Submitted by shaunc on July 14, 2010

“Anglish”

Has anyone come across “Anglish”? Anglish or Saxon is described as “...a form of English linguistic purism, which favours words of native (Germanic) origin over those of foreign (mainly Romance and Greek) origin.”

Does anybody have an opinion or thoughts on “Anglish”...

Comments

Sort by

Shouldn't that be "a of English, which words of over those of and"?

Since "form" is Latin, "linguistic" and "purism" are both Latin-Greek hybrids, "favor" is French, "native" is Latin, "origin" is Latin, and "foreign" and "mainly" are French.

More seriously: very loosely speaking, English has three levels of discourse: a colloquial level using words of Saxon origin, a sophisticated or poetic level using words of French origin, and a formal level using words of Latin origin. E.g. "wrong" (Saxon), "false" (French) and "incorrect" (Latin). But there is a lot of mixing between levels and etymology should always be the last consideration in choosing the proper word for any given place.

5 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Actually "wrong" was borrowed from Old Norse.

I don't think there's such a thing as a "pure" language. Even Anglo-Saxon isn't pure. Anglo-Saxon is descended from Proto-Germanic, and many Proto-Germanic words are descended from Proto-Indo-European, but many aren't - they were presumably borrowed from other now extinct languages.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

When I read about "Anglish" I thought about the poverty of words without non-Germanic words. I don't know how pendantic these people are - they seem to be mostly in England. It could be as simple as picking the Anglo-Saxon word over another non-Anglo-Saxon word when possible. There are many English words that have fallen from common usage over the centuries. However, I can't see a return to Chaucerian English in the cards!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

We ain't ever gonna go back to chaucer's English. But we CAN sway the current norm of English towards the common speech, and slowly, ever so slowly, beat out BS words like "consanguinuity" in favor of words like "samebloodedness" which even a 3-year-old can understand. All it takes is using simpler words when possible, avoiding "high words" even though they sound "grand". That's why I get mad at the KJV, so many latin and outdated english words... I don't say "carnal" i say "fleshly" and i don't "thou" i say "you".

8 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Does anybody have an opinion or thoughts on “Anglish”…"

Yes, it's a ridiculous idea.

"Samebloodedness"? Get a life.

10 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"The Anglish Moot," a website devoted to Anglish, defines it as "a kind of English, but without those words which have been borrowed from other languages." The site describes the purpose of Anglish:

"The purpose of Anglish differs from person to person, but mostly it is to explore and experiment with the English language . . . By stripping away the layers of borrowed words, Anglish allows us to better appreciate that core and the role it plays in our language."

This sounds like an interesting academic exercise. The problem is that English has always had "borrowed words" in its lexicon. Nearly two hundred Latin borrowings—that we know of—were brought to England from the Continent by the Anglo-Saxons. Another 350 or so Latin words were added to Old English prior to the Norman Invasion. Other words found their way into Old English from Old Norse. Shall we discard these?

"The Anglish Moot," gives this reason for the existence of Anglish:

"English words taken from Latin, French, and Greek are made up of parts whose meanings are on the whole unknown or at least unclear to the English speaker."

Indeed. Do they include words like butter, cup, kitchen, mile, pepper, plant, pound and street, all of which are Latin-based, and all of which were brought by the Anglo-Saxons when they crossed the Channel? Quoth the Moot: "So extreme is this beclouding of so much of the English wordstock, that we get severely hard-to-make-out-the-meaning-of words like “inebriate”, completely incomprehensible to the English speaker from its wordbits, since it contains the wodbit ‘ebri’, from the latin ‘ebrius’, meaning drunk." (I have kept the spelling and punctuation intact.) Unless one is inebriated, and very much so, the meaning of "butter" is hardly incomprehensible. And is "hard-to-make-out-the-meaning-of" better than "incomprehensible?"

The more I look at Anglish the less I like it. It is not scholarly, and has an odor of xenophobia about it.

17 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

JJM says: “Does anybody have an opinion or thoughts on “Anglish”…”
Yes, it’s a ridiculous idea. “Samebloodedness”? Get a life."

Perhaps instead of being rude and insulting you could explain your point of view. A good English word is "prat".

16 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Actually, I'm quite curious. If you really and truly strip out every single borrowed word (and don't substitute any archaic ones), and only leave modern words that are directly descended from, oh, I dunno, Proto-Indo-European, just how many words would be left? I could be wrong, but I suspect that most of the words that the Anglish fans espouse are still borrowed, however long ago.

5 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

You know, ther are a lot of haters of this anglish stuff. I for one have taken a liking to it. There seems to be no lack of misconception about it either. Supporters of anglish do not simply wish to purge the language of latin, greek and french and leave it at that. No, they very often innovate, propose replacement words, words that don't already exist in english. Like 'bookery' for 'library', or how about is-hood for 'existence.' God that last one is great-- do you see the beauty of it though, the meaning behind the word 'ishood' is clear from its parts 'is' + 'hood,' 'is-hood is the quality of being, expressed by 'is', by parallel with sisterhood or brotherhood. So it is not at all evident that these anglish guys are out to impoverish the language-for the words they remove, they give what they feel are better ones, ones more in keeping with the core of english, because in a way this makes english easier, and more beautiful too, since it connects meaning to word-structure, word-composition. And in many cases, supporters of english do not seek to do away with latin, greek, and french words, they're fine with them, they just want there to be a choice, they want there to be the option of choosing native words over "foreign" ones. As for simple, every-day words like butter, and cup, pointing to those and saying the purpose of anglish is to purge english of those words is very misleading-- if you read up on anglish, you see that most of the backers of anglish are fine with those small, simple words--its words like rectify and inebriate, and consanguinity that seem to tick them off. And look they have a point, consanguinity is pretty incomprehensible to the native english speaker without a dictionary, I'm sorry it just is, just ask a four year old what consanguinity means and you'll see, they'll be clueless. Then ask them what samebloodedness means and you'll more than likely get an answer. And after all, what's so bad about the good old Anglo-Saxon word "samebloodedness" anyway?

23 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Jm:

I hope you're not counting me among the "haters." I should clarify my comment about xenophobia. That should not have been directed against Anglish in general. Rather, I sense on the "Anglish Moot" website—which is a Wiki, and open to editing—the idea that English has been polluted by outside influences. For example:

"English (Inglish) is the theidish speech of the English (Inglish) folk wherever they be found in the world. Hence it should be made up mostly of words which were in English (Inglish) before 1066 and have theidish (germanic) roots."

I take issue with that. English has not been the sole property of "the English folk" for quite some time. Far more English speakers are non-English than English.

English is a great language partly because it adopts foreign words gladly. English has more lexemes than any other language. This gives it a subtlety that is hard to beat. That English has words that are not understood by toddlers is not a bad thing. (And I'm not convinced a four-year-old child would understand "samebloodedness" any more than "consanguinity." My guess is that both would be incomprehensible.)

As I said, Anglish seems at first blush an interesting exercise. But on closer inspection it seems more a parlor game. For example: what are "uncleftish springballs?" (This is a word taken from the "Moot.") Give up? Atom bombs. Consanguinity is crystal in comparison.

9 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

But you see atom bomb is in no way better than uncleftish springball. Of course it is the word that is in use, accepted by all english speakers. But then, what's so bad with proposing a little change?, after all that's how the english you and I know came about: through radical change. So hey, if 'uncleftish springballs' enters the language, cool, I'm all for it. Shouldn't you be too?, who praise english for its variety. Well then bring these words on, bring them all on. Remember, new words enter the langugae every day, some transiently, while some stick around, so I don't see what's all that bad with anglish words.

As for purity of language, consider this:
Some times we're so concerned with being all-accepting of 'otherness', difference, (lest we seem racist or bigoted or whatever) that we do away with what is ours in favour of foreigness. But accepting foreigness does not require rejecting nativeness. Look at Icelanders for example-- they cherish the purity of thier language, and go to some lengths to ensure that no non-native words come into it. And why shouln't they , heck they speak the language of the vikings virtually unchanged, God unchanged, how amazing is that? Are they to be called bigoted? Foreigness for the sake of diversity is great, but so is preservation of what you have.

8 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"But then, what’s so bad with proposing a little change?, after all that’s how the english you and I know came about: through radical change."

The difference is that Old English didn't become Middle English because people consciously proposed the introduction of French words into English based on some argument that it would make the language better. But that's what the Anglish people are doing. They're trying to change the language by decree based on their specific idea of "better". But no language is intrinsically better than any other. And an attempt to change English by decree will never work anyway.

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I don't know about that--I would say that decree had something to do with OE becoming ME, at least a self imposed one (based on the idea of the superiority of french and latin), and for sure this 'self-imposed' decree played a role in the transition from middle english to modern english, with a lot of native words being lost in favour of french or latin ones, precisely because these were thought of as being better. And look, whether it be by 'decree' or by the natural happening of things, whatever, change is change. And remember, it's not so much a decree as it is a proposal--noone can force english speakers to take on anglish words.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Perhaps instead of being rude and insulting you could explain your point of view. A good English word is 'prat'."

Now who's being insulting? The idea of a "pure" English language is silly and, as one poster noted, smacks of more than a little xenophobia.

It's the sort of thing that once had an appeal among certain people with dodgy views on ethnicity and race.

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

In response to Goofy's assertion that "an attempt to change English by decree will never work anyway," Jm writes:

"I don’t know about that–I would say that decree had something to do with OE becoming ME, at least a self imposed one (based on the idea of the superiority of french and latin), and for sure this ’self-imposed’ decree played a role in the transition from middle english to modern english, with a lot of native words being lost in favour of french or latin ones, precisely because these were thought of as being better. ..."

But history shows that a different dynamic was behind the transition from Old English to Modern English, what we call Middle English. During the period when French was the language of government—from the Norman invasion of 1066 to the opening of Parliament in 1362—the English nation was trilingual, but it's people largely were not. French became the language of government and the royal court, Latin remained the language of education and the Church, but the vast majority of English people spoke only their native tongue.

It was during this period that the shift from Old English began, not by decree, either imposed or self-imposed, but as a natural process. The fact that the people spoke a different tongue than the isolated elites meant that their language was free to change unchecked by any authority. There are many causes of the change, such as the increase in regional dialects during the Middle English period, but none resemble a "decree." It could be argued that the end of Middle English was induced, at least in part, by forces of authority, such as the return of English to government use at the end of the 14th century and the introduction of the printing press at the end of the 15th; both would have strong stabilizing effect on the language.

As for "a lot of native words being lost in favour of french or latin ones" (Jn again), this is simply not what happened. French and Latin words were indeed added to the language, but they coexisted with English ones; they did not supplant them. This is reflected in our legal language today, in which couplets like "breaking and entering," where an English word was paired with a French borrowing so that monolingual defendants could understand what they were being charged with.

8 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Let me remind you that 80% of native english words were lost, that's 80%, that's a huge amount, --these were replaced by latin and french ones, which means these were favoured, and that they did indeed supplant the english ones. Look I don't want to discuss the semantics of 'decree' and 'favour', the fact is that most of the english wordstock was lost.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The 80% figure you cite (from Wikipedia?) is at the high end of what linguists estimate were lost from Old English. Yes, some have been supplanted by words of French or Latin origin. But others were synonyms for other Old English words that lost popularity and fell into disuse. It cannot be said that 80% of OE words were replaced by French or Latin ones, though I concede that some were. But 20,000 or so French-speakers were insufficient to supplant the language of England, which had 1.5 million inhabitants when the Normans arrived, and three million when English re-asserted itself as the sole language. The rise to dominance of the dialect of London over other regional dialects probably killed off more words than the Normans ever did.

It is important to note that half of the thousand most commonly used words in Old English survive in Modern English, and 80% of the thousand most commonly used words in Modern English derive from Old English. And fully a third of the 10,000 most common words in Modern English derive from OE. The frequency of use of words is as important as the mere quantity, if not more so. For example, the word "consanguinity" has probably been used more in this discussion than most people use it in a lifetime. It would not surprise me if most of the words used in this discussion are from Old English.

8 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

LOL at the cries of racism and xenophobia. Here’s one for you: you’re supporting the genocide of a native tongue by Roman imperialism. Supporters of Anglish aren’t saying you’re not allowed to use foreign words. This isn’t something to be offended by. People who support this movement (bloggers, novelists perhaps), could start using Anglo-Saxon words; maybe a few words will gain momentum and become commonplace.

9 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"The 80% figure you cite (from Wikipedia?) is at the high end of what linguists estimate were lost from Old English. Yes, some have been supplanted by words of French or Latin origin. But others were synonyms for other Old English words that lost":

figure, cite, linguists, estimate, supplanted, synonyms, popularity, disuse, replace, origin, insufficient, inhabitants, arrived, reasserted, sole, dominance, dialect, important, commonly, survive, derive, frequency, quantity,probably, discussion, people, surprise-- the words of latin/french outspring that you used in 2 paragraphs. That's a lot.

And as for:
"But 20,000 or so French-speakers were insufficient to supplant the language of England, which had 1.5 million inhabitants when the Normans arrived, and three million when English re-asserted itself as the sole language"

This IS in large part what happened-- open up any modern english dictinary, and the first random word you'll land on will probably be from latin/french. Then have a look at an old english text or an OE dictionary, do you recognize most of the words?, some , yes, most. no!

7 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I originally asked the question about "Anglish" to garner opinions. I do not think that the promoters of Anglish are xenophobic, they merely prefer to use an Anglo-Saxon word where possible. Someone also mentioned the loss of words due to the prevalence of London English. My understanding is that West Saxon (Wessex) evolved into modern English. The people in the area that would become London probably spoke Kentish.

In the West County of England, some small portion of West Saxon survives in the West Country dialect of Somerset, Devon and Dorset. I spent the first 7 years of my life in Somerset and was surprised to find that words I had taken for granted had no currency outside of the West Country. I be, she be, gurt, grockle, (f)varmer, hark at ee, wacker, smooth the dog, etc. I never saw a non-English person until I was 7 years old at Heathrow Airport in London. Of course with modern communications this relic of West Saxon is all but vanished.

Curiously, when we emigrated to Canada, I found myself in southwestern Ontario. The names in the southwest of Ontario hark back to the West Country - Exeter, Wellington, Tavistock, Weston, etc. The accent of SW Ont is heavily rhotic like the West Country. Travelling between family in Somerset and Ontario it is easy to hear the similarities.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Shaun C:

West Saxon was dominant from the eighth to the eleventh century, but it was not the progenitor of Modern English. Sorry. London, the seat of government, and Cambridge and Oxford, homes of the preeminent universities, proved stronger. As for xenophobia, I revised my comment to apply only to the "Moot" website, and only to portions of that. Frankly, I'm sorry I brought it up. It distracts from what has been a mostly constructive conversation.

Jm:

It is true that Modern English has a great many words of French or Latin origin: each comprises nearly a third of the lexicon—wordstock, if you insist—according to some sources. But the story of the entry of these words into English is more complex than your account of it. And more interesting.

You say: "Then have a look at an old english text or an OE dictionary, do you recognize most of the words?, some , yes, most. no!" Well, of course. Words change. Spellings change. The structure of the language has changed from Old English to now. Old English used inflectional endings to signal grammatical structure. Modern English uses word order instead of inflection.

Anglish attempts to graft pseudo-Anglo-Saxon words onto the structure of Modern English. This is why it is a parlor game, not much different from speaking Klingon at a costume party. If I am wrong, if there is a credible source or website to prove me so, I would be glad to hear of it.

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Nick (needed)
Mail (will stay hidden) (needed)
That's the best I can try.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Anglish attempts to graft pseudo-Anglo-Saxon words onto the structure of Modern English. This is why it is a parlor game, not much different from speaking Klingon at a costume party. If I am wrong, if there is a credible source or website to prove me so, I would be glad to hear of it.":

Let's cut the crap, I'm well aware that the grammar of the english language was highly simplified with the doing away of inflection and such. But that's not what I was referring to, I think that's pretty obvious. Grammar change is one thing, wordstock change is another. Take italian for example-- it lost the bulk of its inflection, but it kept its words, and didn't take on many foreing ones. Just because grammar changes, that doesn't mean we should say, "oh, grammar changed, to hell with it then, let's change the words, too."
Anglish words that are "ressurections" of lost OE words are the products of an attempt to show what these words would be like, had they overlived. There's nothing illogical about it-- if these words had made it through the centuries, they would look something like these updated-into-modern english forms. The way these words are updated is by applying to them the phonological changes that english went through. It's not that hard. If you want an example of a germanic language that underwent huge grammatical change but kept most of its vocab, then take swedish, heck look at Norwegian, it lost virtually all of its inflection, but not its wordstock.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Let’s cut the crap"

Wonderful. I have been insulted in Old French by an advocate for Anglish. Let me think: what would be the Anglish word for "irony?"

“oh, grammar changed, to hell with it then, let’s change the words, too.”

What does that mean? It bears no relation to any argument I have made. I have tried to explain the development of English into its modern form. I have argued that the mere substitution of mock-Anglo-Saxon neologisms for established English words does not result in "“ressurections” [sic] of lost OE words," as you assert, but in awkward replacements for well-understood English words, and in words which lack the nuance of their English forebears.

I have tried to stick to historical facts. Insofar as I have expressed an opinion it is this: adherents of "Anglish" debase history, picking and choosing where it is convenient, ignoring or inventing it where it is not. Let me reiterate: at the core of Anglish is an interesting academic exercise which seeks the Anglo-Saxon roots of Modern English. But closer examination reveals it to be, in practice, a simple word game.

7 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"What does that mean? It bears no relation to any argument I have made. ":

Sure it does-- I pointed to most OE words being unrecognizable by modern englsish speakers. You then said this was because of inflection being lost (this is simply not true, inflectin and wods themselves are two different things), which seems to suggest that you are of the opinion that because grammar erodes, loss of words themselves is made acceptable, hence my ironic statement "“oh, grammar changed, to hell with it then, let’s change the words, too.”

"adherents of “Anglish” debase history, picking and choosing where it is convenient, ignoring or inventing it where it is not":

well I don't see how this is the case. How is it that forseeking (oops, sorry, attempting), to relifen (sorry, I meant ressurect) OE words, and shaping new ones from already is-some (forgive me, existing) english roots beneathens (debases) english yorelore (damn, should've said history)? I just don't see the connection (there's a nice french word for you). Please don't heen (humiliate, from OE hienan) yourself by pointing to the latin 're' in relifen, as being foreing-- remember, most anglishers are not bent on fullthrough and utter cleansing of english from foreigness.

Look man we anglishers just love the core of english, a core we feel is germanic, (I'm of italian forekinship (ancestory), so this has nothing to do with race-- language provides identity beyond race). We're fore sure not all scholars, and our think-ups of new english words might not be perfect, but we're not saying they are, and I don't think you would think that being imperfect is the same thing as beneathening, or showing disrespect for english. Let me tell you a lot english words of latin outspring come from the past participle of the latin verb. This makes the past tense of these english verbs pretty illogical (eg. the verb expose, from the pp. of the latin exponere. So exposed is sort of like exposed-ed, when you think about), and yet we use these verbs daily without complaint, even though they're illogical and thus arguably imperfect.

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Re: "Just because grammar changes, that doesn’t mean we should say, “oh, grammar changed, to hell with it then, let’s change the words, too."

Come on, now. French and Latin didn't make its way into English because anyone said "Hey, look at this. Our grammar is evolving. I've got a great idea! Let's make up a bunch of new words and change two thirds of our language. Let's do it right now. That sounds like fun. Let's form a club or something." Nothing even remotely like that ever happened in English history. Not ever (what's more, you already knew that). Oh, wait. Yes it has. That's exactly what Anglish is, isn't it?

I know, why don't we just make Esperanto the new world language?

5 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Nothing even remotely like that ever happened in English history. Not ever (what’s more, you already knew that)"-- that's not at all what I was suggesting, clearly.
That was a sarcastic remark aimed at what I thought Douglas' opinion was suggesting- it had nothing to do with english history.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Jm:

You wrote:

". . . I pointed to most OE words being unrecognizable by modern englsish speakers. You then said this was because of inflection being lost (this is simply not true, inflectin and wods themselves are two different things), which seems to suggest that you are of the opinion that because grammar erodes, loss of words themselves is made acceptable, hence my ironic statement ““oh, grammar changed, to hell with it then, let’s change the words, too.”

Let me reiterate:

"Words change. Spellings change. The structure of the language has changed from Old English to now. Old English used inflectional endings to signal grammatical structure. Modern English uses word order instead of inflection."

This does not imply that the loss of words is acceptable, or, for that matter, unacceptable. It addresses your complaint that most OE words are unrecognizable to modern English speakers. Of course they are. They have evolved. Modern english has jettisoned gender, eschewed inflection (by and large) and adopted the Roman alphabet. Add to this the Great Vowel Shift and Old English appears foreign to modern English speakers.

You wrote:

". . . we anglishers just love the core of english, a core we feel is germanic, (I’m of italian forekinship (ancestory), so this has nothing to do with race– language provides identity beyond race)."

I have said nothing about race. Why do you bring it up?

If you love the core of English—and I don't doubt that you do—then study its history. Thomas Jefferson advocated the study of Anglo Saxon as a means of understanding Modern English. But first he actually studied it. With all due respect, your comments show a lack of knowledge of history. I cannot claim to be an expert on the history of English, but I have ventured beyond Wikipedia.

As for Anglish, well, you have my opinion on that. If you wish to change anyone's opinion of it, including mine, you will need to do better than peppering your argument with Anglish neologisms. This is merely annoying.

7 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Right well, there's ignoring everything I've said.
You seem to missing my arguments man, and then pointing to history, without going beyond that. And by the way, againstwise (contrary) to your foretruthing (assumption), I have studied Anglo-Saxon. Sorry for the anglish.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Well, for those of you who, unlike Douglas, don't find it sinful to further the saxon side of english, may I point you to anglish.wikia.com/ (the articles written are in no way intended to be comprehensive, or reliable sources of information, the whole point of them is to provide some sort of anglish reading material). Explore the site, especially the wordbooks, where anglish word proposals are made; and add to them if you feel you have some good ideas. Also, check out ednewenglish.tripod.com-- this site deals only with bringing back some of OE into modern english, and doesn't deal with the creation of words from english roots.
As well, if any of you are bloggers or novelists, and again underhold (support) the movement, try using some of these anglish words--exposing the public to these words is really the only way make these words will catch on.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Interesting. I just found out about this concept today through random wiki-ing and happen upon a fresh thread. I heartily approve. Though I'm studying Latin now, and love the language, there is a certain robustness lacking that one finds present in Germanic vocabulary.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I agree with Jm on one point, at least: if you want to learn more about Anglish, go to anglish.wikia.com, also known as "The Anglish Moot." I mentioned this site in an earlier posting.

