stratford earned his B.A. at Brigham Young University in 2000, his M.A. at the University of Chicago in 2002, and his Ph.D. also at the University of Chicago in 2010.

I read on an online article that another researcher wrote, that Sumerians essentially taught themselves how to speak or invented an oral language system for their civilization. Is that a valid statement?

Well, taught themselves how to speak is a pretty strong claim…it’s probably too extensive a claim. On the other hand, as far as written language goes, somebody like Glassner who is a French scholar, he argues that between about or around 3500 BC the Sumerians, or some group of Sumerians, absolutely invent writing as a dramatic revolution in communication. Not every scholar agrees with that, some would like to see it as a slow accumulation of written tokens that come together and then finally start working together as a system….that’s harder to defend than a sudden revolution, an invention. I think that’s a reasonable stance…But as far as speaking, I can’t agree with that.

It lives! - The Latin language

So I had a little difficulty scheduling an interview for this week's post... I did, however, come up with a (slightly alternate) solution. Since the main reason for getting an interview was so that we would learn whatever we used for this post orally, I am using a different oral learning source for information for my post: mon professeur francais, Professeur Flood. In this post, I will focus on combining the elements of language preservation and acquisition and Latin by going into more detail about the ways that the Latin language has influenced the English that we speak today, especially through the French language (because really, how much cooler is it to talk about three or four languages instead of two?!).

In my last post, I had two maps that I really liked which showed the expansion of Latin-derived languages and the Latin alphabet across the globe. These maps really showed the extent to which Latin has spread. But how has it spread for us English speakers specifically?

Popol Vuh Preservation and Modern Maya

I went to the HBLL today and learned that there are 36 books on the Popol Vuh--most of them being different translations and editions of the book. I checked out one in English and one in Spanish from 1905 (the oldest edition I could find) 1954, (bonus: I speak Spanish :) ) and have been studying them to learn more about their oral tradition and preservation. Books can't be translated perfectly from one language to another without losing some of the savor of the original meaning of the text. For example, the Popol Vuh was translated from Maya, to Spanish, to English, and other languages.

What originated from an oral, fluid tradition is now locked into words on a page. Words can change from edition to edition, but they don't have the same fluidity as speaking.

In my research I've learned that the Popol Vuh originated as part of an ancient oral tradition and consists of a collection of traditions that are based in a mix of historical fact and mythical interpretation. It makes sense that the mythical interpretation came about from passing the history down through stories. Eventually, these stories were written down (in the 1500's) to be preserved.  Maya hieroglyphs could record any idea that could be spoken because it is a phonetic language rather than a pictorial form of writing (Source). 

The Mayas valued knowledge and the scribes--who kept the records--were among the most valued people in their society. 

The Popol Vuh frequently uses the mnemonic device of parallelism within the stories to connect ideas and increase fluidity. This Quiché tradition has its roots in using parallelism in speech oral tradition  Parallelism was often used so that the storyteller could easily connect from one part to another and have key words and phrases to help them remember and tell the stories orally. (Source)

The Super Fresh Gilgamesh (and other Sumerian musings)

Oral knowledge plays an important role in every culture. What made dealing with the Mesopotamians especially interesting for me is that, according to this researcher, it is believed that the early Mesopotamians literally invented oral knowledge and the concept of writing (which we’ll deal with in a future unit). “The words of proto-Sumerian are fundamentally different from those of proto-Indo-European. However, because the proto-Sumerians appear to be unique in having started with vowel-only words, they have a good claim not just to having invented a complete spoken symbol system, but to having originated the concept of such a system. Non-speaking populations could have invented their own systems once they had been exposed to the concept of speech (this is not to deny that multiple populations could have invented the concept of speech independently, cf., the use of clicks in Africa). A good parallel example is how the Sumerian invention of the concept of writing appears to have inspired the creation of very different forms of writing in Pre-Dynastic Egypt and the Indus civilization of Pakistan and India.” The newfound ability to verbally communicate a common language facilitated the expansion of shared knowledge.

Ancient Sumer was first settled in about 4500 to 4000 B.C. Widely considered to be the first real civilization, it’s what I learned about first in my World History course during high school (and thus saith Mr. Holmes).

