3 ms·
English has inconsistent spelling and pronunciation because it is a pigeon language, a mix of various Anglo-Saxon, Norse, Celtic, Dutch, and Norman French, then
by rrwo 4y ago
English has inconsistent spelling and pronunciation because it is a pigeon language, a mix of various Anglo-Saxon, Norse, Celtic, Dutch, and Norman French, then later with a lot of Latin and Greek words added.
The grammar is simpler (no gender and fewer inflections), but it has more phonemes than most other Indo-European languages, and has one of the largest vocabularies.
- jcranmer 4y agoThe word you're looking for is "pidgin" language, not "pigeon," but no, English is not a pidgin language. An example of a pidgin language is something like Tok Pisin. Pidgin languages essentially start out life as a not-quite-language, with such restricted vocabulary and grammar that there are concepts that can't be uttered, and such languages tend to grow back a grammar on top of that as they develop into a full, proper language. English is not a pidgin language because the grammar is very clearly identifiable as a Germanic language (albeit a clearly simplified form), but with substantial lexical borrowings from other languages. Grammatical simplification and lexical borrowing is not particularly unusual in language development--in fact, English may not even be the biggest offender in these departments (I believe Turkic languages borrowed more from Mongolian languages than English has from Romance languages).
- radarsat1 4y agoI'm curious, given the proximity of England to the Celtic world, why did English not borrow more from Gaelic? Hopefully it's not a stupid question, I realize that the language probably largely developed in Saxony, but I don't know much about how it made its way to the British isles.
- jcranmer 4y agoThere is a lot that is not clear about the Anglo-Saxon migration to Britain. The obvious archaeological evidence suggests a very abrupt shock that sees Roman Britain almost completely replaced by Anglo-Saxon migration in maybe a generation or two. This has traditionally been interpreted as effectively a complete population replacement, although this has been challenged in more recent archaeology. Probably, I would say, the big reason for the lack of Celtic borrowings into English is the fact that, to whatever degree there was admixture between Celtic and Anglo-Saxon populations, English would have been the prestige language, and the prestige language tends to be little affected by borrowings compared to the non-prestige language. You see this with French borrowings: French was the prestige language of England for about 400 years or so, so English starts borrowing all sorts of things from French, but not vice versa. The existence of the Danelaw region--a part of England that was primarily Danish rather than English even when largely ruled by the English--provided a substantial contact region for Old English/Old Norse borrowing, which was helped by the very similar nature of the two languages.
- radarsat1 4y agoSuper interesting thanks, I'll have to read up on the Danelaw, first time I've heard of that!
- mtts 4y agoIf I’m not mistaken the latest research on this topic incorporates the results of DNA studies that seem to suggest there was indeed a population replacement (made possible in part by the very large number of the Anglo-Saxon immigrants and the very much reduced, as a result of the upheavals after the departure of the Romans, number of Britons). The linguistic evidence has always suggested complete replacement. Even with the prestige language of invaders taking over you would expect some geographical names, especially for small, insignificant and / or out of the way features to persist and yet in England there is pretty much not a single place name that has Celtic origins (outside of Cornwall of course)
- rrwo 4y agoThere are a few place names of Celtic origin, for example, Kilburn.