Study this site with an open but discerning mind, and with a ear to actual history. If one plows through its drifts of Anglish neologisms a slippery revisionist history is laid bare. While there may be bare patches of truth, the puddles of half-truth are heavily salted, and slippery areas of historical inconvenience are often ignored. So watch your footing.

For a more learned and nuanced history of English, I recommend "The Stories of English," by David Crystal.

5 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Hi Talking to an civil engineer at the bus stop, he used the word potable instead of drinkable....reason of course all the textbooks at uni use it. Be nice if potable meant able to be potted.
Secondly I looked up decide on the anglish moot and they suggest choose instead, although I would guess it is norman french in origin. But what else? "fall upon"?

My view is it is not feasible to go back. However it would be nice to avoid Latinisms where feasible. As a practical matter I think short words of french origin don't sound too bad eg point, choose, change. It's the long words from latin like agglutination which still sound foreign to me. However it's an uphill task... changing from system to framework would take a lot of pushing.

Lastly, I am so used to Latinisms, it's difficult to think without them. Every time I need to check for foreschlage (suggestions) ... oh I give up

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

accept it!!
the english is now a romance language, like the french or spanish languages.
every day there are less germanic words in the language.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Yes English has for sure been overrun with romance loan words. My only grouch is that latin-borrowings to me seem to have no flavor, color, or feeling. For example, "agglutination" means very little to me, but "heaping together" or "together-heaping" brings up a graphic action image. How much more colorful!

Also, latinisms are sometimes have snob value, stemming from the use of French/Latin in business and at uni. EG purchase instead of buy.

The real problem is for many common romance words there is no obvious English substitute, and the meaning would have to be clear from the outset : eg "forelay" might be nice word for suggestion but it doesn't exist yet, though "input" might do.

However the whole notion founders for want of some means of putting it into practice.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

For those only now noticing it, I point out that loan-words have been part of English since its beginnings: Google "Old Norse."

If Latin-borrowings "have no flavor, color, or feeling" for you, perhaps the problem is not with the words but with your understanding of English, and of its history. (By the way, "agglutination” is a noun. Gerunds like “heaping together” and “together-heaping” are verbs.)

Personally, I find agglutination a colorful word, full of flavor and feeling. Not a word I'd toss on the together-heap of history. (Whatever that means.)

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

English will never be purged of Latinity. Words like "agglutinate" (and "lamp" and "butter" [both ultimately Greek, actually!] and "story" and "passion") are part of the language, here to stay. We would be so much poorer without these wonderful words.

Still, "Anglish" is healthy and useful as a tendency and a touchstone. English poets have found it particularly useful. Gerard Manley Hopkins was interested in this movement back in the 19th cen., and the results for his poetry were spectacular. Seamus Heaney specializes in unearthing the Saxon roots of Ulster words he grew up with. JRR Tolkien was nostalgic for a pre-1066 English, and his prose is always mindfull of the strata of English. He was able to revive certain nifty words like "mathom", for which I at least am grateful.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

amen to GMH
although hope of purging English has indeed grown gray hairs

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

anglish is a font - based on accurate angles
www.goldenmean.info/dnaring

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Methinks many have not read the entirety of the thoughts behind Anglish. I do not think that it was intended to be nit-picky about replacing or purging all non-Anglo-Saxon from English. I believe the original intent was to use the Anglo-Saxon choice where it was practicable. Some words have anglo-saxon alternates and others do not.

I do not see "April showers bring May flowers" being replaced with "Whan that Aprille, with hise shoures soote, The droghte of March hath perced to the roote And bathed every veyne in swich licour, Of which vertu engendred is the flour"...somewhat wordy, puffed up and awkward by modern standards ...then again, politicians might like it.

Mind you, when listening to international football matches it seems the England fans are already yelling "Engelond" out loud..

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

more on agglutination....which has been bugging me.
1) respell it as: agluetination... suggesting glue
2) the "cling-on effect" (courtesy of Startrek)
3) it is the "beaver-dam" of human history which creates the pond we live in today!
etc

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

fuck french, fuck latin, fuck greek. Let's take our tongue back. May english be english. Let's undo the sullying of our tongue brought about by the Norman infall, and bring it back to the wuldor and thrum (splendour, OE þrymm) that it once was. Those who gainstand us are but half-wits held thanes, haftlings, to the misbelief that now-time english is some kind of awesome, overworldly tongue. They think that it lords over all other tongues as an outfollow of the broadness and sundriness of its wordstock, and that it is far better that its foretime birth-giver, OE. Hah! broadness, what overdriving. Most words are scientific jargon that noone ever uses, and its sundriness is but basteredness that draws from the understandableness of the tongue, and from the selfhood and whoness of its mother-tongue speekers.

6 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

this is a call to all those who becraft writcraft (literature). It is upon you that much of the weight of the upkeeping and berging of the english tongue lies. Your works are read by the masses and have a weighty inhit on the overshaping, growth and unfolding of our tongue. You have the wald, the canhood to bring back sorrily forgotten, forsaken words of yore, and make them one with our speech again. By the same token, you can carry by to the further downbreaking of the core of english by doing away with inhomeish words in forelove of foreign ones.
However, you the common folk also have an answerlyness to uphold the englishness of english. In your everyday speech, take care to show forechoice to english words and not french or latin or greek ones.
The overliving of english hangs off on all of us. In a time where it would seem that english, having been stolen by the world, can no longer be shaped and moulded by its mother-tongue speekers, we CAN bring back some if not much of its forgotten roots and make sure that those that are still with us live on.

In kinship and in kithship from Canada.

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I love learning languages and finding out about word roots. It is good to have a big wordhoard if one is a wordsmith or wishes to clarify in simpler language. My English vocabulary increased muchly when I learnt Latin. I agree with the people who complain Latinate words are sometimes used in snobbishness. I found a great poem, "Aestivation" http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/owh/aest.html ,where as many Latinate words as possible are used. I like a bit of humour and eccentricity.
I'm not sure what Jon C's gripe is with the KJV; if you don't like it get a different translation! The KJV was intentionally written in grand-sounding language. "Thou" might be out of date now, and even somewhat when the KJV was written, but it's a nice Viking pronoun (the Vikings got so integrated English took on some of their pronouns, the most internal parts of language). It's all Indo-European, so is it really such a big deal?
It's true science uses a lot of Latin and Greek word stems to describe things. The joy is in learning the classical languages and having a laugh at the simple meanings of the scholarly-sounding names.
I don't like how some people seem to be attacking Chaucer. Nobody here has suggested a return to late 14th century English. It won't please modernists and it won't please Angliscs; it's already full of Frenchy words. Chaucer should be everyone's friend because he wrote in English. The late 14th century saw the resurgence of English as a literary language.
Wordplay is a great thing. Our choice of words can convey tone and create atmosphere. Language changes, not just from foreign words coming in. Sometimes nonsense words enter common speech, e.g. "chortle". Shakespeare coined a lot of compound words. I see Anglisc as a bit of fun at getting some words into common use and reminding us of the history of our language. I like seeing what our language *coud* have been like. Today I've also been reading Proto-Indo-European, another scholarly reconstruction that might leave some of you wondering why anyone bothers.

(Could is a misspelling because "would" and "should" are from "will" and "shall", so should have "l" in, but "can" should not lead to "could". Chaucer spells it "koude", and "coud" seems to be the logical modern way.)

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I think I have made a mistake; "them" is the Viking pronoun. "Thou" is from OE. I probably should not write when tired.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thou is not out of date
It is still used inside the family in the north of England

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Jay, I think that would count as dialect. People would probably think you strange if you wrote like that in a national newspaper column.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

maybe it would give the right impression then!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

At GOOFY ... from July 28, 2010

How do you think the Jews revived and updated Hebrew? If they can bring back to life (oh, sorry: "revive") a 2000 year old dead tongue, we can bring back some old words and/or make new ones.

Before I go on (continue), I will let you know that I LOVE Latin. But I also love English and I want to keep English as English and not something that's slowly (or quickly) turning into a Latin-like tongue.

I like using semantic calques and breaking down (analyzing*) the word and translating all of its parts. The word "remorse" literally means "again-bitten" from "re(again) + morse (mordere=to bite)". In fact, "ayenbite/againbite" was the Middle English translation of "remorse". Why can't we still use it today?

*analyze literally means unfasten, set free, release

atom = a (not) + tom (cut) = uncut or notcut... The proposed Anglish word is "uncleft" from un + past participle of "cleave". We use the term "cleft lip" in medical jargon. So most folks have an UNcleft lip. Do you see the link/transparency?

Another way, is to use the simpler synonyms like "nonstop" instead of incessant, often/frequently, night/nocturnal, eatable/edible. If a kid saw "eatable", he would now right away that means "something that can be eaten" but he won't know wtf "edi" means until someone tells him. Use "unendingly" instead of "infinitely". I hate the word "infinitesimally", by the way.

Also, older English words are still being used today for technology. Take "ware" which means something like "tool" (i.e. hardware, glassware, silverware). Where do you find "ware"? Well... go to a WAREhouse. So in today's high-tech world, we have hardware and software, input and output, download and upload, intake and outtake, and network.

I am in favor of bringing back old words and slowly (or quickly!!) turning English (back) into Anglish. Literacy would sky-rocket. If you don't believe me, read about the Korean writing system called "Hangul". Before the adoption of the Hangul, the Koreans used the Chinese writing system (Hanja) and only the elite/upper class could read and write. And they probably wanted to keep it that way because they OPPOSED any new, simple way of writing... just like some people today look down on using simple, every-day words in English and condemn as racist or xenophobic anybody who wants to make English more Germanic/Anglish.

Our tongue is turning into a mess of words that we have to study and study to learn and understand. Why go to the ophthalmologist when I could just go to the eye-doctor? Fraternal/brotherly, paternal/fatherly, family/kin, homicide/murder, miscellaneous/sundries

I also hate it when English words are considered dirty while the Latin ones are ok. For example piss/urine, shit/feces, dick/penis. If I use the words on the left, I'm suddenly "cussing" and talking like a crude and possibly uneducated man.

7 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I personally think that Martin Luther King's speech in Anglo Saxon is very poetic-sounding. Go to http://anglish.wikia.com/wiki/I_Have_a_Dream or just read below...

I am happy to come together with you today in what will go down as the greatest gathering for freedom in our homeland‘s tale. Five score years ago, a great American in whose betokening shadow we stand today, underwrote his name on the deed giving freedom to the black thrall. This timely boding came as a beacon, a light to thralls in their millions hoping that, their days spent withering in wretchedness' searing fire had come to an end. It came as a listful dawn to end thralldom's long night. But one hundred years on, the black American's life is still not free. One hundred years on, freedom in the blackman’s life is still sadly crippled by asunderhood's shackles and unfairness' hidden fetters.

One hundred years after, the black American still lives on a lonely island, in neediness, amidst wealth's brim. One hundred years after, the black American is still ailing in the nooks, on fellowship's edge, in his own land. So we have come here today to spotlight a shameful tale.

In a way we have come to our homeland’s headtown to call in a draught. When our great folkdom's fathers wrote the haughty words of the Books-of-Rights and the Call for Lonestance, they were underwriting a hight to which every American was to fall erewardly.

The deed was a hight that all men, yes, black and white would have life's yieldless rights, freedom and the right to seek eadiness.

It is fair to see today that Americans have been found wanting in fairness, doing little on this hightful deed in their dealings with their black brothers. Rather than holding worthiness firmly in their hearts in following up this hallowed call to right a wrong, America has given its black folk a bad draught. A draught that has come back with the words ”not enough fee.”

But we unwilling to believe that the horden is without fairness or fee. We also are unwilling to believe that there is not enough fee in this land's great hordern. So we have come to take in fee this draught, a draught that will give upon asking freedom's boons and hele's fairness.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to bring to America’s mind again Now's pressing need . This is not the time to take a cooling-off sop or the calming healthdrug of let's go forward little-by-little.

Now is the time to make true this mighty hight.

Now it is the time for the black folk to rise from aparthood's darkness and lonely hollow into fair-go's sunlit path .

Now it is time to lift our homeland out of this folkstrandish quicksand onto the rock of brotherly steadfastness.

Now is the time to give a fair deal to all God’s children.

It would be dooming for the homeland to stay deaf to the black folk's thronging call for freedoms and rights and underguess their steadfastness in seeking them now. Their sweltering summer's lawful gladlessness will not go-away until there is freedom with fairness. Nineteen sixty-three is not the end but a beginning. Those who hoped that the black American needed only to let-off some steam and will now be fulfilled will have a stark mindjarring awakening if the homeland goes back to its old, unfair ways.

There will be neither be a frithsome soughing over America until the black American is given his full rights. The uprising, like a windwhirl, will shake our folkdom’s frame until the sun shines fairly and evenly on all.

We can never be fulfilled as long as our bodies, weighed down and tired with the day's wayfaring cannot get board and lodging in inns along our highways and in our great towns.

We cannot be fulfilled as long as the black folks leave small wretchsteads to end-up only in larger wretchsteads.

We can never be fulfilled as long as our bairns have taken from them their self-worth and have their selfhood reaved from them by boards that read “ for whites only. ”

We cannot be fulfilled as long as a black folk in Mississippi cannot folk-aye and black folk in New York believe that they have nothing for which to folk-aye.

No, no we are not fulfilled and we will not be fulfilled until fairness rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.

I am not unmindful that many have come here today ordeal-wearied and sorely smited. Others have come from steads where seeking your freedoms has left you harried and hounded, and smitten by harshness' biting winds, wrought upon you by those given to uphold your rights and freedoms.

You have been old-hands at finding understanding and insight in bearing the burden. Go on with your work with the belief that dreeing an unearned weird will make you free.

Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the wretchsteads, to the small black townships throughout our now great towns, knowing that somehow this wrong can and will be made right.

Let us not wallow in the yesterday’s waned and withered hopes. I say to you, my friends, we have the burdens in our heart and toils in our the mind, today and tomorrow.

I have a dream. It is a foresight deeply and longly rooted in the American mind.

I have a dream that one day this folkdom will rise up and live out the true meaning of its belief that all men are made even.

I have a dream that one day in Georgia's red hills one-time thralls' sons and one-time thrall-owners’ sons will sit down together at brotherhood's table.

I have a mindsight that one day Mississippi shire, a shire sweltering under downtrodden-ness' heat, will be shaped otherwisely into an lush well, brimming with freedom and fairness.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a land where they will be deemed not by their skin’s hue, but by their deeds.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day down in Alabama, with it’s evil-willed hindering haters, its leader his lips dripping words, bitter, hateful and worth-quelling; that one day right down in Alabama little black children, carls and frows, can link hands with little white carls and frows, as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that every dale shall be swallowed-up, every hill shall be lifted up and every fell shall be made low, the rough places will be made smooth, and the crooked places will be made straight and the Lord's greatness shall be made for all to see and all flesh shall see it together.

This is our hope. This is the belief that I will go back to the South filled with. With this belief we will have the strength to hew out from hopelessness’ fell, hope's stone .

With this hope we can shape anew our heart clattering, sadly beating for our land asundered, into a brotherhood gladdened and gleeful.

With this belief we can work together, make our beseeching to God together, to dree together, to be locked-up together, to climb up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day when all God’s bairns will sing with new understanding “My land ‘tis of thee, sweet land of freedom, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the first white settler's pride, from every fellside, let freedom ring!”

And if America is to be a great land, this must become true. So let freedom ring from the hilltops in New Hampshire. And let freedom from New York‘s mighty fells ring.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies in Pennsylvania

Let freedom ring from the snow-topped Rockies in Colorado.

Let freedom ring from California’s wendsome slopes.

But not only that, let freedom ring from Georgia’s Stony Fell.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill throughout Mississippi and along every fellside.

When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every boarding-house and every small hamlet, from every shire and every great town, we can speed up the day when all God’s children, black and white, Jew and those who are not Jewish, Romish-church men and those who are not Romish churchmen, can link hands and sing the old song, in words sung by this land's enthralled black folk , Free at last, free at last. “Thank God Almighty, we are free at last.’’

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AT - PAUL RODRIGUEZ from July 15, 2010

Paul said: "Shouldn’t that be 'a of English, which words of over those of and' ?" in response to "a form of English linguistic purism, which favours words of native (Germanic) origin over those of foreign (mainly Romance and Greek) origin."

It would be more like: "Anglish is a kind of English-speech cleanliness which notes (uses) words of Anglo-Saxon [you wouldn't need to use "native" in this case] birth/stock instead of outside (mainly Romanish and Greekish) birth/stock."

or even: "...instead of words which are not of Anglo-Saxon birth/stock".

Looking at Dutch, Swedish, and other Germanic toungues as templates, "native" could be "inborn". Afterall, "native" is from "nativus < natus < nasci "to be born"

A normal translation would be "Anglish is a kind of English-speech cleanliness which notes (uses) words that come from Anglo-Saxon instead of those that don't."

One thing folks must bear in mind is that languages should never be translated word-for-word. As one teacher told me (I'm paraphrasing) "We are translating the Thought or the Idea, not just words." In my linguistics classes, I've seen a sentence of five words in one language turn into a sentence of 15 words in another language. And just because one language has a prefix on a verb does not mean that the verb the target language HAS to have one too. Also, some words do not have morphemes that other languages do. I don't know how the heck "-ism" would be written in Anglish. We have to generalize and approximate because we only need to worry about conveying the IDEA and not every single morpheme.

Landshape or Landscape = Geography
Turf = territory (in gang jargon, but we can use too!)
Speechcraft = Linguistics


One last thing... Folks used to say "I'm so excited about trip to the beach!" and are now beginning to say "I'm so stoked..." At first, I hated it but I soon realized that, semantically speaking, they mean the same thing. To stoke a fire is to excite a fire.

I used to dislike the word "stronghold" and I preferred "fort" until the day I learned that "fort" comes from the Latin word "fortis" which means "strong."

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I swear this is my last input. It's 4:07 in the "morning" and I am freaking tired.

We should fix English spelling. I will not explain the rules in detail, but here is a quick speaking-guide.
Main Vowels are a, e, i, o, u = ah, eh, ee, oh, oo = as in father, bed, feet, bone, food
Other vowels are marked: ä (or æ), ï, ü = as in bat, bit, foot
The schwa vowel can be represented a dot below a, e, and o so that words like America won't be mutilated---> Umeriku. (But I don't know how to type the under-dot!)

Diphthongs ai, ei, oi = eye, ay,oy, au = as in fly, break, boy, cow

The consonants should be easy. Only change is the addition of thorn ( þ ) and eth (which I don't know how to type)

The only letters I want to improve is i and ï. The i with one dot is "ee" as in "feet, machine" and the ï with two dots is short as in "fit, bit, sit" but I think they look too much alike, plus, words like "needed" will look like "...nidïd..." So, when necessary, I might make a double i for the long "ee" sound. So niidid = needed.

Modul werdz shüd bi speld "shüd, wüd, küd" but þu "umlaut" simbul iz nat nidid bikuz uv hau aftin þiz werdz ar yuzd. þu freiz "have to" shud bi speld "häf tu" or "hæf tu". It meiks no sints þät wi hav þhri diferint spelingz for faiv werds wich saund ekzäkli þu seim (to, too, two). Wi kan fiks þis prablum bai speling al uv þïm "TU". If yu kan nat underständ wat ai äm seying (or seiying, but I prefer "seying") þin wat þu hel ar yu duing hir? --- I am going to switch subjects. -- Ai häv u gurlfrind and her neim is Jäzmin and shi iz friking kyut (or kiut = cute). Shi iz u Meksikin gurl but duznt spik much Spänish bikuz her perints never taht her hau tu spik þu rait wei. --- þu taim iz nau 4:35 in þu morning. Ai am going tu slip. Güd nait tu al uv yu.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I steven overone with the forothering of english spelling. I'm not hardcore about it, but it might not be such a bad thing, and it might actually be a great thing.
However, I don't see the need to add accents to english spelling. This is too big of a forothering and unlikely to catch on. How's this for a put-forth: for vowels, pick the spelling that shows up the most, or is the most "linked" to that vowelsound and make that the one and only spelling for that vowel. For byspell, the vowel /i/ as in need, feed, heel, see, should be spelt ''ee''. This works, forwhy every english speaker knows that "ee'' is always pronounced long, that is, as /i/. Doing it this way, you're not really adding anything to english spelling, your just taking what's already there, and regularizing it, and that's key, forwhy it's the method thats abids the least change, and will thus be the most likely to be taken on. Following this logic here's a list of english vowels with what I think would be good spellings for them:

the vowel in but, what, luck-- u
the vowel in food, rude, brood-- oo
the vowel in off, scoff, often-- o
the vowel in foe, over, row-- oe
the vowel in oar, for, soar-- oa
the vowel in see, eat, heel-- ee
the vowel in elm, elk, felt-- e
the vowel in hit, sit, bit-- i
the vowel in would, should, could-- ou
the vowel in bat, cat, rat- a

as for the shwa, I see no problem with just using e.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

as for diphthongs:

the diphthong in fight, cry, ride-- ay
the diphthong in say, day, same-- ey
the diphthong in cow, crowd, shout-- aw
the diphthong in boy, roy, coy-- oy

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Here's what you wrote in my spelling.

Moedel werdz shoud bee spelt shoud, woud, coud, but thu umlaut simbel is not needed becus uv haw ofen theez werdz or yoozd. Thu freyz "have to"'shoud bee spelt "haf too." It meyks noe sens that wee hav three diferent spelingz foar fayv werdz wich sawnd egzactlee thu seym. Wee can fics this problem bay speling ol uv them "too". If yoo cannot understand wut ay am seying then wut thu hel or yoo dooing heer? I am goeing too swich subjects. Ay hav a gerlfrend and her neym is Jazmin and shee iz freeking cyoot. Shee iz u meksikin gerl but dusnt speek much spanish becus her parents never tot her haw too speek thu rayt wey. thu taym iz naw 4 35 in thu moarning. Ay am goeing too sleep. Goud nayt too ol uv yoo.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Phonetic spelling of English is impossible because of the variations in pronounciations between the various accents. For example, I disagree with almost every example from Jm. To me girl = girl, saying = saying and name=name.

Unfortunately there are some absolutely horrendous accents in existance. I cannot foresee a time when we could ever reach agreement - we can't even agree on British v. American spellings!

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Jm, your proposed spelling rules are moderate and could probably gain a foothold. Five years ago, I would have said I loved your way of spelling--I myself had written a spelling guide much like yours because I hated spelling words such as "fight, flight, I" like "fait, flait, ai". But after I noticed that the vowels in their "purest" or most basic forms are a=ah, e=eh, i=ee, o=oh, and u=oo all over the world, I decided that wi shud spel laik this (or þis) bikuz forinerz wud bi eibul tu pronaunts aur werdz corektli... and meibi wi kud tu!

