8 ms·
This is a fun way to speak English, but this notion of "native" vs. "borrowed" words is incredibly slippery. For instance, the example replaces "union" with "on
by bloppe 4y ago
This is a fun way to speak English, but this notion of "native" vs. "borrowed" words is incredibly slippery. For instance, the example replaces "union" with "oneship", but these words share a common Proto-Indo-European root and can reasonably be interpreted as the same word; the same goes for most other Norman words "borrowed" into English after the conquest. The page advocates the use of "Old English words ... revived and updated to modern spelling and phonology to be used for a modern meaning". How old is too old?
Not to over-charge this conversation, but it reminds me of anti-race-mixing ideologies. Race is also a much more slippery concept than some people would care to admit; we're all related if you go back far enough.
- triyambakam 4y agoYes, you could go back and back and back. But the point of this project is to see what a modern "pure" Germanic English would be like.
- bloppe 4y agoSure, I just think it would make more sense to pick a real date then. No words that would be unrecognizable to a typical English speaker before 1066? Sure. You'd still have to define "typical" because even modern English speakers do not all speak an identical language, and this notion of "updating to modern spelling and phonology" becomes a strange exercise. All I'm saying is, the word "pure" doesn't make sense to me here.
- nerdponx 4y agoIt's also not like Norman French was a "pure" offshoot of Latin either. It was heavily influenced by the languages of the Franks and Gauls. That said, what I find really interesting here is that William The Conqueror was only something like 4 generations removed from people whose "French" was more or less still a dialect of Latin.
- philwelch 4y agoAnd that’s not to mention that William’s great-great-great grandfather Rollo was a Norseman who himself conquered part of northern France, and was allowed to keep his conquests in exchange for swearing allegiance to the French king and converting to Christianity. I think the term “Norman” is actually related to “Norseman”, in fact. (“Rollo” was, incidentally, probably not his real name.)
- lisper 4y ago> the point of this project is to see what a modern "pure" Germanic English would be like. The absurdity of this is manifest in the name: "pure Germanic English". That's like "pure California Champaign" or "pure Wisconsin Parmesan". There is no such thing as "pure English", Germanic or otherwise, because one of the defining characteristics of English is that it is, and always has been, an amalgam of many different languages accrued over time. Even Old English had four different dialects. And certainly a "pure modern English" is the very paragon of an oxymoron. If it's "pure", it's not English. There's nothing wrong with playing around with language. There is something wrong with calling the result "pure" because it casts negative aspersions on everything else as "impure", which is a word that carries a lot of disparaging implications.
- Tor3 4y agoAgreed. English is not the only language deeply influenced by other languages. The other "Germanic" languages aren't necessarily any more "pure" than English. The other day I came across an article (unfortunately I can't find the link) which talked about how the Scandinavian languages were forever changed by the contact with the Hansa trade union, some 40% of Norwegian vocabulary, for example, is from Low Middle German. The article showed example sentences where every single word was from LMG, but at the same time perfectly fine Norwegian.
- culebron21 4y agoGrammar stays the same in borrowings. For instance, Italian has greek borrowings for centuries, that disobey the gender endings (-o for masculine and -a for feminine, m. fotógrafo -> f. fotógrafa), and the biggest offender is the Greek suffix -ista, which can have both genders (communista, feminista, etc.). Nevertheless Italian grammar didn't get broken. (I'm personally outraged that they say "il mouse" (pronounced il máus), instead of native il topo/la rata as every other Latin language, but Italian grammar still functions fine.).
- jameshart 4y agoWhich is all a fun linguistic ‘what-if’ game - but when you start posting ideas online about ‘pure Germanic heritage’ you might find you attract an audience who are not just interested in word games.
- bigpeopleareold 4y agoCertain people would be attracted to things even if you didn't mention the word 'pure'. We all clearly understand that there will be people will have impulses towards provincialism, etc. I just think though, by avoiding the word 'pure' to describe something like this, even if it is not exact, this becomes another form of language purification. in this case, it's leaning towards prophesizing how a concept would be approached.
- axlee 4y agoI see it as a fun way to see how english would work when it is delatinized / degallicized. Most other influences are a detail.
- aardvark179 4y agoAlthough it seems intended as fun I’m always a little nervous of things like this because it also denies the power relationships that led to those borrowings. Degallicized English is kind of erasing the relationship between England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and even Cornwall. I’d be much more comfortable if I didn’t have to explain to so many Americans that Scotland is not a part of England, that it isn’t a separate island, etc.
- philwelch 4y agoWhile I understand and appreciate these distinctions, I think a lot of Brits can get a little precious about the idea that England, Scotland, etc. are different “countries”, to the degree that they even e.g. field competing teams in the World Cup. I understand that there’s a nuanced narrative in which the UK consists of four different countries that share a monarch and a government, but from the outside y’all are just one country. I’m a little more sympathetic to pedantry about not calling that country “England”, but people do the same thing with the Netherlands and Holland. (There are apparently twelve Netherlands, with Holland only consisting of two of them!)
- walthamstow 4y agoI don't know any English people who think that Scotland or Wales are countries. Most people understand that the four nations compete separately in football because the game was invented here, and the first ever international match was between England and Scotland. A great distinction I once heard was that the US is a nation made up of states, the UK is a state made up of nations.
- Wildgoose 4y agoPleased to meet you. I'm English. Scotland and Wales are countries. There can't be a concept of a "Union" if there are no components to unite. Scotland has its own Parliament, Legal System and even bank notes, for example.
- philwelch 4y agoLatin and Proto-Germanic were both Indo-European languages but that doesn’t make them the same language. A lot of the family resemblance between English and other related languages like German or Dutch is lost under the thick blanket of Romance vocabulary.
- avgcorrection 4y agoTired point to make. Languages are cousins, either first or fifteenth. (Or maybe they have no known cousins, but whatever… English certainly does.) Anglish proposes more Germanic words. It doesn’t propose to find words which cannot be traced back to a common Indo-European root word… > Not to over-charge this conversation, but it reminds me of anti-race-mixing ideologies. Race is also a much more slippery concept than some people would care to admit; we're all related if you go back far enough. First of all, “race” is pseudo-science. Language research is not. Second of all, try to make an argument for “race mixing” which isn’t racist. In contrast, Anglish is more of an aesthetic approach to language, one which doesn’t threaten to marginalize any groups of people. Frankly, I suspect that the reason why this offensive comparison is even brought up is becaue of the Germanic assocation, which some people might not find aesthetic for historical reasons.
- TimTheTinker 4y ago> First of all, “race” is pseudo-science. Thank you. That is all.
- xico 4y agoIt is a pretty well known fact. The concept of human race is developed by racist ideologies (obviously), see for instance [1], and is as such a banned concept in many countries. [1] https://bioanth.org/about/position-statements/aapa-statement-race-and-racism-2019/ https://bioanth.org/about/position-statements/aapa-statement...
- fsckboy 4y ago