Two "American" Language Books

I haven't had a chance to read these books. I was working late one night and listened to a commentary about them. The first book, Cement in the Cementary, isn't out yet, or at least, I haven't found it.

The second one is out and has it's own web site.SPELLING DEAREST:The Down and Dirty, Nitty-Gritty History of English Spelling at

http://www.spellingdearest.com

Here a quote from the second book.

To add to this chaos, the spelling in most regions, in this and the next period, took on a distinct French flavor. What this means is that an immense number of words or parts of words were spelled like the French would spell them in their language. These are the same French who didn't even sound their words the way we would sound them if they were ours. In fact, it's the same French who sometimes didn't even sound their words at all. They just shrugged their shoulders or waved their hands and that was considered to be a whole sentence. With this in mind, it should come as no surprise that many of the words or parts of words that the French gave us were riddled with silent letters. Obviously, these were the bits that were supposed to be mimed.

James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
[sup]I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229![/sup]

 

[AnotherHiggins]

Toshilap:

I cannot decipher what you are trying to say in your last post.

Please be aware that there are lots of ways your can make quoted text stand out so it is easier to tell what you are adding vs. what you are quoting.

[ignore]

Quoted Text

[/ignore]
[tab]and
>[ignore]Italicized Text[/ignore]
are a couple of popular choices. Using the tags above renders the following:

Quoted Text

[tab]and
>Italicized Text

I think what stackdump meant was that while 25% came from "Old and Middle English, Old Norse, and Dutch", only 16% came from Old and Middle English.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.

 

[stackdump]

French, including Old French and early Anglo-French: 28.3%
Is Anglo part counts for 14.15 1/2 % as Anglo? English is Anglo isn't it?

The proportion being Old/Middle English is 26% not 16%.

What do I know anyway?

I have no idea what you know.

But Anglo-French is not English. It is the dialect of Old Norman (old french basically) that was introduced into medieval England. You could think of it in the same way that we talk about American-English today.

Even if it were, I don't see where 14.15% comes from. (I hope you're not thinking that American-English is exactly 50% English and 50% American).

 

[CajunCenturion]

==> only 16% came from Old and Middle English.
There is a big difference between Old English and Middle English since the Middle English period did not begin until after the Norman conquest

In any event, to relate that to the original quote --

(only 16% of English words are truly English)

-- is difficult because it's not clear to me what is meant by 'truly English'. How much of Middle English is being considered as truly English?

stackdump - Do you by any chance, have some bibliographic reference, on or off-line, to the Oxford survey?

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[CajunCenturion]

But Anglo-French is not English. It is the dialect of Old Norman (old french basically) that was introduced into medieval England. You could think of it in the same way that we talk about American-English today.

I'm not sure that's a valid analogy. After the Norman conquest of 1066, English was displaced as the official language, and naturally replaced with French. However, native English continued to be spoken on the streets and in rural areas. Over time, the formal upper class French and the rural and street English merged together to become Anglo-French, which ultimately became the foundation of Middle English. Naturally, there was a tremendous French influence over English during this time. In any event, Anglo-French is the convergence of two languages into one.

I think that is somewhat different than the divergence between American English and British English.

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[stackdump]

It is not an analogy, it is an illustration. The point being that American-English does not represent the marriage of two languages, but merely the adoption of a language elsewhere (and ultimately culminating a new 'dialect' of English).

Similarly Anglo-French is essentially the old french language introduced and used by the upper classes in England. Remember that Anglo-French and Middle English were two different languages and for some time, spoken by different people. Very few people needed the command of both. Over time Middle English absorbed many words from Anglo-Norman resulting in the french and germanic influences we see today.

The Anglo-Norman language is well documented and words in modern English are easily traceable. So we can definitely say that Anglo-Norman is not English and contains no English words whatsoever. But it cannot be said that Middle English is English, since it evolved over time and is effectively Old English with the Norman/Germanic influence added.

I have a book called "An Introduction to Old English" by Brook that carries a section on this.