For the vowel sound in "bat, cat, flat" we use a regular a with an umlaut above it like this ä or just use the "ash" symbol ..æ.. and ..Æ.. from Anglo-Saxon and Icelandic. Mai neim iz Ædum ænd ai æm frum Florida. Wat abaut yu?

Schwa is a, e, or u with a dot below it. I just don't want to muck up the word "America" ... among others. But for the most part, ther iz nuthing rang with speling "other" like "uther" or "uþer".

Unfortunately, I know bringing in new letters (æ and þ) would be a hard thing to push. So we could just continue to use ä and th.

Another thing I want to fix, is words like "watch" and "batch". We do NOT need the T in there. So it will be "wach" and "bæch/bäch".

The -er- sound can be spelled "ur" or "er" so that the word "sure" would be "shur" or "sher". I'd be ok with just UR, though. Some people say it like "shor".

The affricate "ch" that is heard in TR- and DR- words like "trust" will NOT be spelled "chrust" even though that would make sense. That way "trust" is "trust" and "dream" is "drim". Plus, the only way I could think of to represent the voiced affricate found in "dream" would be "dzhrim, džrim, dhrim, or jrim" which look like Sanskrit!

Vision = Vizhin
Germany = Jermani (I hate the way that looks, but if I want words too Look pretty I'd leave our spelling alone)


Ai want tu bi a daktur so þat/that wun dei ai kan kyer/kyor (depending on local dialect) sik folks uv ther ilnisiz. Wi must meik shur wi wash aur handz bifor and after going tu thu bathrum so az nat tu git ini baktiria an aur skin.

No matter who you are, you will be able to pronounce my writing very easily. When I send texts to my girlfriend, I write MY way and she can read it fine!

..... And the Spelling Bee would be forever doomed. Yay!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Unluckily there are some hurdles in the way of changing English spelling.
1) Computer keyboards limit the options. We need something that will work straightaway without resetting the font/language.
2) Spellings like "tonite", "lite", are becoming more common, but there may still be people in Scotland who pronounce the "gh" so getting rid of even "gh" is fraught with issues.
3) Some Scottish and american people pronounce the "r" in words like "farther", some don't. The right new spelling would be a moot point.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ Shaun C - from Oct 6.

We cannot agree on spelling between American and British dialects because we pronounce things differently.

British - American
/both/ - /bæth/
/mili-tree/ - /mili-tehr-ee
/æloo-mi-nee-um/ - /uh-loo-mi-num/

In my History of the Spanish Language class, my professor explained to us that in the early Middle Ages, Spanish, French, Italian, and Portuguese all sounded different, but yet they wrote in what we call LATIN. They would look at the SAME THIING and say it completely different... The example sentence he used was...
Video hominem in ecclesia.
They all wrote like this, but they all SAID it differently
Spanish - Veo al hombre en la iglesia.
Itlaian - Vedo l'uomo nella chiesa.
French - etc
Portugues - etc

And just as some of you have pointed out, Americans, Scottish, and British peoples all spell mostly the same way (some exceptions are programme/program and colour/color, but those are minor problems).

So if the Scottish still say "nikht" then they can spell it night or nikht or nicht, whichever they prefer. And if Americans say "/nait/" then we can spell it "nite" or "nait".

If the Scots say "laughter" like "lahkter" then they can spell it "laughter/lahkter/" etc, and the British can spell "lahfter" and Americans can spell it "lafter".

If we dont' want our spelling to match the pronunciation, then our orthography will pretty much be a symbol-type system and we will be no better off than having to use Chinese symbols.

My girlfriend's 4 year old nephew's name is Kristian. For a school art-project, he spelled his name "Crish-chin" because that's how it is said. Very logical... but "wrong". However, no one says "Kris-tee-ahn". But everyone does say "Krish-chin"

When I was a kid, I remember spelling "police station" as "polees stayshun" [I still have that paper!]

I believe that FIXING our spelling... well... RULES of spelling will RAISE literacy or, at least, make it much easier to teach and learn how to spell.

If wi al rot (wrote) laik this, it wud bi beter. Ther wil bi NO sailint (silent) leterz as sin in "laughter". Thu werds "plough, through, rough, dough, trough, bought" wil be speld az "plau, thru, ruf, do/dou/dow, trahf, baht". Ai adid/ædid thi "H" bikuz thi "a" saund iz u bit diper than thi "A" in "father", but "traf" and "bat" wud bi ekseptibl.

Thu leter "C" wil bi kikt aut. Saft C wil bi speld with än S änd thu hard C wil bi speld with u K. For egzampl, "practice" wud bi speld "praktis" or "præktis" or "präktis". Ai hav nat disaidid (decided) wich leter tu yuz for thi "ash" saund. Sumtaims, ai laik yuzing "æ" and uthers, ai laik "ä". Yuzing ä iz similer tu thu Germin* ä in "mädchen" or watever that werd iz.

*(There will be a few soft G exceptions, along some other letters. Otherwise, soft G is spelled with a J as in "gem" = jem/jim.)

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Addendum...

And to further demonstrate/PROVE his point, my professor wrote this sentence in English...

Night comes earlier each day.

We say /nait kumz er-li-er ich dei/ = nait kumz erlier ich dei (7 syllables)

But according to the spelling, it should be...
/nikht ko-mes e-ar-li-er e-ach dai/ = nikht komes earlier each dai (10 syllables)

So let's fix the dang spelling rules!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Consanguinity (consanguinuity) or Samebloodedness.

I see no reason to say either of them - other than pomposity.

By the way 'uncleftish springballs' are available at Tesco - buy one get one free - or as we say 'buy two'.

As for spelling - it doesn't matter - leave it as it is.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I simply think that it is an interesting linguistic exercise. There is certainly not such a thing as linguistic purity, but at the same time, English speakers have a much better idea of the senses of "overbringing" than "translating." We know the roots of the words much better: over and bring versus 'trans' 'latum.' We therefore know the word by its entire meaning and not by the meaning of its parts. I think we definitely lose something here.
Also, I think that this is a noteworthy cultural movement as well. Try using Anglisc. You might be surprised at how clear your speech suddenly seems.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Yes this is indeed a noteworthy FOLKWAYS SHIFT ! I would however be somewhat taken aback if anglish unclouded your speech.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I think that the birth of Ænglisc again is good. Is there anything wrong with folks wanting to learn the old? Ænglisc (or English if you like) is, at its heart, a Germanic tongue, even though there has been outside bearing on Ænglisc speech by Latin and Greek. It can be shown true that some of the Norman words are from Old Norse, and are therefore French versions of the earlier Germanic. As for Ænglisc word-offerings for 'bomb', 'agglutination', and 'irony', how about: 1) bomb (Fr., from Gk. 'bombos): Bursting-Weapon (for 'Atom", why not use 'kernel' like in German- 'die Kernwaffe', which would beget 'Kernel-Bursting-Weapon'? 2) agglutination (L. from PIE *glei-): Clump or Lump (oddly, most Wordbooks use the Ænglisc to tell the meaning of this word. Isn't that weird?) 3) irony (L. from Gk. 'eironeia'): Why not use 'Tongue-in-Cheek'? Or, 'Weird'? Or, 'Silly'? There are many ways to say this one. It is true that early Ænglisc already had many Latin words like 'butter'. These early words belonged to early Ænglisc, and therefore belong to Ænglisc today. The main thought (or inkling) here is to teach, learn, and use words that are markedly Ænglisc. Truthfully, there is no need for loan-words. The Ænglisc wordpool is rich on its own. I believe I have shown that here with this bit of writing--all (or most) of which is in Ænglisc. What's more, it means nothing to say that words are borrowed from Old Norse, Old Frankish, Old Saxon, Old Frisian, Old High German, Old Dutch, and so on, while all of them are Germanic at their roots. What is wrong with wanting to use cleaner Ænglisc for writing and speaking? The thought that this means a fear of outsiders is CRAZY. By the way, 'Crazy' is one of those words that is a frenchified Germanic. It comes from Old Norse 'krasa' through Old French to Ænglisc. Did anyone get a headache reading all of this in Ænglisc? The only hitch to this whole Ænglisc thing is everyone would might be too wordy.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Oops, "versions" is French through Latin. What I meant was "...and are therefore, French words of the earlier Germanic." Version = Ænglisc 'kind'. My mistake!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

By the way, 'Consanguinity' is better said in Ænglisc as 'blood-kinship'. There is no need for the Latin-French word 'consanguinuity' to give this thought meaning. "-ism" = belief in Ænglisc.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

An earlier writer seems to say that Ænglisc is a rather low-brow tongue (folk-speech)--uncouth. Anyone who has read Beowulf understands this to be wrong. "Poet" in Anglo-Saxon was 'scop' (old Norse 'skald'), which now is found in the verb 'to scoff' in today's English. 'skald' is 'scold' in today's English. Why use poetry when we have the forgotten high-brow word 'scopfsang' that we can use again? Ænglisc is very couth and highly clever. All the old Ænglisc writers show that to be true.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Paul Rodriguez says, " ...“mainly” are French." Sorry you are wrong! Main (n. or adj.) comes from mægen (n.) "power, strength, force," from P.Gmc. *maginam- "power". The suffix "-ly" is also from Ænglisc/ Germanic. Tokens are Anglo-Saxon "-lic" or"-lice", Old Norse "-liga" or "-ligr", German "-lich", Dutch "-lijk", ans so forth. The word "mainly" is not a "Romance" word at all. @Charles says, "accept it!! the english is now a romance language, like the french or spanish languages." Well, he is wrong, too. Only Francophiles and folk of that ilk say and believe such wrong-headed things. Ænglisc will always be Germanic at its roots. One can choose to use the Latin-French and Greek words, or one can knuckle-down and use the right Anglo-Saxon words to speak and write. The most used words in Ænglisc are Germanic, unless one is a Lawyer, an Alderman, a Healer, or a snooty sort of man overly burdened and most dizzy from too much "learning", which has darkened and hidden the truth from said 'learned man'.

4 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc, in general I like the idea of anglish. However there are powerful forces working against its worldwide adoption. There are many areas such as medicine, computing, accounting, engineering, aeronautics, where English is the de facto world language. Most university textbooks for these subjects are written in English, and many students are using English as a second language to study them. Also within the academic world there is a propensity to choose romance words to conform to expected standards.
To enforce Anglish would be to change all the jargon words and muddy the waters.
We are not all etymologists... eg choose is good Anglish, but choice is not. What might be achieved is to change people's mindset toward simpler and less snobby english and less esoteric lexis withing academia. However some jargon eg in medicine is now so entrenched and vital that change is impracitcal IMHO>

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: Good thoughts all! You are right. World-wide use, however, should not be the goal. Also you are right about 'choose' and 'choice'...there is a lot of that in English. French does have Frankish in the background somewhere, so some word follow a Germanic--> French --> then back to Germanic trend. It will never again be all Germanic, but English can be mostly made up of mostly Germanic speech again. We should choose English words for most of our speaking. Almost all tongues (even French, despite the Toubon law) are having outside words come in to them. Folks have to want to, and choose to, speak a cleaner English at home. A shift will take a lot of time. A small ripple will wallow over the whole of the sea. Everything starts small. Long live Germanic English.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc! Good. Would you accept a little challenge for you for homework? If so, pls post your comments in Anglish on one of the following topics (100 words max): 1) soil liquefaction or 2) pneumoconiosis. Both these items have been in the news.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Not only should yall write a 100 word paragraph on "soil liquefaction" and "pneumoconiosis", but yall should also add them to the Anglish Wikipedia.

If I could write in Anglish, I honestly would spend my freetime translating articles into Anglish.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I must admit that Anglish would make medical definitions somewhat redundant. Once we call pneumoconiosis "breathingindustdisease" it's pretty obvious what it means, unless of course your greek is good anyway. "Soilflow" sounds good but isn't really specific enough to pinpoint the precise phenomenon.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

well im sure we could be a little more becraftsome than breathingindustdisease. How about lungdustcothe (cothe from OE coðu, disease). or how about dustethemcothe (OE aéthm OE breath, air). Granted cothe and ethem are just as undersatndable to english speakers than pneumowhatever, but at for those of you anglishers that are looking to edstathel some good old Anglo-Saxon, there are plenty of options. It just goes to show we truly did not need greek or latin or french. it amazes me you know, having studied Anglo-saxon for so long now I can truly say that in my mind it is far oversome(superior) to what we have today. So many poor loreknights (students) of english loaded on with the misbelief that english was bettered by its borrowings. English already had so much, it did not need in any way, foreign influence. And what a load of bullshit it is when it is claimed that english was enriched by its borrowings-- english lost so much of its wordstock, for what was gained an evenworthed muchth was lost. The Anglish Moot now has an Old English Wordbook where OE words are updated into now-time english. It's definitely worth looking at.

Long live Anglish. i swear i will die speaking and writing it.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Wet-earth Melting"(aka soil liquefaction): The way in which earth that is too wet starts to behave like water. Wet-earth Melting is a wondrous happening in which the strength and stiffness of dirt is made weaker by earthquakes, shaking, or quick loading. Wet-earth Melting and like happenings have been guilty of bringing about great loss in well-known earthquakes around the world. Wet-Earth Melting happens in spots of ground that are overly wet, that is, ground in which the room between lone motes is thoroughly filled with water. This water brings weight to bear upon the dirt motes which then sways how tightly the motes themselves are squeezed together. Earthquake shaking often triggers this waxing water-weight, but building work such as blasting can also bring about a rise in water-weight. Molten Wet-earth also bears greater weight on holding walls, which can bring them to tilting or sliding. Begotten from: http://www.ce.washington.edu/~liquefaction/html...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Dustbreathing Sickness"(pneumoconiosis) or "Dust-Lungs": any of the many lifelong lasting lung sicknesses brought on by the breathing-in of all kinds of dust motes.

In German it is called "Staublunge" (dust lungs). Why can't we use the same words? It doesn't have to be so muddled. Anyone think about "Black Lung"?? It is a "Dustbreathing Sickness or a pneumoconiosis illness. I can write about this in 100 words, too.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc! I award you A- ! That was surprisingly intelligible. It certainly shows what could be done if academics were willing. It does however highlight the difficulty of settling on new terminology and labels that everyone understands and uses.
One word that I do detest is "disambiguation" which is often used by wikipedia.

"Damn I must have left my rainshield on the coach." said Harald (circa 1066)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thanks, jayles! What did I get an A- for? Dust-Lungs or Wet-earth Melting? My use of Ænglisc? Both bits were dead-on, no? You are right, making new words everyone can use and understand could be woeful! Folks would have to learn new words like "mote", and learn words like "lone" (and its many uses) again. But, it CAN be done.

Wordtrending (disambiguation): 1) a sorting out of the way in which a writer uses a word, that has many meanings or spellings, for his own ends. 2) to make a lone, well-shaped meaning for a word which has many uses. 3) to use the meaning of a word that does not hinder understanding.

Token1: I do not get your meaning? Could you choose another wordtrend to make me understand better?

Would we need to (disambiguate) any thought using mostly Ænglisc anyway? I think not.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ænglisc: I would have given you an A but 1) melting suggests a change in temperature as the cause, which is not the case with soil liquefaction; and 2) IMHO we can sway people, but for an inanimate process it seems less than perfect as a substitute for influence, although I am hard put to come up with anything better.
“Damn I must have left my rainshield on the coach.” : Harald's last words before he glanced up at the gathering rainclouds and copped an arrow in the eye, and so died Old English. But what is a rainshield?
Seriously though, the whole premise of anglish is that saxon words are better, Why?
Romance words do not denote snobbery or social status in France, or Spain or Romania.
Only in England.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

foreign words are snobby forwhy they make no sense. They are made up of foreign roots, roots that are not understood by engish speakers. Their inly up-build is therefore misted over. One real downside to foreign words is when you come upon a new one you cannot draw off its meaning without a wordbook, unless you know latin or greek. Foreign words really get to me forwhy they do not say what they mean. Ornithology is the study of birds and yet the word bird is no where found in the word "ornithology". It is therfore deceptive and snobby, like wtf is ornithology, speak english, fuck. The word birdlore, the lore (from "learn") of birds , is much clearer, much more wordbirthlorely throughlooksome (etymologically transparent). Lawcraft, is much clearer, much more homey-sounding than juriprudence. Foreshut is much more image-evoking then preclude. So much of our language is foreing to us, we do not own it. Wtf is ''ceive"'in deceive, conceive, receive, perceive. Wtf is "tain" in contain, retain, detain. To english speakers, these words don't really have an inly upbuild, they are just arbitrary speakly tokens for ideas. They lack metaphor, image-evokingness, found in inhold for contain, athold for retain, downhold for detain. Anglish words are truer, they say what they mean. There is truth is Anglish, there is falsehood in foreign english, which is why it is the language of politicians and snobs.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: Thanks for your input. You have given but one of today's meanings for 'melting'. It is a useful word!

melt (mlt)
v. melt·ed, melt·ing, melts
v.intr.
1. To be changed from a solid to a liquid state especially by the application of heat.
2. To dissolve: Sugar melts in water.
3. To disappear or vanish gradually as if by dissolving: The crowd melted away after the rally.
4. To pass or merge imperceptibly into something else: Sea melted into sky along the horizon.
5. To become softened in feeling: Our hearts melted at the child's tears.
6. Obsolete To be overcome or crushed, as by grief, dismay, or fear.
v.tr.
1. To change (a solid) to a liquid state especially by the application of heat.
2. To dissolve: The tide melted our sand castle away.
3. To cause to disappear gradually; disperse.
4. To cause (units) to blend: "Here individuals of all races are melted into a new race of men" (Michel Guillaume Jean de Crèvecoeur).
5. To soften (someone's feelings); make gentle or tender.
n.
1. A melted solid; a fused mass.
2. The state of being melted.
3.
a. The act or operation of melting.
b. The quantity melted at a single operation or in one period.
4. A usually open sandwich topped with melted cheese: a tuna melt.
[Middle English melten, from Old English meltan; see mel-1 in Indo-European roots.]
melta·bili·ty n.
melta·ble adj.
melter n.
melting·ly adv.
melty adj.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

So, you see, it spot-on for what I wrote about. The same is true for 'sway':

sway (sw)
v. swayed, sway·ing, sways
v.intr.
1. To swing back and forth or to and fro. See Synonyms at swing.
2. To incline or bend to one side; veer: She swayed and put out a hand to steady herself.
3.
a. To incline toward change, as in opinion or feeling.
b. To fluctuate, as in outlook.
v.tr.
1. To cause to swing back and forth or to and fro.
2. To cause to incline or bend to one side.
3. Nautical To hoist (a mast or yard) into position.
4.
a. To divert; deflect.
b. To exert influence on or control over: His speech swayed the voters.
5. Archaic
a. To rule or govern.
b. To wield, as a weapon or scepter.
n.
1. The act of moving from side to side with a swinging motion.
2. Power; influence.
3. Dominion or control.
[Middle English sweien, probably of Scandinavian origin.]
swayer n.
swaying·ly adv.

One could say 'clout', 'might', 'reach', 'win over', 'work on', 'stir' (emotion), 'upper hand', and so on, to mean 'sway'. 'Sway' means the same thing as 'influence', whether the thought be about things alive or dead.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "... the whole premise of anglish is that saxon words are better, Why?
Romance words do not denote snobbery or social status in France, or Spain or Romania.
Only in England."

Firstly, let me say, it is not only in England that romance words seem to tell breeding or standing. It is in the U.S., too. Secondly, Ænglisc (Germanic) words are not better, they rightly belong above all other words. Jm wrote a truth: "Anglish words are truer, they say what they mean." Think about French, Greek, Latin, and any other tongue that has made it into English. Why are they used? Why are these tongues thought of as greater than Ænglisc? Why are folks seen as 'smarter' when they speak them? Why forget our roots where ever they may be from? Why should Ænglisc end up like Norn, Gothic, or Yola?A borrowing here or there is not an evil thing, it will happen when two unalike folks get together. It is right and true for Ænglisc folks everywhere (England, the U.S., a.s.f.) to take care of their birthright. Folks need to know where they come from. The Ænglisc folks and their tongue are worthy of awe, just like any other.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: as a descendant of the illegitimate son of and Norman lord and a welsh wench, I think my birthright would lie elsewhere than Anglish, I would suggest you check your own antecedents back over the last thousand years in case you too have some smidgen of Norman or Romance blood.
I gave you A- because it was (to my surprise) intelligible. However this style of writing would of course fail at university entrance because it is not "academic" enough. There is a list of acceptable academic words which you will find in TOEFL and IELTS courses.This is where the rot starts.
"influence" ranks among the most common three thousand words in modern English,(off the cuff). Substituting other words makes the passage less easily comprehended. Although the writing may be better wrought, as a means of communicating ideas it is less effective.
After years of latin at school, and despite years of German too, "soil liquefaction" is still for me much easier for me to understand than your alternatives.
Perhaps we should all use Hungarian instead?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thank you for the comments, jayles: Ænglisc, as described here, may not be for you. It is not for everyone. As I said earlier, it is not for World-wide distribution. Perhaps you are at home with all of the French influence. Good for you. A lot of Norman-French words are of Germanic origin,and were reintroduced into English, as I am sure you are aware. The Welsh are trying to revive Cymraeg, why shouldn't the English try to do the same for their language? It is called, after all, England, not "Norfrenlatengwelscotland". Recall that Normans are culturally Germanic as well as by blood, but spoke Normaund (Scandinavian-Latin-French). They are a mixture of Scandinavians, Hiberno-Norse, Orcadians, Anglo-Danish, and indigenous Franks and Gauls. 1000 years ago the Normans were in Normandy expanding west and pushing out the Bretons.

What do you mean the language is not academic enough? University disapproves? Who cares about the status quo? Do you think that anyone is advocating for an immediate switch? That would be ridiculous, as well as, impractical. The influences happened over time, so the reversals could happen over time, too. "Wet-earth Melting" is an off-the-cuff attempt at creating an equivalency for "soil liquefaction". If you understand German, do you understand Bodenverflüssigung? Break this word down in to its parts, and you should be able to construct the Ænglisc version. No doubt there is a lot of developing to do. There is 945 years of damage to reverse! For you, "soil liquefaction" is more understandable because that is what you are probably used to. That is expected, and okay. The same goes for any of the other Anglo words you find difficult. You are simply not used to them being used in ways other than how you were taught to use them. That is why you have the impression that ideas are not communicated as well as the mongrel English of today. That simply is not true or accurate said in any language. Your understanding of "melting" is a great example, and neatly proves the point of Ænglisc supporters.

