Comments by "Digital Nomad" (@digitalnomad9985) on "How long can a language last before it's unrecognizable? - Dyirbal Glottochronology 2 of 2" video.

  1. How can "dog" referring to the same referent as the English word "dog", be of aboriginal origin when dogs aren't native to Australia? If a word existed before the foreign influence, then it would have to be native, but a word is not going to exist before the speakers of its language learn of its referent. Since these aboriginal languages were going concerns for many years after European settlement, there was time for a word to be generated for canines, and I know such coincidences can happen. But since the referent and the English influence arrived contemporaneously, this would take a heck of a proof.
    2
  2. All long term mass media, including the printing press, tend to slow the change of a language. Spoken language, and to a lesser extent, "hot" media which is consumed and discarded (weather reports, sports commentary) have an only temporary effect, except that "hot" media, unlike personal speech, tends to standardize over space. Long term media: books, movies, audio recordings, etc, of enduring interest tend to standardize the language over TIME. I have heard the opinion that the King James Bible and the works of Shakespeare have had a slowing effect on the rate of change of English. Also, there is the factor mentioned that a large body of speakers tends to slow the rate of change of a language, and English has a lot of speakers, which also leads to more authors and a more robust literary tradition stabilizing the language over time.
    1