A short summary is given on

http://www.wordorigins.org/histeng.htm

 

[strongm]

Norman French was not the French spoken in Paris ...

 

[stackdump]

What speech in what era of history are you referring to?

If it was recent history then it would not have been Anglo-Norman, it would have been modern french.

 

[CajunCenturion]

==> Similarly Anglo-French is essentially the old french language introduced and used by the upper classes in England
That's close, but not quite in keeping with the timeline.

Anglo-French was not essentially the old French language, because it was a merger between Norman French and the common English of the day. Neither was Anglo-French introduced to the upper classes in England. Norman French was introduced (imposed) as the language of the upper class in England in the late 11th century. It took scores of years years for that Norman French to merge with the English spoken by the commoners to form Anglo-French, and even many more years before it became the single prevailing language of Britain. As France continued to lose control of Britain, the language continued its evolution to what we know as Middle English.

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[KenCunningham]

As is the way of these things, we then started exporting Franglais back to them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franglais

 

[stackdump]

Nope, you have them the wrong way around. The Anglo-French language contains no English whatsoever, it is not a merger. You're making the assumption that Anglo-French represents some percentage of English and some percentage of French. It does not. It is a dialect of Old Norman adopted by the nobility and for legalese.

Anglo-French actually fell out of usage in favour of English. Middle English is however still the result of cross fertilization, a merger of Anglo-French with the common language of the time. It did take years for ~30% of the Anglo-French language to merge into the then current English.

I would refer you to;

Bailey, Charles J. and Karl Maroldt. “The French lineage of English.” Langues en contact – Pidgins – Creoles. Ed. Jürgen M. Meisel. Tübingen: Narr, 21-53.

Dalton-Puffer, Chritiane. “Middle English is a creole and its opposite: On the value of plausible speculation.” Linguistic Change Under Contact Conditions. Ed. Jacek Fisiak. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1995. 35-50.

Dawson, Hope C. “Defining the Outcome of Language Contact: Old English and Old Norse.” OSUWPL 57 (2003): 40-57.

Gilbert, Glenn G. Pidgin and Creole Languages: Essays in Memory of John E. Reinecke. Honolulu: U of Hawaii P, 1987.

Görlach, Manfred. “Middle English – a creole?” Linguistics Across Historical and Geographical Boundaries. Eds. Dieter Kastovsky and Aleksander Szwedek. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. 329-344.

Poussa, Patricia. “The Evolution of Early Standard English: The Creolization Hypothesis.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 14 (1982): 69-85.

Rothwell, W. “Arrivals and Departures: The Adoption of French Terminology into Middle English.” English Studies (1998) 144-65.

Schendl, Herbert. Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001.

Warner, Anthony. Complementation in Middle English and the Methodology of Historical Syntax: A Study of the Wyclifite Sermons. London: Croom Helm, 1982.

 

[Trevoke]

I dont know of any french words where a letter is truly silent in that it does not influence the manner in which the word is spoken.

The word 'silhouette' comes to mind.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/silhouette

-Haben sie fosforos?
-No tiengo caballero, but I have un briquet.

 

[elanor]

I would disagree with Stackdump's assertion that "it cannot be said that Middle English is English, since it evolved over time and is effectively Old English with the Norman/Germanic influence added." Old English, a resolutely Germanic language, differs quite considerably from Middle English in structure and in vocabulary. Middle English is recognizably English and can be read quite easily by modern English-speakers while Old English cannot - just compare the original Beowulf to the original Canterbury Tales to see the difference.
Thanks!
Elanor

 

[stackdump]

"it cannot be said that Middle English is English"

I see what you mean, the problem is that the language is referred to as English, but also ownership can be referred to as English (i.e. belonging to someone English).

My meaning is that it cannot be said that Middle English is was developed by English people adding 'original content'. Put another way, the new words and vocabulary that came into usage are sourced/borrowed from other languages and thus additive to what was pre-existing. From this it is easy to see how 84% of modern day English is derived from other languages.