Modern English speakers have lost much of the original language by allowing so-called "academics" to tell them which word are acceptable, and which are not. Why do you think we do not use a case system anymore? "Academics". Why is our spelling screwed up? "Academics". Why can most modern English speakers not understand the English of Chaucer or Shakespeare? "Academics". People's inability to read, write, and understand proper English is a failure of Academia at large (or Acadème, if you prefer). Appealing to authority is never the sign of a strong argument. Google/Harvard Study of the Current Number of Words in the English Language is 1,022,000 (OED estimates about 750,000). Either way, are this many words necessary to be precise? To effectively communicate? Useful? No. Muddling to most native and 2nd language speakers.

As for your challenge, I more than surpassed your 'expectations'. I wrote more than 100 words and presented the idea of soil liquefaction as clearly and defined as if it had been written in mongrel English. I can do it all day long, with any topic. Of course, it will sound weird because there is, as of yet, no generally accepted terms in Anglo-Saxon for some modern concepts. Alas, it doesn't matter anyway. Moving on, I also successfully defined disambiguation and pneumoconiosis without any problem. Keep in mind, that had 1066 gone differently, we would have true English words for these ideas, just like the Germans. In German one can use the snooty sounding "Pneumokoniose" or the colloquial Germanic "Staublunge". Surely, English can be this way, too. As for me, my native languages are German and English (although I speak six fluently, at the moment). No Welsh, Picts, Brits, French, Spanish, Basques, or Hibernians in my tree.

Ha szeretné megváltoztatni az egész sziget Anglia a magyar beszél?k, hogy biztos lenne lehetetlen feladat! A magyar nyelv nem áll kapcsolatban a latin, kelta, germán nyelvek vagy egyébként. Azt akarod mondani, hogy angolszász nem érdemes megmenteni?

Those interested in protecting culture and history will secure Anglo-Saxon Ænglisc, and perhaps restore it to its rightful glory. Everybody else will be happy speaking Global-English (which should not be called English) just to get along.

Thanks again for the feedback.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

A great read for anyone interested in how the Norman Conquest affected the English language. http://geoffboxell.tripod.com/words.htm

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Ne haragudj! Ne sertodj meg. Nem akartalak zavarni. Ne felecs el, hogy eleinte azt mondtam, hogy teszik nekem az Anglish. Egyetertunk, hogy az akademiakban, es az egyetemeken all a problema. Nekem tetszik a magyar, ez altalaban sokkal konnyebb, ( miutan megszoktak.) De persze viccelodtem a magyarhelyetitesrol. Udv

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: No, man! Its cool. I simply want encourage people to use English, not Global-speak, in traditionally English-speaking countries like England and the U.S. English, even as we know it, can become extinct by completely transforming into "Globelish", if care is not taken.

Academia, of course, is one of the biggest accomplices to that. For example, how many people do you think believe that "soup" is a French word? A Latin word? It's neither. It is a Germanic word. It is derived from P.Gmc *saupan, *saupaz. How about "soil"? Sounds French. It's not. "Soil" comes from Frankish *sulljan, *sauljan and OE solian, sylian. Okay, "regret". Now that's of French origin! Nope. It is a Germanic word, too (with the exception of the "re-" part, which is borrowed from Latin, but of unknown origin). "Regret" is from Frankish *grêtan, grêotan (to cry, weep, mourn, or lament), which is ultimately from P.Gmc. *greutanan (derived from PIE *ghrew- "to weep or be sad"). See my point? This knowledge is lost to average folks. This type of ignorance allows people to believe the propaganda about the English language.

Anyway, I digress. Good show, jayles! I appreciate the debate.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: I absolutely agree; knowing what is really English is a major issue; but of course the first task would be to get the average person interested. I wonder whether facebook and hotmail etc would consider adding Anglish as a species of English? Or whether a spellchecker-type Anglish highlighter would be feasible. Secondly you would have to consider carefully which words to target. Words such a government are in the top 3000 usage. How many borrowings would you allow from Norman french (which I submit IS part of our heritage). I would miss words like baliff, castle etc.
It is the renaissance wave of direct borrowings from latin that sound so pompous.
Your intent and endeavours are praiseworthy, albeit I do wonder whether you will see them as worthwhile in the eventide of your life. Sok szerencset kivanok!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: I do not propose to remove all foreign words. Words like "street" (L. stratta) were introduced so long ago that they are considered, by most, as belonging to English-proper. I will argue that Norman-French is part of the legislative culture of England, but almost certainly not of its people. Norman burial traditions, for example, are considered as part of the Anglo-Scandinavian tradition. What's more, the Normaund (Norman-French) language influenced legal language, but not much else. I could live without 'bailiff'-- we have 'sheriff' (O.E. scirgerefa) and 'reeve' (O.E. gerefa) among other options. If England decided to return to its pre-1066 nomenclature, that would effective solve it. Academia should teach the borrowed word and the English word side-by-side, and allow the student to choose the proper word for, what he/she feels, is the proper context. The average person, to be interested, would have to not be afraid to have pride in his/her cultural roots.

Thanks for the well-wishes, but luck is for the ill-prepared! Cheers!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

We do try to teach "made up of" along with "consist of", but inevitably romance language speakers just choose the romance option. For the others the romance option is often less error-prone. Le mot juste is beyond them. They just want to pass the exam and get into uni.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: What do you mean by "inevitably romance language speakers just choose the romance option. For the others the romance option is often less error-prone."

More "French words" of Germanic origin:
* boulevard (from M.Du. bolwerc "wall of a fortification")
* mannequin (from Du. manneken). This word already existed in the 1560's, while the French version came about in 1902.
* afraid (from L. ex + Frankish *frithu "peace," from P.Gmc. *frithuz "peace, consideration, forbearance"; O.E. friðu)
* war (from Frankish *werra)
* standard ( from Frankish *standhard)
* scavenger (from O.H.G. scouwon, O.E. sceawian)
* baron ( from Frankish baro; merged with cog. O.E. beorn)
* skirmish (from O.H.G. skirmen or Frankish *skirmjan)
* attack (from a + Frank. *stakon. see O.E. staca, from P.Gmc. *stakon)
* regard, reward (from re + Frankish *wardon, from P.Gmc. *wardo-)
* crush (from from Frankish *krostjan)
* herald (from from Frankish *hariwald, from P.Gmc. *kharjaz)

Check twice, if you think, or more importantly someone (especially in Academia) tells you, a word in English is borrowed from French.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Based on the evidence of the Oxford English Corpus, which currently contains over 2 billion words, the 100 commonest English words found in writing around the world are as follows:

1 the
2 be
3 to
4 of
5 and
6 a
7 in
8 that
9 have
10 I
11 it
12 for
13 not
14 on
15 with
16 he
17 as
18 you
19 do
20 at
21 this
22 but
23 his
24 by
25 from
26 they
27 we
28 say
29 her
30 she
31 or
32 an
33 will
34 my
35 one
36 all
37 would
38 there
39 their
40 what
41 so
42 up
43 out
44 if
45 about
46 who
47 get
48 which
49 go
50 me
51 when
52 make
53 can
54 like
55 time
56 no
57 just
58 him
59 know
60 take
61 people* (O.Fr. peupel, from L. populus, unknown origin, possibly from Etruscan)
62 into
63 year
64 your
65 good
66 some
67 could
68 them
69 see
70 other
71 than
72 then
73 now
74 look
75 only
76 come
77 its
78 over
79 think
80 also
81 back
82 after
83 use* (from Vulgar L. *usare)
84 two
85 how
86 our
87 work
88 first
89 well
90 way
91 even
92 new
93 want
94 because* (OE. "by" + L. causa; modeled on Fr. 'par cause')
95 any
96 these
97 give
98 day
99 most
100 us

3 out of 100 are non-Germanic (3%). 97 out of 100 are Germanic (97%).

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Most common 'content words' in ranking order from the Oxford English Corpus:

Nouns
1 time
2 person* (from L. *persona)
3 year
4 way
5 day
6 thing
7 man
8 world
9 life
10 hand
11 part* (from L. *partem)
12 child
13 eye
14 woman
15 place* (ultimately from Gk. *plateia)
16 work
17 week
18 case* (from L. capsa "receptacle"; from L. casus "state of affairs")
19 point* (ultimately from L. *pungere)
20 government* (from Gk. kybernan + L. stem -mentum)

21 company* (from L.L. companionem. Found first in 6c. Frankish Lex Salica, and probably a translation of a Germanic word (cf. Gothic gahlaiba))

22 number* (from L. *numerus)

23 group (actually a Germanic word from P.Gmc. *kruppaz)

24 problem* (from Gk. *proballein)
25 fact* (from L. *factum)

Verbs
1 be
2 have
3 do
4 say
5 get
6 make
7 go
8 know
9 take
10 see
11 come
12 think
13 look
14 want
15 give
16 use* (from Vulgar L. *usare)
17 find
18 tell
19 ask
20 work
21 seem
22 feel
23 try
24 leave
25 call

Adjectives
1 good
2 new
3 first
4 last
5 long
6 great
7 little
8 own
9 other
10 old
11 right
12 big
13 high
14 different* (from L. *differentem)
15 small
16 large* (from L. largus)
17 next
18 early
19 young
20 important* (from L. *importare)
21 few
22 public* (from Old L. *poplicus)
23 bad
24 same
25 able* (from L. *habilem, habilis)

16 out of 75 words (21%) are of non-Germanic origin. 59 out of 75 (79%) are of Germanic origin. **I am counting company as a non-Germanic word, even though the ultimate origin is in question given the Frankish reference.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: These people are often not linguists as such. They may be, for example, an immigrant pharmacist, who needs a minimum of IELTS 7.0 to work professionally. Or they may be budding engineers, IT people, teachers etc. who wish to enter university and therefore need pass an English test. Some people are just not good at learning a second language. Of course romance speakers' first choice is familiar lexis: so a french speaker might say: May I propose a cup of coffee? Most non germanic speakers find the grammar of phrasal verbs like "made up of" incomprehensible and avoid them. In the limited time available it's more effective to focus on "academic" words to get them through the exam. It's just business sense.
If you look in the Longmans (advanced) dictionary for English learners, the top 3000 words are marked in red, and there are markers like W1,S2 to indicate more detail.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: if you seek real pain in the english, take a look at "academic word list" on Wikipedia and follow the links. It is enthralling stuff, but shows what you are up against.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: It would be a "Pain in the English" to attempt to convert foreign, non-English speakers because of the "Globalish" already being taught to them. I am setting my sights a lot lower. Words from mathematics should stay. Although, a lot of the Latin-Greek "science words" could be replaced.

The Old English lexis for arts, sciences, and literature fell out of favor because it fell into disuse. Very simply, the bourgeoisie wanted to be taken as a more noble and refined people--so they adopted more "Latin-French" words. The became embarrassed by Ænglish believing the snobby hype that it was VULGAR. The fix? Start proudly rediscovering and using the higher-register OE words!

"Old English was extremely resourceful in its ability to express synonyms and shades of meaning on its own, in many respects rivaling or exceeding that of Modern English (synonyms numbering in the thirties for certain concepts were not uncommon). Take for instance the various ways to express the word "astronomer" or "astrologer" in Old English: tunglere, tungolcræftiga, tungolwītega, tīdymbwlātend, tīdscēawere." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language

Recommended Reading: "Politics and the English Language" (1946) by George Orwell http://georgeorwellnovels.com/essays/politics-a...

More Latin-French words that are surprisingly Germanic at their roots:

* allegiance (from O.E. læt)
* Feudal (from Goth. *faihu, O.H.G. *fihu)
* Fee (from Frank. *fehu-od--same Germanic root as Feudal)
* furniture, per+form+ance ( both from W.Gmc. *frumjan <= P.Gmc. *fram-)
* gallantry (from Frankish *wala- <= P.Gmc. *wal-)
* bourgeoisie (spelling and pronunciation screwed up by the French, but from Frankish *burg <= P.Gmc. *burgs)
* wardrobe (from W.Gmc. *wardo + W.Gmc. *rauba)

More later....Enjoy!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

If you haven't already done so try: www.plainenglish.co.uk

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thanks, jayles! Good recommendation!

More Germanic=> Latin/ French => English (Germanic) Words. Enjoy!:

abandon (from P.Gmc. *bannan through Frankish, which was heavily borrowed into French and Latin.)
acre (O.E. æcer, from P.Gmc. *akraz)
aboard (from à + Frankish *bord)

bacon (from P.Gmc. *bakkon through Low Frankish *bakko)
baggage (from O.N. baggi)
ballast-er (from P.Gmc. *bazaz + P.Gmc. *laistijanan. Or from North Sea Germanic and Scandinavian (cf. O.Dan. barlast, 14c.)
bank (from P.Gmc. *bangkon, a cognate with *bankiz)
bastion (from Frankish *bastjan)
bivouac (from Swiss/Alsatian biwacht, "beiwacht")

Camembert (from W.Gmc. *kampo-z, an early loan from L. 'campus' + W.Gmc. p.n. "Maimbert")
canard (from P.Gmc *kanan)
chic (from M.L.G. schikken or M.H.G. schicken)
crochet, croquet (from O.N. krokr )

equip (from P.Gmc. *skipan through O.N. *skipa)
etiquette (from Frank. *stikkan)
engage, gage (from P.Gmc. *wadi- through Frankish *wadja-, common evolution of Gmc. -w- to Fr. -g-)

flatter (from Frankish *flat)

gain (from Frankish *waidanjan, Gmc. -w- to Fr. -g-)
guide (from Frankish *witan, Gmc. -w- to Fr. -g-)
guise (from Frankish *wisa, Gmc. -w- to Fr. -g-)

haggard (from P.Gmc. *khag- through M.H.G. 'hag')
harness (from O.N. *hernest)

maraud, marauder (from Frankish *marrjan)

placard (from M.Du. placken)

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

What Old English prefixes would Anglish the word: embower...
inbower
onbower
umbower
abower
?


embower [ɪmˈbaʊə]
vb Archaic to enclose in or as in a bower

1. Enclosed or sheltered in or as if in a bower; 'a house embowered with blooms'
2. Being sheltered

Prefixes en-/em- to make into, to put into, to get into: enmesh, empower

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The prefix "em-" is French, which derived from O.Fr. "en-", and is ultimately from L. "in-" (Gk. cognate is "en-"). A W.Saxon prefix that means the same thing is "on-" (cf. O.E. onliehtan "to enlighten"). The O.E. prefix "an-" is a variant of "on-", too.

BOWER is from O.E. *bur, which is from P.Gmc. *buraz. So, "onbower" or "anbower" would be equivalent to "embower".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Wow! did not think I would get an answer for days. Thanks.

Sounds all good to me though I'm guessing onbower and onlighten are not working the same prefix as in 'ongoing'?

How about 'embedded' (hack) which folk have willfully reworded into the more truthful and more English 'inbeds' is thist the 'prefix' in- + bed, or the 'word' in + bed?

I wonder how eath it would be to cleanup those English words stuck with Romance affixes. Not yet come upon a fullstanding English affix list anywhere. Doesn't help that whether the endings of words like downset, lowset, waterborne, seaborne, homeborn, newborn, sunkiss, bekiss etc etc are thought of as affixes or not is beyond my ken.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Hi, Stanmund:

Yes, "ongoing" uses the same prefix. O.E. 'on' is an unstressed variant of 'an', meaning "in, on, into". It would be used (in O.E.) in many instances where "in-" is used today. (cf. "inward", O.E. inneweard, from O.E. inne "in" + -weard). Note, O.E. "a(n)-,on-,in-" is not to be confused with Latin "in-". Other examples include, arise, awake, ashame, alive, asleep, abroad, afoot, anew, abreast, upon, etc.

From what is known, O.E. seemes to have a lot more suffixes than prefixes. A great deal of the suffixes survive in modern English. Unfortunately, the reverse seems to be true fro the prefixes.

As for O.E. affixes, Wiktionary will get you started in the right way: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Old_Engl...

Also, here is the link to a great book, which has a good list of prefixes and suffixes:

http://books.google.com/books?id=h0RSfnHNdKUC&a...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: about the academic word list: www.oxfordadvancedlearnersdictionary.com/academic/

This is the stuff which non-native speakers have to learn. It is mostly very difficult to find real english substitutes for these words. Many are very specific in their meaning(s) and usage(s). Whilst I hate,
loathe and (mildly) detest them, there seems little option. a few examples:
1) analyse/analyst/analysis "check" is just not accurate enough. "breakdown" is actually used for figures in business. Hungarian does better with "elemez" etc. but analyze has become an international loan word for several languages so what would be the point of substituting some weird Anglish word that no-one recognises?
2) approach: "near" (verb) is a nice substitute for literal meaning but "approach" is also a noun meaning "method" "way of tackling a problem" ; then there's "unapproachable" etc "unnearable" just doesn't cut it.
3) assume/assumption/unassuming: of course we say "I take it that.." but that doesn't translate into a intelligible noun like "it-taking". Better to stop people writing "based on the assumption that..." which is tautologous.
And there's another 600 academic words to go....
So I don't see any real point in targeting academic language.
On the other hand, I would love to replace diarrhea and pusillanimous with something I could spell, like "throughfall" and "cowardly"
Finally (and teasingly) my etymology isn't very good as I find sound shifts very grimm indeed, but surely we can allow "capital" as germanic since it has the same roots as "Haupt" ..... teehee!
Thanks for the frankish/french words in english. Some of them I would never have guessed. Uncloudedly this has been a travail of love for you. udv

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: I would take issue with your earlier assertion that old english "fell into disuse" and the "bourgeousie became embarrassed..believing english was vulgar".
You seem in danger of swallowing the cover-up line. This is the truth:
Old english died because its writers and leaders were slaughtered by the invaders.
This from the BBC:
"The bloody violence of the Norman Conquest has become entrenched in history thanks to the legendary death-bed confession of William the Conqueror; contemporary commentator Orderic Vitalis describes William repenting for, "the slaughter and banishment" by which he "subjugated England". In 1066 the entire ruling class of Saxon thegns, or landowners, was replaced; kingdoms were redrawn and a new language was introduced. For every Anglo-Saxon settlement sacked, a Norman stronghold appeared." Old English was SLAUGHTERED.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

It's likely I have misunderstood but what's wrong with: 'sift' or 'sift over' for 'analyse'

Even the likes of:

chew over
think through
soakup, asoak
weigh
delve
indeem (deem)
toothcomb
asweat (sweat out info)
winkle
amindstake
keenout
anighsight, asight, asighten, allsight, (hindsight, foresight, oversight)
stripout
nearhand
burn
abrand
siftfeed
ameal
aheadwork
overbrood

Your forgetting most everyday English speakers (like myself) do not have a marked understanding of the 'dead on' meaning of words like 'analyse'

With a little bit of tweaking or in context, some of the above words would work as a 'stand in' for most folk.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

ameal = analyse

The study will ameal the psychological and physiological impact of draughts on Whooper swans.

The above usage works for me in the sense of the digestion of something in ones mind and working out its part. Influenced by:

making a meal out of something
mulling something over
to mill through something
anneal (to kindle properties of something)

Not sure if I have got the prefix right though...

ameal (awake aware anew)
onmeal (ongoing)
anmeal (anneal)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

If analysis/analyze/analyst/analytical are understood by a billion hominids on this planet, why change? It has the same roots as "on+loosen". Breakdown is similarly widely understood and has an identical meaning in the right context; but it is difficult to form the person "breaker-downer" or an adjective "downbreaking". Why try to create new words when the existing ones are so widely used and well understood?
Or (in jest): "Police are chewing over tissue samples from the corpse". (ie analysing)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Analysis is probably not the best example to support your point, Stanmund, although I get your meaning. Many languages unfortunately use "analysis" (or a derivation thereof), too. Some foreign words have become commonly useful in the modern age.

Although, look at good old Icelandic. They made up their very own word for this concept instead of adopting the Greek word: greining (from the verb 'greina'). Ex. stærðfræðigreining (mathematical analysis). They have their own word for mathematics, too: stærð (quantity, size) + -fræði (study of-; -ology) = loosely, 'the study of quantities'. Ingeniuous! Ænglisc, given the same quiet development as Icelandic, I'm sure would also have a native catch-all word for 'analysis'.

Analysis (from PIE base *ano- via Gk. 'ana') + lysis (from PIE *leu- through Gk. 'lyein'). "Breakdown" is a perfectly good synonym, means the same thing, and is just as clear as "Analysis" in all contexts.

Forming an agent noun would not be difficult at all as suggested, but it would probably have to be contextually specific. Ex. "Stock Analyst" => "Stock Watcher". We already have agent nouns with certain professions i.e. "psychiatrist" => 'shrink' or 'head-shrinker'; "accountant" => 'bookkeeper'. Instead of saying 'metal chemical test analyst', we call that person an 'assayer'. It would be nice to call a "doctor or physician" a "healer" instead. It is much more specific and comforting, since it describes what this person is actually supposed to do.

The same breakdown could be done with "synthesis". One could simply choose to say in English, "bring together, blend, weld(-ing), shape(-ing)", brew(-ing), make(-ing) one, mishmash(-ing), a.s.f., depending on the situation. Another example: "combine" => Eng. twin, match (up), mate, yoke, wed, etc. Native speakers, of course, choose words this way quite often. The English words are there for the choosing. Old English words could be revived through the education system.

jayles is right, though, about the way academia teaches non-native speakers. They teach them the Latin and Greek words, especially regarding science, because they are considered higher register words and have been spread World-wide in their use. The academics have convinced non-native speakers that they are speaking English, so it will be nigh impossible to abruptly change the academic, financial, legal, and political lexicons. And, I am not sure that messing with all of them is such a good idea. That said, time and being steadfast of purpose are required to make this type of monumental change.

The general notion of the so-called "educated" that English words are low-brow, unsophisticated, and vulgar sadly still persists today like it did from 1066 onward.

I have to get in at least one false Latin-French word that's really Germanic!

spy (from Frankish *spehon; ultimately from P.Gmc. *spekh-)

More later...

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thank you jayles and ÆngelfolC

RE the moot & stuff

Like shown on my own posts, millions and millions of folk in the UK are plighted in being weak to naught in the meanings of even straightforward English grammar terms and workings. Ironically, one of the outcomes of all the French, Latin and Greek influence within English, is that it handicaps the learning of foreign tongues! (like it dose for me in learning French) Even elementary English grammar guides seem to thwart their own ends, in selfishly explaining and defining any given grammar term by wielding yet more selfsame bewildering grammar terms as an explanation! Even though the 'names' of these grammar terms can ring bells going back years, the best I have ever gotten in English grammar 'meaning' is something like verb = doing word.

Are folk over at The Anglish Moot working on ednewing English grammar terms? - It would without a shadow help us grammarweaklings in strengthening our English and Anglish, and frowardly, picking up French and other foreign tongues! Bytheway, why has 'renew' been anewed as 'ednew' rather than anew?