Once they had developed the concept of speech, some of the very first orally transmitted subjects were creation and flood myths/legends. These stories were spread throughout the region, and many other similar stories proliferated. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a text comprised of seven cuneiform tablets, the writing system of the Sumerians. Each tablet deals with these various parts of the legend:

A Dead Language (?)

Latin is often seen as the epitome of language failing to endure through the ages. The phrase "dead language" in English refers primarily to Latin even though English isn't a Latinate language. Observing and analyzing the Roman Empire's preservation and acquisition of language is therefore very different from doing the same for some other languages which are still spoken today relatively similar to how they were spoken in the past, such as Hebrew or Chinese, because there is no general Latin speaking population anywhere in the world today and nobody on the entire planet will tell you that their first language is Latin. So because Latin is the poster child for "dead languages," I'm going to take a slightly different approach on my post...

Hosanna! Preserve the Feelings of Oral Knowledge

        This is a bonus post that does not have to do with my ancient culture, but as we were talking in class today about history as it is experienced and history as it is written and interpreted, I thought about an experience I had yesterday relating to this. Thinking about the disconnect that happens between the reality of the past and interpretation of the past, much is lost. Regarding a religious, sacred experience, I believe the most important thing to preserve is not the finite details, but the feelings.  

          I had the opportunity to spend a day in Jerusalem in the days of Christ yesterday as an extra in the Church's new New Testament movie. I participated in the scene of Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem with the task of embodying a young Jewish woman rejoicing to witness and worship her Savior. 

          In preparation for this experience, we were asked to read the passage depicting the account of this event in the 4 Gospels. Reading them in the King James version, I notice these are not identical accounts. I realize this consists of oral knowledge written down years later, so it makes sense that two people preserved the memory differently. In just expressing one sentence to describe what people said, you lose the finite details, especially individual experiences, but as long as you capture the actual feelings you want people to remember, does it matter? The biblical accounts are written in a formal language that reflects the sacredness of the experience in one concise sentence and fits into the institution of the bible for a medium of knowledge. 

Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest. (Matthew 21:9)

 Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest. (Luke 19:38)

Wait...are you for real?

This week is, as previously mentioned in this blog, a transition week from folk knowledge to oral knowledge. As I started contemplating what I wanted my post to focus on, I stumbled upon a subject that blurs the lines and incorporates some of both. Urban legends are fascinating in how they get started, why they are accepted, and how they maintain relevance.

            An urban legend is a term I use broadly. It can apply to many specific groups such as a culture, religion (Mormon myths), a region and even an individual family. Myths and legends have been an important part of history for as long as we have had oral or written history. The most commonly known are those from Greek mythology. Native Americans told many legends as well, such as how Gluskabe changes maple syrup. Some are more universal, such as that of the lost city of Atlantis (has it been found?).

In modern times, usually the legend is founded in some truth, and then stretched to conform to a more exciting version of reality for somebody. I can just see it now…a young man trying to impress a pretty girl…a father trying to spice up the story he’s telling to his kids…a sly prankster hoping for a good laugh to himself…there are an infinite amount of ways and reasons these things get started.

First Aid

In thinking of a topic for a transitory post between folk knowledge and oral knowledge, I couldn't find something I liked to write about. So I went (instantly hears Harry and Ron say "to the library" in my head) to the instructor blog where there was a list of ideas for folk knowledge. I ended up deciding that first aid was a good topic. Let me explain why.

When you were a little kid, you probably went to your mom whenever you got hurt. If you just got a little cut, your mom probably put on some neosporin and a band-aid; if you got a bad scrape, she probably put on hydrogen peroxide and a band-aid. Basically, if you got hurt, your mom would put something on followed by a band-aid.

As we get older, we begin to learn to treat ourselves. Seeing someone else treat me when I got hurt was a big part of learning how, but it wasn't enough. I knew that scrapes called for hydrogen peroxide and cuts called for neosporin, but I didn't know why simply from watching. I also never saw my mom call the poison control center, but I knew that I needed to if I saw someone get bit by a poisonous snake. For that matter, even, I hadn't ever seen anyone get bit by a poisonous snake, so I had no actual folk knowledge derived from experience of how to tell if a snake was poisonous or not. First aid was therefore a form of folk knowledge and also a form of oral knowledge.