Is there a TAM leaf sworn to the marketing of Anglish? wish the Anglish Moot had a more conventional forum/messageboard for brainstorming and rattling out thoughts on all things Anglish. Wouldn't mind giving a go a thread on the potential of stuff like Lord of The Rings, Harry Potter etc trend in films to market Anglish, or fingering any other openings which would boost the profile of Anglish into the mainstream. Even the oddball English speech of the Yoda character in Star Wars films makes an interesting case study. Would of thought for Anglishlovers the upcoming film: The Hobbit is a golden opening for the whole Anglish movement 'to go big' by selling itself to the film's speechwriters. Indeed building on the successful usage of the older English witnessed in LOTR films. Like in Tolkein's books, reckon the pick of English brooked in the LOTR films are underlying thrills which even its newer moviegoers now come to expect. Anyway, a further Anglish boosting of The Hobbit film script has gotta strengthen the the swagger of the resulting film's convincingness. Would like to think the Tolkein estate and the man himself would approve. Anyway, this whole Anglish thing seems to have a thrilling and moreish mark to it - and if Anglish hunts down its game many a willing amongst the worldwide stocks of the whole of 'swords and scorcery' market out there.

And how about the UK folk music scene as another likely welcoming field to make inroads on. One would think the business of folk music, folk lore and 'folk speech' (Anglish) would be openminded to eachother and wed the creative skills of both. Maybe something like a sponsored English Folk music festival or competition onbowered in an Anglish theme?

I truly like the three kegged word 'comeuppance' but like picking at a scab, I want rid of the Romance suffix for a English rooted one. I'm not getting the drift of the -ance suffix - which would be the nowadays English/Anglish endings that cognate with -ance?

Hope this has been more coherent than my previous posts.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_wor...
wikipedia....list of french words of germanic origin
if you haven't checked it out already

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

And:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_La...

All of which suggests to me that it really is hard to guess the true origin of even obviously
latinate words. Unless somehow we all learn this list. It's all greek to me anyway.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

ed- is the Old English fore-wordling which has the same meaning as the latin re-.

Some updated Old English words: edquick (revive), edkenn( regenerate) edbirth (regenerate), edstathel (restore, reestablish), edwend (return).

OE also had eft-, as in eftcome (return), eftmind (remember), eftsit (reside), eftarise (resurrect), efty (repeat).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: I am not so sure that there is anything wrong with "comeuppance". I think there is a major problem with the unnecessary borrowing of words that are used in place of true English words. Words like this, however, deserve to be handled differently.

The suffix "-ance" is from L. -antia and -entia (-ance, -ence). It is a muddled suffix with muddled usage. Basically, this suffix is attached to verbs, and is used to form abstract nouns of process. act, state, or quality.

"Comeuppance", according to the Merriam-Webster wordbook, define the word thusly: a deserved rebuke or penalty.

If pressed to drop the suffix, I guess one could say, "one day soon, you'll have your coming up!" or "the bad guys finally got their comeupness", or something like that. But why try to change a 152 year old relatively modern word?

I'd argue that this word belongs in the category of Anglo-Latin/Norman Hybrid. It is an outgrowth from the combination of Ænglisc and Normaund (Latin/Norse-French).The word itself was not borrowed, it was created. Only the suffix was borrowed. So, the word is still a Germanic word with a little Latin flavor. If still put off, why not simply say, "you'll get yours" or "you will have a reckoning/ to reckon for your misdeeds"?

If English is to go back to its roots, one has to be mindful when choosing words. For example, instead of using "holy spirit", choose "holy ghost". Describe someone as "lively" instead of "vivacious". If you think someone is "brilliant", call them "bright", "brainy", "gifted", "quick-witted", "whiz kid", "smart", "clever", "keen", "crafty", "wise" or "knowing" (but not knowledgeable...-able is from L.-ibilis, -abilis).

Folks have to relearn (L."re" + O.E. leornian, which is from P.Gmc. *liznojan) the English words that replace the Latin-French and Greek ones they are comfortable using. Once folks begin speaking more Germanic English and the foreign words are diminished in the culture, then new "Germanic rooted" words will naturally emerge.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc

As it happens I worthy the word 'Comeuppance' for its blend of three wordbits. It is not so much -ancegate, but myself balking at not finding a good homborn match for it that works. Anyway, I would rather it is wielded in its nowadays fullness than folk not using it.

Don't know how, but for some weird reason the following diminutive suffix seems to work a little bit for me...

'you'll get your comeupkins'

'the naughty boys finally got their comeupkins'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: Do you mean that you are looking for an Anglo-Saxon word to mean "a deserved rebuke or penalty", rather than trying to fix "comeuppance"?

The word deserve had many true English alternatives: earn, gain (from Frankish *waidanjan), etc. "Rebuke" is a recycled Germanic word with a Latin prefix: L. "re-" + "buke"(O.Fr. rebuchier)-- from W.Gmc./ Scandinavian *busk, which is from P.Gmc. *busk-). "Rebuke" literally mean "return strike".

Other native similar words/ phrases you might use: Wrath, Eye for an Eye, Reckoning, Reward, Earned Wyrd (i.e. Fate), Get His/Hers/Yours, Get what's coming to you, you shall rue the day, you'll be sorry, I'll see you on--, or you'll get-- the gallows, asf. There is lots to choose from.

The suffix "-kin" would not work. It is a diminutive (cf. Ger. -chen) or "a kin, kind, race, species, family" (cf. Angelcynn, "Angelkin).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The O.E. prefix "ed-" (from P.Gmc. *ith-) is found in cognate form in the word EDDY (a current of water or air running contrary to the main current. From from O.N. iða "whirlpool").

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Old English was SLAUGHTERED" is fantastic hyperbole! Too much is always made of the "Conquest". Had Harold Gōdwines sunu not been trying to fight a two-front invasion, things would have certainly been different. Anyway, it cannot be accurate, for if it were, we'd all be speaking French. Why do I write that?

Well, consider that there was an unbroken, normal transmission of (Old) English from one generation to the next (the ruled folks spoke English, not French), but the new generation also received new Norman-French words and expressions, too. An oft used example is that the expression "before-hand" comes from Norman "avaunt-main". It is interesting to note that almost no French loan words are found in English during the 11th and 12th centuries. Furthermore, late West Saxon and South Saxon were spoken well after the "Conquest", even though, the written word was mainly Latin or Anglo-French.

Old English, like most Germanic languages, had a very strong oral tradition which did not discontinue with the slaying of most of the thanes. As a matter of fact, Anglo-Saxons didn't really begin regularly writing things down until their conversion. Prior to 597 AD, hardly anything was ever written down. It must also be noted that the Norman ruling-class never tried to actively supplant the English language at all.

Now, one could make a great argument the Old English literature died with Wulfstan of York in 1023 A.D., but certainly not as a result of the Norman invasion. The transformation form Old English to Middle English is generally dated to 1100 A.D. (not 1066 AD), and it was not a result of the Norman Invasion. Besides, English was already naturally evolving on its own prior to the Norman invasion due to the influx of Scandinavian (Danish & Norwegian) influence. The Norman interference simply sped up the process and took English into a slightly different direction with respect to vocabulary.

Old English simply suffered the same fate that Latin did: It merely transformed into something else--Middle English--but, it was still regarded as English...not Anglo-French (although, "Anglo-Norman" was used to differentiate itself from continental French because Anglo-Norman was quickly being considered too old-fashioned and dialectical shortly after 1066 AD--possibly due English influence? By the middle of the 12th century, Norman-French had lost its "purity". This is supported by the many accounts of English Knights who sent their kids to France to learn French.), Latin-Saxon, or Frenglish. The fact is that English remained the vernacular during the entire Norman occupation, and even those in the highest classes eventually had English as a mother-tongue.

Yes, to assert the bourgeoisie was "embarrassed" did produce a muddled meaning. The Normans were said to be indifferent to English, which is worse. There is no debate that English was considered uncultivated (i.e. vulgar) and socially inferior. Ænglisc did fall out of favor as the language of the nobility, education, diplomacy, commerce (generally), and education being replaced, of course, by Norman-French. The church is not to be excluded, since Latin and French were exclusively used during this period.

When the evidence is closely scrutinized, it is clear that the Norman Conquest had little direct impact on the English language. The fault lies with the church and the academics. Enter the University of Paris that was established in the 12th century. Later on, the "Renaissance scholars" shoulder the rest of the blame. To put a finer point on it, it was, at one time, mandatory that Oxford scholars learn either Latin or French. Latin was the language of education and piety, and French was the language of "Polite Society".

More Germanic words given back to English through N.French:

garden (from Frankish *gardo, from P.Gmc. *gardaz- )
hale (from Frankish *halon or O.Du. halen)
hurt (from Frankish *hurt)
pocket (from Frank. *pokka, from P.Gmc. *puk-)
rabbit (dim. of Flem./M.Du. 'robbe' + Fr. suffix -it.
wage, gage (from Frankish *wadja-, from P.Gmc. *wadiare)
wait (from Frankish *wahton, from P.Gmc. *waken)
wallop, gallop (from Frankish *wala hlaupan)
warden (from Frankish *warding-)
wicket (from P.Gmc. *wik- through Old Norse)

More later...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

One more thing, the Saxon Thegns were not all killed in 1066, nor were they all immediately displaced thereafter. That is untrue. The surviving thegns were gradually deprived of their lands in favor of Normans upon their deaths.

Check out The Anglo-Saxon Thegn, AD 449-1066 (1993) by Mark Harrison for a complete treatment of the Anglo-Saxon Thegn.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Anyone think 'lifetoll' (influenced by deathtoll, life forms, http://www.morewords.com/contains/life/) hits the spot a bit better than the running English words for /population/ (n) = befolking, bewoners, indwellers, folk, ware, erdeners, allfolks (allhallows), folktell, headtell (head count)

/the town's lifetoll stands at over 10,000/

/the lifetoll of the village is under 200/

/many bits of the earth are in truth underlifed rather than overlifed/

Note: undertolled and underlifetolled don't work as well. Lifed seems to work for 'populated' and even if 'lifetoll' sounds best for 'population' 'under/overlifed' seems to work better for 'under/over populated'

/with a lifetoll of just over 250'000 Plymouth is home to the biggest population center in Devon/

population = lifetoll

populated = lifed

under populated = underlifed

overpopulation = overlifed

population centre = something like lifehub, livingness, lifestand, settleset?


'lifetoll' wielded here... http://vaughndavis.posterous.com/christchurch

'lifed' wielded here... http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=...

wonderful website: http://www.morewords.com/contains/life/

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: "Toll" is O.E. toll/ toln which is a very early borrowing into Germanic from L.L. tolonium (from Gk. teloneion). Are you sure that you would want to use this word? An English equivalent is "reckoning".

"Lifetoll" seems more akin to "census" in meaning, which could be the very Germanic "Dweller Reckoning".

"Population" (from L. populus "people") means a "multitude of people", not an 'accounting of'. "Folk" or Folk Group/ Folk Throng all work just fine imo.

I think "populated" is rendered best by a word that already exists: "settled". "Settle" (n. & v.) is from O.E. setl (n.)/O.E. setlan (v.), which is from from P.Gmc. *setla-. "Settle" is defined as "to establish in residence; to furnish with inhabitants".

Hence:

* over populated = over-settled (overbefolked)
* under populated = under-settled (underbefolked)
* population centre = Folk middle (Befolking middle); Folk Seat

My 2 cents.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Germanic words dressed in French Guise ("French & Guise both being Germanic words, btw):

vogue (from Old Low Ger. *wogon)
guise (from Frankish *wisa)
French (O.E. frencisc "of the Franks", from Franca (from Frankish *Frank))
aubain (suggested from Frankish *alibanus)
cruet (from Frankish *kruka)
franchise (transitive verb. From Frankish *Frank + Gk. -ize, literally 'to make free')
jangle ("to chatter". from Frank. *jangelon)
ramp (from Frankish *rampon)
toupee (from Frankish *top)
arrange (from a- + Frankish *hring)
scabbard (from Frankish *skar + *berg, literally 'blade protector')
warble (from Frankish *werbilon)
stallion (from Frankish *stal)
hoe (from Frankish *hauwa)
slat (from Frankish *slaitan)

Surprising isn't it? More to come...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

populate- befolk, from the german bevolkern
population- befolking, from the germna bevolkerung

Though i don't quite like befolking for population since it brings about no toshedness (distinction) between the deed of befolking and the rime of folk. How about folkrime for population?

And for the hardcore anglishers out there there's the word theedship from the OE þéodscipe, one of whose meanings was population. You could even take theed, meaning people and insteaden that for folk giving betheed (populate) and theedrime (population).

The acominglinesses are endless really.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

as for the "able'' arveth, OE brooked "ingly" as an afterwordling to mean the same thing. So wishingly (desirable), unawendingly (unchangeable), unbearingly (unbearable). Though it's not a fullcomely toleeser (solution) to the "able" arveth, since we already use ingly in a toshed way. For bisen, "She looked up at the stars wishingly". The clearly does not mean the same thing as She looked up at the stars wishable. In soothlay, the twoth wordstring makes no mindrightness.

"Your child is fullthroughly unbearingly." That's really quite understandingly.

Ya it looks like the afterwordling "ingly" could work. You can usually tell by imblay (from OE ymb meaning around) (context) whether it's being brooked in the first or twoth way.

Hope you understand the bulk of what i just typed, it's all anglish unless i ovelooked something.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Hope you understand the bulk of what i just typed, it's all anglish unless i ovelooked something."
Nope, beyond me. Tele van a hocipom belole!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Re: toll as in death toll. I always assumed this was cognate with "Zahl" meaning number in German. And "tell" like "erzaehlen". Am I just plain wrong or merelyl misguided?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

afterwordling- prefix (pretty opensightly)
brook-From OE meaning to use
arveth- from OE meaning problem, difficulty (akin to german arbeit)
fullcomely- perfect
In soothlay the twoth wordstring makes no mindrightness- In fact, the second sentence makes no sense.
fullthroughly- completely

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

No i dont think tell and toll are bekinned in any way. Toll stems from greek meaning tax or something and tell is germanic.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Etymologies for "tell" and "toll":

1. "Tell" (v.): O.E. tellan (to calculate, to account, to consider, to reckon). From P.Gmc.*taljanan, *talzijanan "to mention in order, enumerate, to count". This verb
has the same P.Germanic base (*talo- 1."number, numerical reckoning" 2."speech, language") as "Tale" (O.E. talu). It is from here that German gets "Zahl, zählen, erzählen", Danish "tal, tale", Dutch "taal, tellen", Norwegian "telle", Icelandic "telja", and so forth.

2. "Toll" (n.)-meaning 'tax, fee' (another root): In addition to the Greek, OE tol, toll, toln (cf. O.Sax tolna) can be from P.Germanic *tullō ("what is counted"). This is the same root as German "Zoll", Dutch "tol", Danish "told", Swedish "tull", Icelandic "tollur", asf.

3. "Toll" (v.)- meaning "to sound with single strokes slowly and regularly repeated, as a bell.": From ME tollen "to draw, lure", which is a 13c. variant of O.E. -tyllan, as in betyllan "to lure, decoy," and fortyllan "draw away, seduce".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Na, toll!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Old English was SLAUGHTERED...it cannot be accurate, for if it were, we'd all be speaking French." I think we mostly do, looking at all the french and latin borrowings in your reply. Of course there is a smattering of little english grammar particles to hold it all together, but the bricks are frenchie.
Of course it is all a little overblown. Such is the travail of the agent provocateur.
"it was, at one time, mandatory that Oxford scholars learn either Latin or French": certainly was when I went to school. How else can one obfuscate an issue?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Thanks! LOL! Although, the etymology of the German word "toll" is different.

Today, as you know, "toll" means "terrific, awesome, cool, smashing, etc". Originally, "toll" meant "crazy, mad, frenzied, bedlam" (cf. OE "dol" and "dold", modernly "dull" and "dolt"). OE "dol" (Mod.E "dull"). OE "dold" (Mod.E "dolt") and Ger. "toll" are all from P.Gmc. *dulaz . The meaning 'crazy' is still carried in German words like "tollwütig (rabid), liebestoll (lovelorn/love-crazy)".

So, what are you saying exactly? ;-)

Anyway, more about "toll".

It seems that, at least the German word "Zoll", while apparently a cognate, stems from from P.Gmc.*talo- (root also of "tale" and "tell") according to Friedrich Kluge (pg. 409, An etymological dictionary of the German language). Kluge also states that Anglo-Saxon "tolna" and OE "toll" derive from *talo-, too. He wrties, "The Ger. words are...so old, and correspond so closely, that they must be regarded as of genuie Teut. origin."

"Zoll" in German usually refers to "customs duty/ tariff" and also refers to "inch" (i.e. 2.54 cm). "Maut" in German is a Bavarian word refers to a 'parking toll' or 'bridge toll', asf (from Gothic mota through OHG muta--Latin derivation cannot be correct because the German term is recorded earlier.).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: true Ængelfolc's answer was highly latinized, though bear in mind it's dealing with thoughtlays not often spoken about in every-day speech. Anyway, if the english had one this is some of what Ængelfolc might have wrote:

"Old English was SLAUGHTERED" is dwimmerfast overdriving! Too much is always made of the "Overswithing". Had Harold Gōdwines sunu not been costening to fight a two-front infall, things would have iwiss been toshed. Anyway, it cannot be soothfast, for if it were, we'd all be speaking French. Why do I write that?
Well, hidge that there was an unbroken, wonely yondstelling of (Old) English from one strind to the next (the ruled folks spoke English, not French), but the new strind also fanged new Norman-French words and speechlings, too. An oft brooked bisen is that the speechling "before-hand" comes from Norman "avaunt-main". It is betwixtbeing to bemark that almost no French loan words are found in English whilen the 11th and 12th hundredyears. Furthermore, late West Saxon and South Saxon were spoken well after the "Overswithing", even though, the written word was mainly Latin or Anglo-French.
Old English, like most Germanic irords, had a very strong mouthly thew which did not stop with the slaying of most of the thanes. As an andwork of soothlay, Anglo-Saxons didn't really begin wonely writing things down until their forwending. Before 597 AD, hardly anything was ever written down. It must also be bemarked that the Norman ruling-class never costened to deedfastly insteaden the English speakle at all.
Now, one could make a great kneeting the Old English writcraft died with Wulfstan of York in 1023 A.D., but iwiss not as an outfollow of the Norman infall. The forshaping form Old English to Middle English is imeanly dated to 1100 A.D. (not 1066 AD), and it was not an outfollow of the Norman Infall. Besides, English was already ikindly wharving out on its own before to the Norman infall due to the instream of Scandinavian (Danish & Norwegian) inflow. The Norman betwixt-meddling onefoldly sped up the happen-forth and took English into a slightly toshed whitherness with edsight to wordstock.


Truthfully, it aches me through to think of what english might be had it bided on as a clean speakle. It hurts every time i have to use a foreign word so i try my best not to without making things too hard for readers to understand. But really i could easily never again use a latin or greek word if of course i were just speaking and writing for myself.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "I think we mostly do, looking at all the french and latin borrowings in your reply."

We "mostly" do not. Your idea that English is now merely a dialect of French/Latin is utterly unfounded. (good job trying to be an 'agent provocateur'! LOL!) Yes, the schools are loaded with borrowed words that are lauded as "intellectual". Yes, the International Community learns pseudo-English. That's why Anglish Moot, and others, do what they do. The amount of French words & influence borrowed into English is, however, way overblown. Leave it to those so-called "educated" to lie (i.e. 'obfuscate') about the truth.

The ways French affected English:

1) Pronunciation
2) Vocabulary
3) Word order of windy, boastful titles like 'Secretary General', 'Attorney General', 'Surgeon General'

Th-th-that's ALL folks!

I loaded up my comment with Latin-French borrowings for the benefit of the reader to ensure complete understanding of my meaning. I don't have to write with the borrowings, if I choose not to. Why? I speak, read, and write English.

"Of course there is a smattering of little english grammar particles to hold it all together, but the bricks are frenchie." Untrue. I would like to know from which well-spring your ideas flow.

"laud", by the way, is from P.Gmc. *leuthan, and is not French or Latin. ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"if the english had won".....yes indeed; but in fact, in reality, they didn't.
The result is that you can write in vaguely Chaucerian English and people will understand you; but if you invent quasi-old-english words, very few indeed will. The choice as to whether you wish to be understood remains of course yours alone. Time and persistence may improve your chances, but considering the eco-threats to the continued existence of our species I do not myself see it as an overwhelming priority, more a bit of harmless fun on a wet arvo. But I wish you well in your endeavour all the same. Suggest you try to avoid speaking Anglish in interviews for the time being though.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Thank you for your comments including all those latinate words; if you do not object I may use it in class- so many "academic" words and such a good topic.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: haha, you are likely right, on a big scale anglish might catch on to a certain degree, but OE words that bear no likeness to any words that we use today stand a much smaller chance of catching on. Unless of course writers and bloggers and academics and such somehow are pulled on by anglish and start using it. Our best hope lies in using already-existing english roots and being creative with them, shaping new words that can be more or less readily understood from their parts.

it sucks though because english has been "stolen" by the world and it's as if native speakers hold no sway over the language anymore, english does not belong to english speakers. ya it would be hard to change the masses, globalisation brings about standardisation, and so we're left with english school children learning their language from dictionaries because of its pathetic foreign vocabulary which makes so many of its words ununderstandable from their parts. Truly we english speakers do not own our language, we do not know it, we just use it blindly, these many-syllabled words for abstract concepts, words that are made up of foreign roots we no nothing of, making these words raw symbols for ideas with no logic to them, no metaphor,no image-evokingness.

Boy, maybe it's hopeless getting the masses to change their english. maybe the place of anglish is tribal, meant for a select few with a heart and mind for saxon-english.

And on a side-note yes we are in all likelihood fucked as far as ecological disaster goes, 98% of old growth forests are gone, more than 90% of large fish in the sea are gone, there's dioxin in every mother's breast-milk we are stripping the earth of all her resources, everyday 200 species go extinct... Though fully unbekinned to our speak-about, I really hate industrial civilisation for what it's doing to the earth and to the human being, dehumanizing and alienating him. Makes me want to leave it all, get a tribe together, and go live in the wild, where of course, we would speak anglish :)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

wlyan138: looking on the briteside, 95% of scientific papers are published in English, not Chinese..... there are many people struggling to learn English just to get a job too.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: You are welcome! Which of my ideas would you like to draw from? It is a good thing to talk about. So many "academic" (Gk.) words shouldn't be needed, but sadly, in school (Gk.) they will be. I am not for making new English words as it were. I am for learning about the rich English that has been hidden and/or lost underneath all of the borrowed words.

As I have written many times, some Latin (L.), Greek (early Germanic borrowing from L. Graeci), Dutch, German (L.), and Scandinavian words belong to English since they were borrowed so long ago, put forth a new idea/thing, or may have filled in a gap (like 'Saturday'). Wanton, worthless borrowing is what I am against.

The first Latin words (and some Latin borrowings from Greek) borrowed into West Germanic started about 100 B.C. (food names, Weekday names are loan rewordings, so 'Saturday' (L.) was borrowed). The second Latin borrowing (starting in about 597 AD, Church Latin) came at the time the Anglo-Saxons became Christians. Words like "oil" (O.E. æle, from L. oleum, from Gk. elaion), "butter" (O.E. butere, from L. butyrum; ultimately from Gk. boutyron), cheese (O.E. cyse, from L. caseus), cup (O.E. cuppe, from L.L. cuppa-borrowed throughout Germanic), and so on, are to my mind, good English.

All in all, the Romans (L.) seem to have set up the framework for a way of living that everyone today, more or less, follows. So, it is likely that a little Latin will be left behind everywhere the Romans were, or a little French from the Normans, and that is all right. This is not the same as needlessly borrowing words into English, with the same meanings and ideas, that it already had/has.

It is the third Latin borrowing (beginning in 1066) and the fourth Latin borrowing (beginning in Middle English about 1450) that I think are uncalled for. Your idea about making new "quasi-old-english words" is true, and well taken. Again, why not learn the about the Germanic words that have been gilded in French, the lost Ænglish (before 1066), as well as the English that has been slowly forgotten thanks to academia (Gk.)?

Hope you had your "brellie" (Aussie slang) to withstand the wet "arvo" (Aussie/New Zealand slang)! By the way, this whole thing was written in Germanic English (with befitting borrowings), unless otherwise marked. This shows that there is no need to make up new "quasi-Old English" words ( I did not make any word up), and the Germanic soul of English itself.

French-gilded Germanic word of the day:

remark (L. 're-' + P.Gmc. *marko, through O.H.G. marchon)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

missed some:

ultimately (L.L. ultimatus + Gmc. -ly)

Christians (from Church L. christianus, from Eccles. Gk. christianos, from Christos + Gmc. -'s)

quasi (from L. quam)

Sorry!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

A few standard words that, in my view, truly belong to English seeing that they were borrowed so long ago (Latin and Germanic folks meeting beginning from 100 B.C.), put forth a new idea/thing, or may have filled in a gap:

1. The sixth day of the Week- Saturday: Germanic folks followed the Roman's framework for setting up the Week. The Germanic folks took out the names of the Roman Gods/ideas, and put in the names of Germanic Gods/ideas. Germanic folks did not have a God for "Saturn", so it was borrowed to fill-in the gap.

* Sunday (Goddess Sunna, sister of Máni, + Day; 'Sun's day')
* Monday (God Máni, brother of Sunna, + Day; 'Moon's day')
* Tuesday (God Tiw/Týr + Day; "Tiw's day.")
* Wednesday (God Woden + Day; 'Woden's Day'
* Thursday (God Thor + Day; 'Thor's Day')
* Friday (Goddess Fríge + Day; 'Feyja's Day')
* Saturday (Roman God Saturn + Day; Saturn's Day)

The Anglo-Saxons had more to do with the Roman's, and that is likely why Saturn was borrowed (cf. Icelandic "laugardagur", Old Norse "Laugardagr"/ sunnunótt, Danish & Bokmål "lørdag", Swedish "lördag", German "Sonnabend"-although "Samstag" (from low Gk. *sambaton", meaning Saturn) is also said).

2. Baptizm (New Holy Idea): Given to Germanic folks by the Christian church. The word is from L. baptizare >> Gk. baptizein >> baptein "to dip, steep, dye, color" >> PIE base *gwabh- "to dip, sink."

3. Church (New Thing): O.E. cirice from W.Germanic *kirika (yet from Gk. kyriake). Germanic folks had few, or likely never had, holy houses of worship the way we have today. This word shows the Greek-to-Germanic headway made by Christian words, by way of the Goths; it was most likely wielded by W.Germanic folks before they became Christians.

4. Kitchen (Food Idea): O.E. cycene, from W.Gmc. *kocina (cf. M.Du. cökene, O.H.G. chuhhina, Ger. Küche, Dan. kjøkken), likely borrowed from V.L. *cocina (L. coquina "kitchen)," from of coquinus "of cooks," from coquus "cook," from coquere "to cook".

5. Priest (New Holy Rank): O.E. preost, shortened from the older Germanic word O.S., O.H.G. prestar, O.Fris. prestere, from V.L. *prester "priest," from L.L. presbyter "presbyter, elder," from Gk. presbyteros.

6. Banana (New Food): This word was borrowed by Spanish or Portuguese from a W. African word, and taken into English.

And, there are so many more! The thing is, not all outside ideas/words are unseemly in English. What else would one call a banana? A "Yellow Bowed Moon Berry"?! How silly.

French-gilded Germanic word of the day:

flank (late O.E. flanc, O.Fr. flanc, from Frankish *hlanca)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

My words with "all those latinate words" written only in English and with borrowings that belong:

"Old English was SLAUGHTERED" is far-fetched Balderdash! Too much is always made of the "take-over". Had Harold Gōdwines sunu not been trying to fight a two-way onslaught, things today would indeed have gone another way. Anyway, it cannot be true, for if it were, we'd all be speaking French. Why do I write that?

Well, keep in mind that there was an unbroken, wonted handing-down of (Old) English from one set of offspring to the next (the bridled folks spoke English, not French), but they also picked up new Norman-French words and ways of speaking, too. An oft made likening is that the look of "before-hand" comes from Norman "avaunt-main". It is striking to see that almost no French loan words are found in English between the years 10 and 11 hundred. Furthermore, late West Saxon and South Saxon were spoken well after the Norman take-over, even though, the written word was mainly Latin or Anglo-French.

Old English, like most Germanic tongues, had a very strong way of teaching folklore/ways through the spoken word, which did not end with the slaying of most of the thanes. In truth, Anglo-Saxons didn't begin steadily writing things down until their switch to Christianity. Before 597 AD, hardly anything was ever written down. It must also be said that the Norman blue-bloods never tried to earnestly crowd out the English tongue at all.

Now, one could make a great to-do about the Old English written works dying with Wulfstan of York in 1023 A.D., but indeed not that it was brought about by the Norman onslaught. The switch from Old English to Middle English is given as 1100 A.D. or thereabouts (not 1066 AD), and it was not an outcome of the Norman take-over. Besides, English was already freely broadening itself on its own before the Norman raids, thanks to the inflow and bearing of Scandinavian (Danish & Norwegian) words. The Norman meddling frankly sped up this happening and took English slightly onto another path with its wordstock.

Old English truthfully underwent the same fate that Latin did: It wholly became something else--Middle English--but, it was still seen as English...not Anglo-French (although, "Anglo-Norman" was put forth to mark itself off from French in France, since Anglo-Norman was quickly being thought of as too hoary and folksy shortly after 1066 AD--maybe owing to English? By the middle of the 1100's, Norman-French had lost its "cleanliness". This is upheld by the many tales of English Knights who sent their kids to France to learn French.), Latin-Saxon, or Frenglish. The truth is that English hung on as the folks-tongue for the whole Norman kingship, and even those in the highest standing, in time, had taken English as a mother-tongue.

Yes, to say the working folks of middle standing were "ashamed" did yield a muddled meaning. The Normans were said to be cold toward English, which is worse. There is no bickering about whether or not English was thought of as uncouth (i.e. boorish) and unworthy of the middle and higher ranks. Ænglisc did fall away as the tongue of the high-born, higher learning, Statecraft, and business (more or less) being taken over by, what else, Norman-French. The church is not to be left out, since only Latin and French were spoken at this time.

When the tokens of truth are thoughtfully looked over, it can be understood that the Norman take-over itself had left little to no mark on the English tongue. The guilt lies with the church and the high-brow thinkers. Now, the University of Paris comes into the frame, which was built in the 1100's. Later on, the "Renaissance Thinkers" shoulder the rest of the guilt. To highlight this even more, it was, at one time, needful that Oxford eggheads learned either Latin or French. Latin was the speech of learning and holiness, and French was the speech of "Well-to-do".

I hope everyone can understand!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Very nice Ængelfolc, you show very well that even today's germanicness in english is enough to get the meaning of more or less everthing across with little if an new anglish words being coined. Though my only trouble with doing away with all those foreign words without coming up with new words in their stead is that what you're left with is an english wordstock that is heftily less than it is with all those foreign words. It is for these grounds that though I am fully at one with wielding germanic english whenever you can, I do very much hold dear the idea of shaping new anglish words to keep up the broadness of the english wordstock even without its foreing words.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: very good and shows just what can be done. There are great linguistic resources within so-called "phrasal verbs" such as "crowed out" as used. My only comment is some words like "unbridled" are now rare outside set collocations - "unbridled enthusiasm" - but good to revive them. We'll award you an 'A' for this piece.
I was hoping you would allow "unruly" instead of "disruptive" as we need a word like this in order to tell students off for bad behavior, and I hate the PC term "inappropriate behavior". Damn must catch a bus now.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thanks for your thoughts wlyan138 and jayles. They are well taken.

@wlyan138: You are right. New words do need to be made for those that are taken out of the word-stock. I think that, at least at first, English speakers should again learn the words they have forgotten, like "wont" and as jayles wrote, "bridled". These words are still in the tongue waiting to be born again. Indeed, I am for speaking, reading, and writing mainly English, but also, some of the borrowed words rightfully belong. And, yes, my writing does show that English is still Germanic!

@jayles: An 'A' is good. As for "disruptive" or "unruly", methinks I know not what you mean by that. Both are Latin words. Although, I like "unruly" ("rule") much better than either "disruptive" or "inappropriate behavior". Here are a few Germanic words that are good to know for bad children:

* bad
* bawdy (French-gilded Germanic word from Frankish 'bald', which is from P.Gmc.
* balthaz, meaning "bold, swift, daring, fearless")
* hardheaded
* headstrong
* heedless
* loath, loathesome
* mean
* naughty
* on-a-tear
* reckless
* rollicking
* rowdy
* stubborn
* unyielding
* wayward
* wild
* willful
And so on, and so forth. There are a lot of words to talk about bad kids!

One would say "wield" in English when one means "rule; to excercise power and influence effectively; to use a tool or weapon with skill and control".

It is indeed old, but it is there. It has the same root as the Germanic name "Walter, Walther": both from P.Gmc. *wal-t- (to rule). "Walther" (walt + hari, heer) truly means "ruler of the army".

Sadly, Replaced O.E. wealdan (wield) was taken out and "L. rule" (from O.Fr. riule, from V.L. *regula, from L. regula) was put in its stead. I would earnestly think about keeping it in English, since it comes from the PIE base *reg- ("to rule, to lead straight, to put right") like the following Germanic words:

* Gothic 'reiks (a leader), raihts (correct)'
* Old English ' right (correct, froward of left), -rice (kingdom), -ric (king, rich, powerful)
* Old High German 'recht' (right, correct, froward of left)
* Old Swedish 'reht' (mod. Swed. "rätt") meaning 'right'
* Old Norse 'rettr' (mod. Norwegian "rett") meaning 'right'

Other sister words that share the same PIE *reg- and meanings are:

1. Latin regere (to rule), rex (king, leader), rectus (right, correct)
2. Gaulish -rix (king)
3. Old Irish ri (king)
4. Gaelic righ (king)
5. Persian rahst (right, correct)
6. Sanskrit raj (king, leader)

Ya, I think "rule" is cool. I'd keep it.

French-gilded Germanic word of the day: see "bawdy" above.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

One more I forgot:

Mod. German 'reich (rich, wealthy, affluent) and 'Reich' (Kingdom, Realm, Empire, regnum-from biology)

Latin Regnum (inheritable power to govern)

There are so many! It is hard to keep track!

BTW: "track" is another French-gilded Germanic word. It is from M.Du. trecken (cf. M.L.G. trecken, O.H.G. trechan).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Fine. The upside to "disruptive" is it describes only the behavior and its consequences and is emotionally neutral, whereas "unruly" and the other anglo-saxon words tend to describe someone's personality or attitude. It is sometimes useful to teach it and discuss some examples like mobile phones ringing and so on. "Unruly" is a bit close to disobedient which is not the focus here; we are trying to focus on not breaking the flow of learning for all students present. In short we criticize the behavior not the student. There are times when a "clinical" "blank" latin word is deliberately useful.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

this is where a good coinage would come in handy. oversetting "disruptive" into a more english "disbreaksome" yields a nice word in my mind (rupt=break, ive=some) Granted, the "dis" is from french. english did have the "to" fore-wordling (prefix), which would give ''tobreaksome'' though using it would hinder understanding, and I don't mind keeping the already widely used and worksome "dis", and if im right the fore-wordling dis was found in gothic. A word like disbreaksome is one of those anglish coinages that id say would be pretty readily understood from its parts, and a clear enough context.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

More French-Gilded Germanic words in English:

1. Choice (from O.Fr. chois (12c., Mod.Fr. choix), from verb choisir "to choose", from Frankish *kiosan, from P.Gmc. base *kaus-; cf. Gothic kausjan "to taste, test"). Related to Eng. "choose", O.E. ceosan, from P.Gmc. *keusanan.

2. Dance (from O.Fr. dancier (12c., Mod.Fr. danser) from Frankish *dansōn)

3. Rob (from O.Fr. rober, "to rob," roub "spoil, plunder", from Frankish *rōbon, from P.Gmc. *raubojanan, from *raub- "to break".

4. Fletcher ("arrow-maker", from O.Fr. flechier, from Frankish *fliugica)

5. Grape (from O.Fr. grape from Frankish *krāppa, from P.Gmc. *krappon "hook". OE equivalent was O.E. winberige "wine berry").

6. Bastard ("illegitimate child", from O.Fr. bastard. From from Franish *bāst- "marriage" (*banstuz (“bond, tie”)) + *-ard "bold, daring, fearless"; pej. ending from Frankish *hardjan)

7. Allot (from O.Fr. aloter (Mod.Fr. allotir) "to divide by lots, to divide into lots", from à "to" + loter "lot". Lot is from P.Gmc. *khlutom. cf. O.E. hlot, O.N. hlutr, Goth. hlauts)

8. Ambush (from O.Fr. embuscher, ""to lay an ambush". From em- + Frankish *busk)

9. Banish (banischen, from banniss-, extended stem of O.Fr. banir, "announce, proclaim; levy; forbid; banish, proclaim an outlaw", from Frankish *bannjan)

0. Braggart (from ON bragr, from ON *braka + *-ard "bold, daring, fearless"; pej. ending from Frankish *hardjan)

1. Cry (from O.Fr. crier, from V.L. *critare, from L. quiritare, ultimately from Frankish *krītan (“to cry, cry out, publish”))

2. Halberd (from M.Fr. hallebarde, from M.H.G. halmbarte "broad-axe with handle," from halm "handle" + barte "hatchet," from P.Gmc. *bardoz "beard.")

3. Dungeon (from O.Fr. donjon, from Frankish *dungjo (“prison, dungeon, underground cellar”), from Proto-Germanic *dungijō, *dungijōn, *dungō (“enclosed space, vault, bower, treasury”)

4. Install ( in- + Frankish *stall (“stall, position, place”), from P.Gmc. *stallaz (“place, position”)). The Latin and Germanic prefix both mean "in, into".

5. Mayhem (from Anglo-Fr. maihem (13c.), from O.Fr. mahaigne "injury", *maidijanan (“to cripple, injure”). Related to the Germanic word "mad".)

6. Race ("people of common descent", from M.Fr. razza "race, breed, lineage", from It. razza, probably from Lombardic *raiza "line of descent". Cf. OHG *reiza "line". For contrast, O.E. þeode meant both "race" and "language;" as a verb, geþeodan, it meant "to unite, to join.")

7. Seize (from O.Fr. seisir "to put in possession of, to take possession of," from L.L. sacire, from Frankish *sakjan "lay claim to", from P.Gmc. *sokjanan or P.Gmc. *satjan)

8. Vermouth (from Fr. vermouth, from Ger. Wermuth, from O.H.G. wermuota)

9. Waste (from Anglo-Fr./ O.N.Fr. waster "to spoil, ruin" and O.Fr. wast, from Frankish *wastjan (“a waste”). Could be that Latin vastō may have merged with Low Frankish *wōstin, *wōstinna (“a waste, wasteland”), from Proto-Germanic *wōstin-)

0. Band ("an organized group" also "a flat strip, something that binds", from M.Fr. bande and O.N.Fr. bende, from O.N. band, from P.Gmc. *bindan) Related to Germanic "bind" and "bend".

Germanic => O.N.Fr./ O.Fr. => Germanic (English)---these words are all Germanic. They are said in English almost the same as their root words, even though the went through O.N.Fr. first. Speak them proudly!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: I get what you're saying. I don't think that Latin words are truly "emotionally neutral", though. I think it comes down to the understanding of the student. What's more, it is that the meaning is shaped by the speaker. Said angrily, "disruptive" might come across as too emotionally charged. How something is said is key here. I guess "disruptive" will always go over better than "troublemaker"at a Parent/Teacher meeting. Why not say to a rowdy student, "you are cutting in to everyone's class-time!" instead of, "you are disrupting my class!". Or, "you are keeping everyone from learning." Using the pronoun "you" is going to make it personal, thereby making it emotional. I really don't see a difference between "he was being disruptive" vs. "his behavior was unsettling". What sense does it make to "criticize the behavior not the student", when the student is the root of the unwelcome behavior? To me, they go hand in hand.

Here are some other words to think about:

* upsetting
* irksome
* trying
* troubling/ troublesome

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@wlyan138:

You are right about Gothic have "dis-" as a word-binder: Ex. distaíran (to tear apart) and dishaban (to seize upon).

I am not so sure that a making a loan word with English words will work well here, even given the Gothic "dis-". The Anglo-Saxon already has a word that would work in the stead of "disruptive" and even for "separate, divide" or "destroyed": sunder, as in, break asunder. "sunder" means 'to break apart or in two : separate by or as if by violence or by intervening time or space ' as a transitive verb, and "to become parted, disunited, or severed" as a intransitive verb.

Ex. "She tore my heart asunder."; "The royal family was sundered by scandal."; "East and West Berlin were sundered by a wall."

Hook on whichever ending you want and there you have it.

* sundersome "I find your behavior sundersome."
* sundering "You have shown nothing but a sundering attitude today."
* sunderful "Your actions are sunderful."
* sundered "You have been sundered from your group."
* sunderish " You have sunderish behavior."

What do you think?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: We are not necessarily dealing with children. English is used in NATO as a command medium, in medicine, in air traffic control, and in diplomacy, and business generally, especially in multinationals. It is also a teaching medium in universties around the world for some subjects - for example in medicine and accounting the textbooks and lectures are often in English, even though the university may be in, say, Saudi Arabia. Imagine, for example, a training session for European businessmen on negotiating in English or handling employee relations in the US. Firstly they are paying customers and we do not want to upset them, even if their mobile phone goes off in mid-session. Secondly, they themselves need to be able to choose and wield English in a way that is not going to inflame a situation. "Disruptive" is a safer bet. Also, as you are aware, it is easy for non-native speakers to unwittingly bring over things from their first language; for instance, in Hungarian, negative questions tend to make things more polite, whereas in English just the opposite applies, unless one is very careful with the intonation, which is often beyond them. Avoiding 'you' where possible is a good move, As you know, it is easy for German speakers to fall into using "You have to" (Sie muessen - polite), whereas it is generally safer to use "We need to...". Similarly having "disruptive" in your bag of tricks may help to smooth things over, as the situation often requires. "I love you very much honey, but your farting is disruptive"

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Yes OE did have toshed, todo, tofare, tolie, sunder and others for seperate. You have todeal which meant divide along with tweem and many others. And don't even get me started on how many words OE had for destroy, they seem endless. OE very often shows itself to not only be just as broad as now-time english in its wordstock, but it often outgoes it, disproving the myth that OE was a far inferior language greatly bettered by its borrowings.

I like the how-abouts that you gave, the root sunder works well for disruptive, though seeing as how sunder also means to seperate it might be called for to use something like disbreaksome. The can-bes are endless though.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: I see. I misunderstood. I thought we were talking only about students. Anyway, English would work great in any of the work settings you wrote about. The working World is full of Latin words owing only to how folks were taught. They are at home with these words, so they are spoken for, and at, work.

Yes, we German speakers do say "Sie" in business or if we don't know someone too well. It is more truthful and open to be that way.

"You must do this now." or "We must do this now." Which is better? Well, that hangs on whether one wants to (obfuscate) the meaning or not. When one's boss (likely from Frankish *botija, but not yet borne out) says, "We", he isn't trying to speak French. He/she means "you" or "us, without me", "all of you". That is never good. Folks understand that they are the ones having to do the work. So, why not say so? English makes it hard to hide the truth. If everyone were more open and frank, more true understanding could take place. The World would be a much better place. You and I acknowledge that any word meaning is heavily marked by how something is said.

One should be able to be open and truthful with one's husband or wife:

"I love you very much honey, but your farting is: unsettling/upsetting/irksome/tiresome/trying/wearisome/wearying/bothersome/maddening/nettlesome/nettling/off-putting/sickening/a turn-off/foul/gruesome/icky/rotten/stinky/awful/bad/grim/wretched/dreadful/godawful/ghastly/raunchy (from Frankish *hring)/boorish/piggish/shameful/dirty/unbecoming" And so on and so forth. There shouldn't be a need for shades of gray here. ;-)

As for business dealings, one should learn the folkways of one's customers. Handle them with kindness, understanding, and in an open, truthful way. There is never a need to put on a "dog and pony show", if one always takes the higher, truthful, path.

Just my 2 cents. Have a good day!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Disrupt has qute a specific meaning, of causing a break in the happening or doing of something. In many cases using upset or unsettle or any of Ængelfolc's other examples wouldn't capture the whole meaning of disrupt. Disrupt kind of has the meaning of habitually interrupting. Any way i'm just saying that try as you might very often there is no clear germanic instead-word for disrupt that has the same subtely it does.

Take the word interrupt, related to disrupt. I would never go up to two people having a speak-about, and say "sorry to upset you," or "sorry to unsettle you'', no I would say "sorry to interrupt", because interrupt has the meaning of causing a break in something that is happening, here the talking of the two people. This is why i feel in these cases, we are forced to be creative, and come up with germanic english insteaders for these words that can be readily uderstood. If I went up to two people talking and said, ''Sorry to break between, but I was just wondering if.." I think that would be very understandable, and captures the meaning of interrupt perfectly. Here, between acts as a pronoun at the end of a seperable prefix verb. Or how about come between for intervene, another straight oversetting from the latin, -- "if this goes on for any longer, the military will have to come between"'-- a bit odd sounding, but very acceptable especially given what I feel is an everything-goes style of speaking among youth especially.

The subtely and specificity of many of our latin words often cannot be captured by our current germanic english wordstock. This often calls for coining new readily understood words, but often just needs a bit of stretching of english words, like break between, or come between, in which case you wouldn't really be coining a new word, just using break and between, or come and between in a slightly odd way.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

So quite clearly Harold Godwin just got his just comeuppance for being less than "Frank"; had he been a little more open, frank and truthful, ..well who knows?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Sorry to break in" is a common enough way of interrupting; in fact break in is in the dictionary as meaning interrupt. You can also use "butt in". We can make nouns like:
"Butting-in will not be tolerated". "Break-in" usually refers to burglary, as in "There was a break-in last night", so "breaking-in" may lead to confusion if the context is not clear.
"Inbutting" as an adjective is unusable at present.
I did teach "disruptive" today and so was able to utter those magic words to a student:
"I love you very much but your behavior is disruptive" and we both laughed.
But of course it is not a cure-all for unruly behavior

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Saying inbutting is unusable is innacurate. It's not so much unusable as it is incommon, but I'll bet you that somewhere in the world some native english speaker spontaneously used inbutting. After all, it does follow one of english's adjective formation rules (think oncoming). With words like inbutting, the usability of them really just hangs on the speaker's willingness to accept new words, and to shape words following english's word formation rules, instead of speaking by an if-it's-not-in-the-dict.-it's-not-a-word philosophy. "Jim, you're always butting in line, you're so inbutting." That to me is a fantastic wordstring.
In what sense then is inbutting not as word if for one it is wholly understandable and for two it follows word formation rules. saying it is unusable is just an example of how we've come to think of our language as being owned and wielded by some outside force ("those who make the dictionary"), instead of laying claim to our langauge and owning it ourselves. I would liken words like inbutting and downgoing and onsitting, and so on, to adjectives made using ''y." Virtually any noun can take a y to become an adj: boxy, computery, grassy, doory: these words are for sure used but of course not all can be put in a dictionary because of the sheer manyness of them. In the same way any sep. verb in the form of verb+prep can be forshaped into prep.verb.ing to make an adj. You will not find these adj in the dict because that would be impractical, and you will not hear these words everyday, because rare are the situations that need them, but they are nonetheless words.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

As for break in, my againstfeel to it lies in it also being used for burglary, which can bring about a twomeaningness (ambiguity). But also, if you're going to get rid of foreign words and then be forced to reuse english words to mean more than one thing, then you're lowering the broadness of the english wordstock. "break in" being used for two concepts is less rich than two disshed (distinct) words being used for two concepts.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

French-gilded Germanic word of the day:

affray(n.) L. ex- "out of" + Frankish *frithu "peace," from P.Gmc. *frithuz "peace, consideration, forbearance".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"So quite clearly Harold Godwin just got his just comeuppance for being less than "Frank"; had he been a little more open, frank and truthful, ..well who knows?" LOL!

It seems Harold II (Godwinesunu) was not truly frank with William of Normandy, but neither was William the Bastard open and truthful with Harold II (Godwinesunu).

It has been brought forth, that in about 1064, Harold II sailed to Normandy. No one knows why. It is thought that Harold II swore some kind of an oath of fealty to William, and had it done, unbeknown to Harold II, over the bones of a saint to bind it.

They were both untruthful, weren't they? I think so.

Also, it goes a little deeper. It is said in Norman folklore that the Normans had been asking Edward for the English crown (upon death), since before the banishing (about 1051) of Godwin. Although, William himself said that Edward I swore (about 1052) to give him the crown. Furthermore, the Witenagemot chose Harold II as king, even though earlier, the the group was not friendly to Godwin and his kinfolk.

I still stand by what I wrote: "...always takes the higher, truthful, path..."

Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

wlyan138 : you are right on the money in saying that disruptive has a very specific meaing of stalling a process or in my example stopping the progress of a lesson. This is indeed the important point. As for "inbutting" I really can't teach words that are not in current use already. And there is a target list of high frequency vocabulary to concentrate on. Also "inbutting" only covers interruptions, whereas "disruptive" covers
ANY behavior that impinges on true participation in the lesson, like quietly texting away in your lap. It is a beautiful catch-all word.
"undermining" is a possibility. "disturbing" might quickly lead to the suggestion that I am disturbed, which has psychiatric connotations. The pity is that Gernman has a nice word "stoeren" which might fit the bill, but I think it is "stir" in English with a different meaning, except in the phrase "he was a stirrer" ie troublemaker.
It is a case, as you rightly acknowledge, where le mot juste happens to be a latinate word.
Ængelfolc: Without in any way trying to undermine your postion, I think we should consider the possiblity that the Normans wrote history to justify the conquest. Harold, had he won, would have put a different spin on the whole thing.
"Honey, my boss has been undermining our marriage"

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Thank you, but what you wrote is well understood, and is a given.The writings from Norway, Denmark, Normandy/France, England, and the Church, at the least, should all be likewise regarded to get somewhere near the truth of what happened. What I wrote is founded on what is known from these writings. They are all we have to go on.

A good book to read about this is: "The Norwegian invasion of England in 1066"
by Kelly DeVries (1999). It stirs up many thoughts and "what-if's" in one's mind, but the book is well grounded by books from all sides. Give it a read, you'll not be sorry.

Stir (O.E. styrian, from P.Gmc. *sturjanan). German 'stören' is from the same root, and can mean a lot of things hinged up what is being said: disturb, interrupt, annoy, bother, perturb, upset, jam a radio signal, commove, asf. It is really a great catch-all word that makes its meaning from what is being talked about.

'Stir' has many great ways it can be put to work:

* (n.) "You caused quite a stir (impression)."
* (tr.v.) "Don't stir up anything with my mother."
* (tr.v.) "That music stirs (rouses) my soul."
* (itr.v.) "...not a creature was stirring (slightly moving)..."
* (itr.v.) "Stir the soup."

'Stir' was also a slang word for "prison", whence "stir-crazy".

Another French gilding of Germanic:

Array (from L. ad- "to" + Frank. *ræd- "ready").

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Other Germanic word that English speakers should not eschew:

* eschew (from Frankish *skiuhan "dread, avoid, shun," from P.Gmc. *skeukhwaz. 'Shy" is from the same root. Borrowed into Italian (schiavare) and Old French (eschiver)
* ease/ easy (O.Fr. aisie, likely from a Germanic or Celtic source. cf. OE ēaþe, *auþijaz (“easy, pleasing”), from *auþiz.) Conflicting forms in Romance point to an external, non-Latin origin.
* Norman (a "Northman", from O.Fr. Normanz, plural of Normand, from O.E. word for "a Norwegian"-Norðman. "Nortmanni" seems to be the source of O.Fr. Normand)
* brioche (N.Fr. broyer, from from W.Gmc. *brekan "to break".)
* carp (from O.Fr. carpe (13c.), from V.L. carpa (c.575), from a Germanic source (cf. M.Du. carpe, Du. karper, O.H.G. karpfo, Ger. Karpfen), possibly Gothic *karpa.)
* trot (from O.Fr. trot (12c.), from Frankish *trotton-variant of 'tread')
* scallop ( from O.Fr. escalope. Latin words with initial sp-, st-, sc- usually acquired an e- when borrowed by Old French; from Frankish, from P.Gmc. *skælo; cf. O.N. skalpr)
* robe (O.Fr. robe "long, loose outer garment", from Frankish *rauba, *rouba "booty, spoils, stolen clothes"; from Proto-Germanic *raubō, *raubaz, *rauban.)
* ribald (from O.Fr. ribaltfrom Old Frankish *rīben , from Proto-Germanic *wrībanan)
* egret (dim. from Low Frankish *haigro (“heron”))
* furbish (from O.Fr. forbiss-, from Frankish *furbjan (“to clean, polish”))
* tarnish (M.Fr. ternir , from Frankish *tarnjan (“to cover up, conceal, hide”))

It would seem that the true bearing of "insular French" is shrinking by the word.

More to come...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Harold's death in 1066 cast a long SHADOW over England. That's why the English always carry UMBRELLAS, "lest we forget." On a wet and crowded street, dodging umbrella spokes, spare a thought for 1066, it was certainly "one in the eye" for Harold.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

one thing for sure should be acknowledged: english's germanic potential is greatly untapped. Midwarm-temperate, forespeak-to predict, belock-to exclude, bewit-to observe, findle-discovery, overtell-to convince, overfight-to defeat, nether-to degrade, numbercraft-mathematics, godlore-theology, forestep-to precede, presence- atbe, athold- to retain, miscare- to neglect, misturn- to pervert, missight-illusion undershove-to suppress, underbear- to support, underwreathe-to support, lifelore-biology.

There are so many potential germanic words that make perfect sense, I am often overgrasped at them not being part of everyday-speech. So much unused potential
I don't see how anyone who underholds foreign words could be against these germanic words, since if anything they would greatly add to the broadness and sundriness of English. So often they make so much more sense than their foreing evenwords (equivalents) that you feel they absolutely should be part of the language

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: How clever! Good show! Too bad we will most likely never know the whole truth of Harold II's death. It is understood that Harold II died at Senlac Hill. Who knows for sure. The "arrow in the eye" seems highly unlikely, though. Take a look at the Bayeux tapestry. The tapestry goes against much of the eye-witness tales of Harold II's death. Very thought-stirring!

Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Check out this good book: King Harold II and the Bayeux Tapestry
by Gale R. Owen-Crocker.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I always thought the Bayeux Tapestry depicted the UEFA cup finals in 1066, with the English football hooligans singing "you'll never walk alone" upon the terraces, and horseback riders trying to control the scimmage. Harold likely just poked himself in the eye with his own umbrella. Final score: Normandy:1, England: nil.
But maybe I'm just dreaming.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@wlyan138: There are already words for many of the things you've mentioned:

Modern English Ænglisc (Old English)
- mathematics * rīmcræft
- illusion * gedwimor (Mod.Eng. "dwimmer")
- to retain * aethabban, forhabban
- discovery * gemetednes
- temperate * gneð(e)n
- to observe (watch) * bewarenian, beweardian
- to exclude (shut out) * atynan
- to predict * foresæcgan, bodian, forwitegian, forecwæðan...

These are just a few of the "word-for-word" examples. Verbs are stickier, since there is not normally a catch-all. Germanic is very specific in its meanings.

Why not use English already in use ('verbal phrases', asf)? Some examples:

to exclude = leave out
to retain = keep, withhold
discovery = unearthing
temperate = mildly warm, Springlike
to observe = watch, see, behold, witness
illusion = seeming, ghost, misbelief, daydream,
to predict = forebode, forecast, foretell, forespeak, soothsay, see coming, asf.

Sadly, English has no modern English word for "mathematics". What a shame. What do you think?

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Silly!

"Scrimmage" is Germanic, by the way. It is misshaped 'skirmish', from Frankish *skirmjan.

I think you got the score wrong, though.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I am fully aware that Old English had words for everything mentioned. It is my thinking that Old English with which i am very familiar, often shows itself to be far richer than modern english.
I am also fully at one with using germanic english already in use whenever mightly. However I also uphold tapping in to the slumberfast germanic potential of english, which to me is twofold: bringing back OE words, especially the ones that can be readily understood more or less, and coming up with new words from english roots.
Forwhy after all, I am all for broadness and sundriness in english-- i would like to see foreign words go, but ideally i would like to see english's wordstock stay just as big which would call for bringing back some or a lot of germanicness into english

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

you seem to know quite a bit of OE yourself. Why not help further the Old English Wordbook on the anglish moot? I've been working on it for quite some time now, and it's looking pretty good.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@wlyan138: Thanks for your feedback. How do I go about helping make the Anglish Moot Old English Wordbook? What kind of help do they need over at Anglish Moot?

I would like nothing more than to bring back some of the Ænglisc words (like woruldwīsdōm (education), uþwitegung (philosophy), rīmcræft (mathematics), bōccræft (literature), tungolcræft (astronomy), asf.), at least, for the English-speaking landfolk (native) in the land (country) itself. For business (which is more and more globalize), we'd still have to know English glob-speak (with all the Latinate, Greek, and other foreign influences). Sad, but true.We'd have to be twīspræcisc (bi-lingual).

English has never lost its "Germanicness", it has only been overgrown with outlandish words and academic swindling. This overgrowth can, however, be trimmed away.

My goal is to have English spoken, at all times, with words already in the wordbook. Those words are being thoughtlessly overlooked only to have an outlandish-word put in its stead.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

http://anglish.wikia.com/wiki/Headside

scroll down to the bottom of the page where all the wordbooks are listed. The Old English wordbook is where OE words that didn't make it into now-time english are "updated" if you will. The idea is that we apply to OE words the sound-changes that english went through to becomes today's english, showing what these words would look like today. The forthstep (process) is not exact but we can have a pretty good idea of what these words would look like for the most part.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Why is an updated OE word more acceptable than a latinate one? Both are the tongue of immigrants, incomers, overcomers, latecomers, settlers from overseas. The true tongue of Britain is of course Celtic, Welsh or Gaelic. Not quite the Urheimat of the Celts, but the birthright tongue of Britain nevertheless, and extant in Britain thousands of years before Anglo Saxon. Welsh is a living language taught at schools, spoken and used in Wales. Gaelic still has about 60000 native speakers. More than Anglish!. Arthur died at Badon hill defending the Celtic heritage. Boudicca fought off the Romans........ and so forth.... the propaganda of "history"

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Dude there are many reasons for anglish, if you haven't understood them by now then whatever speak and write mongrel english. Look as we anglishers have said time and time again, it is most often the case that germanic english, and this also means resurrected OE words, is more in keeping with the core of english, its words are more descriptive because their roots, their morphology is easily recognizable. This adds to to the life of words, it also gives us a functional morphology for god's sake--when we can recognize roots being mixed and put together in different ways, we see where words get their meaning from, the roots come alive and we can then use them (they become funtional) to create even more words. We can't do this with french or latin or greek roots because we dont fucking know what they mean, it's like speaking in code. You see, when words are made up of native germnaic english roots they bring an image to mind, they are not just many-syllabled words that act as raw symbols with no recognizable inner structure. Look it comes down to a matter of aesthetics, in a way there is no logic to the anglish argument-- it's this: I feel that anglish is more beautiful because it is more descriptive and works as a whole, there is a oneness to the language, an integrity because all it's parts are clear to me and I have the ability to use them all, because I know them all. So actually it does go beyond beauty--their is the argument of understandability, and clearness.

Another argument is the beauty of purity. I know it sounds lame and stupid, but really it means something. Why do you think icelanders make sure no foreign words creep into their language--because that would ruin the purity of it, the wholeness of it, it would lose part of itself, its identity would be marred. Language provides identity, an identiy that goes beyond blood, it really is a huge part of it for many people. But if your language is made up of many other languages, what shall your identity be, to whom shall you pledge allegiance-to the english, to the french, the latin, the greek? And the thing with embracing all parts is this- you are forced to divide up your love, so that you experiece only a bit of love for each part. But if you have a pure tongue, then all your love goes to that one and only part of it, it becomes the exlusive receiver of your love. Believe me exclusivity is huge in the human psyche. which is why we form pair-bonds, and are for the most part monogamous.

the thing with mongrel english is that I cannot fully feel the power of it's germanicness, because it is not fully germanic. I can also not fully feel the power of its frenchness, because it is not fully french. And so on and so forth with the latin and greek parts. So i am left with feeling to a limited degree the power of all its parts, instead of feeling the full power of one, pure part.

I mean if we are to have no problem with mongrelness in languages, then why all the fuss about protecting languages against globalization. hell screw protecting them, if english words creep into their languages, all the better, what's so bad about mongrelness right, isn't it diversity? well it's not diversity- mongrelness destroys the uniqueness of the parts which come together to make the mongrel-- 2 or more things being turned into only one thing. This is the deception of this misnamed diversity. In order for linguistic diversity to be kept up, languages must remain pure, not only english, but all languages.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: More (agent provocateuring)?

I think you are right about one thing: The propaganda of "history". You brought up a few: King Arthur (Historical misgivings, not yet borne out), King Arthur at The Battle of Mons Badonicus (unsettled that Arthur was there, but not likely). Both of these are wielded often by Celtic newspeak firebrands, even when the truth is rather clouded and murky.

In Tacitus' Agricola (xv), it is put forth that the Iceni were heartened by the Cherusci's uprising against the Romans in Germany: "Sic Germanias excussisse iugum: et flumine, non Oceano defendi." They thought, "if the Germans can do it, why can't we?" The Germans unwittingly helped the Iceni in a roundabout way. Germanic propaganda? Maybe.

Maybe Boudicca was trying to make up for Antedios (King of the Iceni, 25-47 A.D.) selfishness. Antedios forsook the Iceni time and again for Roman gifts and backing. Antedios chose not to stand against Claudius' takeover in 43 A.D., and did not back the Iceni uprising in 47 A.D. (the year in which he was murdered for his falsehoods). More newspeak?

It does not seem anyone is saying that an "Anglish Wordbook" is, or should be, more welcome than a mixed English one. The froward seems to be true. Those who speak up for England's (or anyone's) Germanic background seem to always be beset with hateful mockery (Old Saxon *mokkian, *mukkian) and scorn (P.Gmc. *skarnjan). At the same time, these same foes of English "Germanic-ness" always try to fasten the lowest kind of shame to the thought of it, as well as, its upholders and friends. It is wrong-headed to eschew the truth of England's Teutonic side, as it is to do the same to England's Celtic side.The truth, as is oft said, is somewhere in-between.

When speaking about "Britain", I take it that you mean Romano-Britain. After all, the Romans stormed into Brittania in 43 A.D., and did not leave until they had to leave (the Roman Empire was crumbling). 43 A.D. is widely thought to be the beginning of British history. Or, are you talking about the folks before the Romans came (Old Stone Age of Britain to 43 A.D.)? The earliest writings about Britain come from the Pytheas in 325 B.C., called the folks he saw 'Prettanoi' (Prettani, whence Brittania).

Stephen Oppenheimer, in his book 'The Origins of the British', puts forth the belief that folks in Britain, before the Germanics came, did not evenly speak Celtic tongues, and that there may have been British folks who spoke Germanic tongues even before the Romans came.

I put forth that speech is the carrier of a folks way of life. You say Celtic is the "birthright tongue of Britain". If this is true, does that not deem that everyone in "Britain" is of a Celtic folkway instead of a Germanic folkway? The truth would look to be something else. Things don't seem to be so straightforward.

What must be rightly asked is what tongue is the birthright of the Germanic English, not the Romano-British folks? That is what has been, and is being talked about here. In rightly the same way that the backers of Celtic (Goidelic and Brythonic) hedge against "linguistic corruption and extinction", so too do the backers of Germanic English have that same right.

I cannot understand why there is, or would be any, strong, angry stand against keeping (or trying to keep) English as Germanic as can be.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

wlyan138: German or Dutch are both much purer than English, and have some good literature etc, Oder hast Du keine Lust dazu? (Or hast thou no Lust thereto?)

Sometimes the virtues of English word roots can be overstated. For example, the meaning of phrasal verbs such as "give up" or "put up with" is not easily deduced from their constituent parts, but rather inferred from the context. Other examples might include "undergo" "forego". Equally even if one understands the Latin roots, the meaning of "succeed" is not easily deduced. It's sometimes the same in German. "Unfall", (unfall) does not obviously mean "accident". So people learn the meaning from context, and the roots may be just a side issue, or even a red herring.

Ængelfolc: Provocateur? Moi? Honi soit qui mal y pense! But such stirring replies!
Seriously though, I deal with people from countries all over the world. The most striking thing is that despite all their differences Europeans have more in common with each other than with, say, Vietnamese, Koreans, Thai, etc. So it doesn't make a lot of sense to say this is Germanic, and that is Greek, when in fact they are both European, and sometimes muddled together. The EU is there for a reason.
Let us take Hungary as an example. Romans, Avars, Arpad and co, Genghis, Schwabisch, Ottomans, Slavs, Soviets, you name it they've been there, and affected the language, and the people. All we can say is they are European and today's Hungarian is European. English is much the same, just a "mongrel' language, but no worse for that. Yes those Latinate words can sound snooty, but we can avoid them in daily speech. I think you already agree with my general drift here. Ciao!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: it was from me learning german that i first got stirred in me the thought of a purer, more germanic english. And i do not pretend that germanic words do not need context for their meanings to be drawn out--all words in the end need context or else no one would ever learn any word and humans would be without langauge. It is of course a matter of degree-- how much context?, is the word just a raw symbol or is it made up of recognizable parts, like unfall, a much more powerful and stirring word than the word accident which again is only a raw symbol for what it tokens. True, context is still needed for children or language learners to learn the meaning of unfall, but at least there is some kind of clue to it, as well as an image-stirring, almost metaphorical suchness(quality) to it, which is fully untheresome (absent) in accident.

And to say well all europeans are alike so that means doing away with language purity is alright is pretty untodowith--we are talking about languages not racial or cultural groups. Different languages of similar cultures are still different languages, and they should stay that way (and therefore stay pure and unmixed) so that language-diversity might be upheld. if all the world were to adopt one culture would it then be okay for all languages to mix, thus hurting language-diversity?

And in any case the cultures of europe do differ enough such that each land-folk has their own selfhood. The germanics are different from the mediteraneans are different from the eastern europeans.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Reckon not much setting needed for anyone to get the word: 'everbear'

Even though it looks like its been around forever, I have never heard or thought of it before...I think (?)

Anyway, don't know if it comes under Anglish but nonetheless it strengthens the Englishness of English.

///11. Special Combinations: ever-bearer, a plant which bears flowers and fruits (sometimes simultaneously) for a long time; hence ever-bearing adj.; ever-being a., that always is; hence everbeingness; everbleving vbl. n. [f. bleve, BELEAVE v.], everlastingness; ever-bloomer = ever-bearer (orig. applied to a rose); hence ever-blooming adj.; everbrown n., a plant always brown (humorously after evergreen)///

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"...it doesn't make a lot of sense to say this is Germanic, and that is Greek, when in fact they are both European, and sometimes muddled together. The EU is there for a reason."

This is away from English, but on what true ground is the E.U. built? Is "sameness" a smart, worthy goal? The E.U. is trying to be a "United States of Europe", but can it ever really be that? Is wresting away folks right to be who they are an upright thing to do? Wherefore came the E.U. into being? Has it rightly grown beyond that? Are the folks really better off? Do the Germans, Danes, Brits, Swiss, Czech, Poles, Dutch, French, asf, need a "parent government"? Read the "Lisbon Treaty", or look it up. If one hasn't read it, it will be an eye-opener. Guaranteed (Frankish *warand)!

Germans and Greeks are folks live on the bit of Earth that is better marked as the Headland of Eurasia. The British Isles are not thought of as Europe (politics aside). Who says, "I'm European." What does that mean other than "I was born and live somewhere on the headland called Europe"? Loosely, Germans, Spaniards, Greeks, Italians, French, asf, have a slender link to each other, but so what of it? All of these folks made their own ways of speaking, doing,and being. Overall, they are NOT the same folks.

This mixed-bag of lands and folks, on the whole, is what is so lovely about the World, whether we talk about today or yesterday. And, yes, they do sometimes mix together, but again, so what? That doesn't make for a "European" way of life, anymore than the U.S. and Canada share a "North American" way of life. It must be said that the U.S. and Canada do have many things that are alike, but there are also those things which make the two truly unalike.

"Sameness", within this framework of understanding, it seems to me, crushes the heart of what it is to truly be a human being. Danke, ich verzichte.

Now back to Ænglisc...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: It is a matter of Weltanschauung*. Students from South America, from Russia east of the Urals I think of as having "European" culture, educational background, and attitudes, when compared to say, Arabic-speakers, or students from SE Asia, where their background, educational experiences, and culture may be quite different. Of coure I am aware that this is an overgeneralisation, but forewarned is forearmed for what problems may crop up in working together.
For instance I once asked a Japanese student how people complained in Japan. "You don't", (And apropos of nothing I once asked a Japanese diplomat why they attacked Pearl Harbor.....I expected "No comment" but....really shouldn't have embarrased him)
As for the EU, well one would hope its raison d'etre would be to foster working together instead of starting great wars.... but it really was just a throwaway remark. (Frankish!)
But your soapbox is nice.
Which brings us to weltanschauung, abseil, angst, anschluss, autobahn, automat, sauerkraut, schadenfreude, schmalz, schmuck, schwa, shyster, spiel, shtum, and so on. These are all listed in English dictionaries. Are we to throw them out because they are foreign? Or accept them as English simply because they are germanic? Be careful with schmuck, it might be slav. The point in my view is whatever, they are European, that's good enough.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Oh and I once vary unwisely asked a guy from the "Middle East" what his wife's name was...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: we should keep foreign words that are one-syllabled, meaning they have no inner framework. However shadenfreude is a word that stands for a pretty abstract thought and so it makes perfect sense to englishen it into the endlessly more understandable hurt-joy, hurt-gladness or something of the kind. It's not so much about germanicness as it is about wholeness and clearness.It would be just as bad for english to be a mongrel of english and german as it is for english to be a mongrel of english and french. Shadenfreude is a terrible english word for the simple reason that it is not english--it is flat-out foreign, made up of two bits which are foreign. God even the spelling gives it away-foreign! WTF shaden is not english neither is freude so why the hell is shadenfreude deemed a word. And weltanshauung? I'm sorry but that has to be one of the stupidest words ever to make it into the wordbook. Clearly worldoutlook is endlessly better because it says what it means. Clearness, understandableness, and wholeness over mongrelness. same goes for abseil (offrope or rope off). I rest my case

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Thank you for shedding light on what you meant. I better understand. Good show acknowledging "remark" as Frankish. I think it belongs to English. It is a Germanic word with a little Latin feel.

Now, I would not call those folks you brought up as having "European culture". Rather, I say they'd have a Western upbringing as set against an Arab or Asian background. There has always been a sharp split between the Eastern and the Western halves of the World. What is "European culture"? No one can say well what that means. Saying "Western culture", however, takes in all of the many folkways on the Eurasian headland, as well as, the lands further West beyond the British Isles (Iceland, Greenland, Canada, and the U.S.). Indeed, South America and it's folkways are something altogether unlike what one thinks of as "Western culture". As I said, it's not so straightforward and open to one's World outlook (as you said).

"Foot in mouth" is all I could think of when I read your brush with the Japanese fellow. You made it out okay, though, right?! You forgot to speak Roman-English, huh? LOL

Your "soapbox" remark (Frankish) seems like back-handed flattery (Frankish *flat). It was not meant to come across as big-headed or in an overbearing kind of way. I am sure that the Salmon feels the flow of the river water is overbearing when it swims upstream, too. It is hard to think politically "upstream". I was only wanting to stir up some thoughts...to have the mind opened. If I have done that for one reader of this blog, I am happy and hopeful.

Your E.U. remark didn't come across as "throwaway". It seemed to be written in such a way as to back your thought ( and oddly, the E.U.'s) about doing away with the "cultural identity" of the folks living in the Eurasian headland.

As for throwing out all of the German words, I say no. As I have written earlier, I am for keeping any and all Germanic words, as well as, some Latin and French (and maybe Greek). I am against over-borrowing and the seemingly willful watering down of Germanic English.

You are right about "schmuck". In German, der Schmuck ('jewelry', 'decoration') and schmuck (adj. 'dapper', 'neat') are likely not where the Eastern Yiddish word "schmok" came from. The Old Polish word "smok" ('dragon') is much more likely given its earliest spelling and Yiddish meaning. Although, weirder things have been shown to be true!

"...whatever..." seems scornful and unacknowledging to me. I do give you, though, that those folks all do live in what is marked as Europe. As for it being "good enough", well, that's for another time...

Thanks for your thoughts, jayles! Machs gut!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Well I must say this column is quite entertaining; I haven't had such linguistic fun since I left skool; thank you. "Soapbox" was in fact forehanded flattery,
'"Foot in mouth": -- not at all : in fact very deliberate training in answering awkward questions diplomatically.
"Western" and "Eastern" and "Middle East" don't make much sense if you live in Hong Kong, as the middle east is in the far west and so forth. They are eurocentric terms.
Not trying "to do away with cultural identity" just wouldn't want the Balkan/ Bosnia/Sarajevo situation to trigger another "Great War" .

So German words are acceptable but 'unakzeptabel" is not, Oder?

Tsch

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@wlyan138:

Die Schadenfreude is not foreign in the same way that Romance, Asian, Arabic, and Greek words are. Yes, the word is from German, but German is kin to English. German and English are "sisters". The both come from Proto-German and are of the West Germanic bough. English truthfully is a blend of many Germanic tongues: Old Saxon, Old Frankish, Old Norse (Danish), Old Dutch, Anglo-Frisian, asf. It is all guess-work, but in all likelihood, nonetheless true. I mean know one knows all of the Germanic folks that sooner or later became the "Anglo-Saxons". Indeed, you know that.

To show kinship:

Schaden (from P.Gmc. *skath-) = Scathe (v.) which in English, came from O.N. skaða. "Scathe" said in German is either 'die Beleidigung' or 'der Schaden'.

Freude (from P.Gmc. *frawa-) = In English "frith" (friþu, friþ) and "frolic" (cf. Ger. fröhlich).

Now, yes, English would need to put English words in the stead of the German ones :

Schaden => scathe, hurt, harm, Freude => mirth, glee, gladness, happiness

So, "scathe-frith" is the English word. Why not just say "sadistic", "gloat(ing), or the English "Roman Holiday"? Friedrich Nietzsche thought up this idea in 1895, and it shortly made it into most tongues. The word is understood by its bits in Germany, but only if it is learned in English. So what? It seems to be a rightful borrowing that was gladly taken into English. For me, it is in the same group of borrowings as 'sushi', 'sauerkraut', 'street', 'pistol', asf. The thought (or folkway) arose outside of English. In this way, to me, it belongs in English.

My 2 Marks. ;-) Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"So German words are acceptable but 'unakzeptabel" is not, Oder?" Nein, auf keinen Fall! http://www.vds-ev.de/

Other better words to say: (nicht oder un) annehmbar or untragbar. German does not need the Latin-French word at all. It is a great show of uncalled for wanton borrowing.

The word "Western" is not always understood to mean direction. The Western World is considered to be lands where Indo-European tongues are spoken and European folkways are mainly undertaken. The West (or Western World) is well-known as the well-spring of technology and modernity. The folks in Hong Kong (and most everywhere else) know and understand this, too.

The break-up of South Slavia was a many sided thing. Government owned a big share of the blame. So, the way I see it, it's not likely that "Big Brother" of any kind, is the answer.

Asking a Japanese diplomat why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor was diplomatic training??

Gruß...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc:
Yes I know german is kin to english, and really we are one on this thought here. The german bits must be set out over into english. If schaden and freude are not found on their own then putting them together makes no sense, so we would have to englishen shadenfreude inot something like scathe-frith. now scathefrith is an awesome word, but more understandable ones to today's speakers would be hurt-gladness, hurt-glee. Scathe is used today as a do-word, so that could work as a thing-word i guess, but frith is not widely known. I am of course all for bringing OE words back, but for a right-now word for shadenfreude, something like hurt-gladness would be better understood. but the choices clearly are broad.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

to be in a state of sheer coldblooded 'scathefrithshire'

scathefrithful happenstance left many a gleen and gladden mind and heart

twas my foes dreadful comeuppance that hast maketh my smile the happiest in the church of scathefrith

or something like: 'badmindedhappiness' or 'spitehappy' (slaphappy)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Guys: surely glee or gloating is good enough in the right context.
Ængelfolc: can't practise sidestepping awkward questions without asking awkward questions,

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: besides featuring in the Milosevich, Karadich, Mladic, UN "safe-haven" saga, Sarajevo was also where the European war of 1914 started. It would be nice to think that the EU would forestall another one.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I think that GLEE and GLOAT(ing) are great.

glee (M.E. glien, gleen, O.E. gléo, glēo and cognate to O.Norse glȳ, gljā, from a P.Gmc. *gliuujan. The word is not found in other Germanic tongues.

gloat (from O.N. glotta. Cf. MHG & German Glotzen)

"Schadenfreude" is a Nietzschean word that was rightly borrowed, since it is a thought that was shaped outside of English. Think about "church", "priest" and so forth. Christian terms (which are mostly, if not all Latin) belong in English don't they?

My 2 Marks...again.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

One more thing:

When a loan-word is borrowed into English, if it can be Anglified word for word, it is:

Will to Power (an Nietzschean word in German is der Wille zur Macht).

World War (from German "Weltkrieg")

Loanword (from German "Lehnwort")

Power Politics (from German "Machtpolitik")

Super Ego (from German "über-Ich")

Rain Forest (from German "Regenwald")

Homesickness (from German "Heimweh")

The list could go on forever. But, it cannot be always done word for word to get the best meaning:

Übermensch (another Nietzschean thought, is fought about in English. Some like "Overman" and some like "Superman". And, there is even "Beyond Human". Funnily, "super" is not even English...it's Latin.)

The thing is, "über" is a word with many meanings which hangs on the framework in which it is said and how it feels and flows when it is uttered.

An extra Mark, sorry....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I meant to write, "Whether a loanword (lehnwort) is Anglified, or not, has to do with how it feels and flows when it is uttered in English."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

You are right--"doing" is a great teacher! LOL

Now about The Great War (and some of its roots):

* The Treaty Alliance System--'War Decl." Au.Hun -> Serbia; Russia -> Au.Hun; Germany -> Russia; France -> Germany; Britain (along with Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, South Africa) -> Germany; U.S. -> Germany; Japan -> Germany; Italy -> Germany & Au.Hun. (government)

* Austro-Hungarians wanted to crush the nationalist movement so that it would gain strong sway over the Balkans, undo Serbia's sovereignty, and to uphold the two-Monarchy rule. (government)

* Black Hand murdered Archduke Franz-Ferdinand (political group interests, maybe government)

* Imperialistic Foreign Policies by all of the great European governments (government)

* Fighting about Land (government)

* Economics (government)

And so forth. It's a lovely thought that you have, but, again, highly unlikely that more centralized, sterile government means more peace, security, and prosperity for all.

Folks need, and have a right to be, and be free.

Good back and forth, jayles! Alles Gute!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

How about a bit of leethsong, here is my poem yeclept:

Horsefeatheriness...


We must fly, a foulfullful doing alights, feathered friends flee, fowlfull skies team, we must. Once at the peck, beck and call of fowl, tree and bush now live underlifed and birdsong no longer full, so we must. With a reck and tell of hundreds and thousands we must be fulfillful of the fowlfull sky above.


loanwayed
foulfullful
fowlfull
underlifed
reck and tell

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

*we must be fulfillful of the fowlfull sky above. Fly!*

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

*we must be fulfillful of the fowl filled sky above. Fly!*

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thought-stirring:

I am reading a good book about loanwords in tongues across the World (written in 2009), and it marks where English is weakest: Social & Political, Law, and Modern World words. Also, 40% of words about sickness/illness and the inner organs are loanwords. The other 60% are Germanic (or 'native').

As for English overall, English is still about 2/3 Germanic (Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, Dutch/Frisian, Frankish, asf.) even with all of the borrowing from French (25%), Latin (8%) and, to my shock, Greek (1.6%). Celtic, of any kind, makes up only .032% of English words.

Germanic far outweighs any other tongue when looking at the first 5000 words (upwards of 54% in any group inbetween). Between 5001 and 6000, though, English (Germanic) only makes up about 34% of those words.

All pronouns, conjunctions, and modal auxiliaries commonly used in English are Germanic.

Food for thought. More later...Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Another striking thing in this book is the list of borrow-rates from highest to lowest.

Tongue with the highest? Selice Romani (with just over 84% coming from Hungarian). The lowest? Mandarin Chinese.

Old High German, to my shock, was the second lowest! Indeed, the only true Celtic loanword in Old High German is Old Irish 'brunna' (armor)-cf. the Germanic name Brunhild(a). Old French gave only one: kussin ("pillow", cf. Ger. Kissen) and Italian, also one: zuckar ("sugar", cf. Ger. Zucker). The rest of the loanwords in Old High German are Latin from the Romans.

English was ranked fifth (when reckoning the Scandinavian (markedly Old Danish), German, Dutch/Frisian, Frankish, Gothic and other Germanic tongues that had bearing on English as loanwords).

Sadly, while the book does talk about the "back borrowing" through Norman-French, the writers seem to not have taken those words out of the French pool. If they would have done so, French (Vulgar-Gaulish-Latin) might only be at about 20%, not 25% of English loanwords.

Also the top five categories for borrowing:

1. Religion/Beliefs
2. Grooming/Fashion
3. House and Home
4. Law
5. Political and Social

One can see why French and Latin are greatly borrowed into every tongue, not just English. Anyway, Ænglisc is still very much a Germanic tongue in all ways, and rightfully so.

Funny enough, English uses loanwords to make Germanic-style compound words like 'television', telephone, motorcycle, asf. Another showing of the Germanicness of English.

The book put forth that speakers of British English are more laid-back about borrowings in English. Why? The writer notes students of British schools are not usually taught the history of English (it's rare he writes), so they take for granted that every word spoken is English. I have written it before: academia is the problem to overcome.

Hopefully, this will give more insight into the Ænglisc debate.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

There was a map prepared for the Treaty of Trianon which showed the distribution of languages in "Greater Hungary" at the time. The remarkable feature was how mixed the distributions was,,, and still is. As one travels in this area, one village is Hungarian, the next Romani, another historically schwab, the next Slovak and so on. E.g Komarno/ Komarom, Acs etc... (Although I understand it was not clever to speak schwab in public under the Russian occupation). Hungarian itself has many borrowings from inter alia slav, and turkic. eg csutortok (thursday) and szerda are slav, vasar is our word bazaar from turkic. The core finno-ulgric words are few indeed. But it doesn't seem to bother them! English has a more open-door attitude to borrowings, particularly from French, although there are a few words from Hungarian like hussar, saber, coach. I like to think "bimbo" is too - it means bud or nipple. ;=))
For me the difficulty with English now is the plethora (Gk) of prefixes.
We have English, Latin and Greek, down, de-, cata-, and so on.
If we attempt to transfer the word transfer to English we get "crossbear" (or a cross bear) or overbearing which already has a meaning, Refer becomes backbear, or bareback or someting confusing. I have no argument with wishing to get rid of many latinate words, the problem is twofold: 1) finding an intelligible substitute and I submit that many "anglishisms" are just not easily understood by hoi polloi (gk), although I like "wordstock" just the vogue word is now lexis. 2) how in reality would one persuade people to make the change and if one succeeded wouldn't that render twentieth century english unintelligable to our greatgreatgrandchildren
Finally of course the answer is for schoolchildren everywhere to go back to learning Greek and latin as they used to in the good old days!
And finally finally what's the difference between a diphthong and a monothong?
The latter is worn by Brazilians girls on the beach.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Cool thing about "coach":

English coach is from M.Fr. coche. The French got it from German kotsche, Kutsche, and the Germans borrowed it from Hungarian kocsi (kosci szekér, "cart from Kocs"). Kocs is a village in Komárom-Esztergom, Hungary, where coaches were first made.

Saber follows the same Magyar-> German -> French path to English. I vote we keep these borrowed words in English. ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Cool thing about "coach":

English coach is from M.Fr. coche. The French got it from German Kotsche, Kutsche, and the Germans borrowed it from Hungarian kocsi (kosci szekér, "cart from Kocs"). Kocs is a village in Komárom-Esztergom, Hungary, where coaches were first made.

Saber follows the same Magyar-> German -> French path to English. I vote we keep these borrowed words in English. ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

One thing to add about Sabre/Saber: In the Magyar Lexicon (1833) the writer seems to think that szabni (to cut) is originally Wallachian.

So, maybe the path, stemming from szabni, is Romanian-> Magyar-> German-> French-> English?

Thoughts about this?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: re szabni (as in szabo a tailor) .. muss aber gestehen dass... actually I know very little Romanian as such, always been more interested in Csango - the kaval, moldvai furulyas, tilinka stb. and the dances themselves, which are markedly different from magyar nepzene.
I myself have long been interested in etymology but found little use for it in real life, even when teaching English. Obviously you too are interested; I have been wondering (as English do) whether this is just a hobby, or there is some "real" or "career-related" purpose in your quest?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: A) When arriving from outer space, the most striking thing about this blue planet is the way in which homo sapiens (?!) has overrun it. As one of the few predators at the top of the pyramid, biologists reckon there should be only half a million of us to keep the prey/predator ratio in balance. With Medaeval agriculture the population of England hovered below the three million mark, unable to produce food for more. Now with oil-based fertilisers etc we support billions. So for me the number one problem is overpopulation. (shades of Lebensraum!) Watch world food prices! etc.
And on a personal level either be rich or live somewhere where there's enough to eat.
Now how does "Anglish" or plain-speaking fit into all this??? Not that relevant IMHO.
B) Sometimes I think we would be better off with NO history and NO etymology. Culturally poorer perhaps, but with no hangover excuses to fight wars and destroy each other. If we didn't know that "offer" came from latin it wouldn't bother us.
Okay enough preaching...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

/All pronouns, conjunctions, and modal auxiliaries commonly used in English are Germanic/


/I have written it before: academia is the problem to overcome/


Indeed. What the heck is a 'pronoun' 'conjunction' and 'modal auxiliary' when they're at home? Do English words exist for these within Anglish academia? I reckon most homeborn English speakers haven't got the foggiest to what they mean. One of the most overriding things to do for Anglish, is to translate these kind of grammar terms.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Pronoun (Latin overbringing from Greek 'antononymia'): L. Pro- (in place of) + L. nomen (name). So, rightfully in English it should be 'steadname' or 'forname'(Cf. Danish 'stedord', Icelandic Fornöfn lit.'for-name').

Conjunction (Latin overbrining from Greek 'syndesmos'): L. com- ('together'; Cf. O.E./German 'ge-') + L. jugare ('to join'). So, in English it could be 'yokeword' or 'bind(ing)word'. Cf. Danish 'bindeord', Nynorsk 'bindeord', Dutch 'voegwoord', German 'Fügewort'.

Auxiliary, verb: Latin augere "to increase", as in 'give help to'. In English we could simply say help verb, but 'verb' is still Latin.

So, given that, we could say 'help-being-word' and 'help-work/do-word'. Another way would be 'help-time-word'. Cf. German 'Hilfszeitwort (Verb is 'Tunwort', 'Tätigkeitswort', 'Tuwort', 'Zeitwort'), Frysk Helptiidwurd, Icelandic Hjálparsögn, Dutch Hulpwerkwoord.

Modal Auxiliary Verb (modal <- L. modus "measure, manner, mode"): Most of the Germanic tongues write 'modal' - Swedish 'modala', German 'modal', Danish mådes/ modal, Dutch 'modaal' but also 'wijs/wijze'. Icelandic and Faroese stand out among the Germanic tongues both with 'háttur'. The 'mode (or grammatical mood) of a verb tells of its relationship to reality and intent. In short, how a verb is to work in a given frame. Maybe English could borrow the Dutch 'wijs/wijze', yielding 'wisehelperworkword'?

Other thoughts?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: Most homeborn English speaker have little need to learn this terminology.
However they are useful when teaching English to other people. Sometimes we can use the term "helping" verb but if teaching romance language speakers "auxiliary" is more intelligible. They are in the end just labels. I teach "nine" modal verbs in English - can, could, shall. should, will, would, may, might, and must. Once students have learnt the label "modal" it is easier to use than enumerating the list every time. So they are just technical terms for a particular purpose. "linking words" is often used instead of conjunctions. However the essence of the problem for students is to distinguish between a conjunction and a "linking" adverb like "however" and which starts a new sentence. Since students have often learnt "conjunction" in their own country and it is used in all the dictionaries, it would be a hard word to change. I don't teach the word pronoun, don't seem to need it

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Aside: the "nine" modal verbs in English - can, could, shall. should, will, would, may, might, and must---are all Germanic!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I'm cathcing up...one at a time! ;-) Okay...

"If we attempt to transfer the word transfer to English we get "crossbear" (or a cross bear) or overbearing which already has a meaning..."

Transfer: L. trāns- (beyond, across, through, cross) + L. ferre (to bear, to carry).

Now, good English speakers will want to take 'cross, across' off the list, even though this word came from Latin-> Old Norse -> Old Irish-> Old English. Maybe we can bring O.E. rōd "cross" back. "Carry" is Latin so that out. There are already many words in English that can mean 'transfer':

* shift (to, over)
* bring (to, over)
* forward (to, over to)
* ferry (over, to)
* hand (to, over)
* haul, lug ( little more folksy)

"Property Transfer" (Latin all the way) = "Shifiting Trust" (Germanic all the way). Indeed, we can always bring some Old English words back into the mix, too, if one likes.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

yes indeed these nine modal verbs are all Germanic. There are other structures that are modal in meaning like "have to" but these modal verbs do not have "s" on the 3rd person singular present. Maybe because originally they were past in form much like must was originally past subjunctive "muesste". Grammar terms like noun, verb, subject object would be really difficult to change given their widespread use, Some bright spark tried to introduce "present progressive" instead of "present continuous" and some textbooks use it to the confusion of student and teacher alike. Changing labels leads to confusion just like wrong labels on your suitcase lose your baggage at the airport.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Trust and transfer have two VERY different meanings when dealing with property. Trustee in hungarian is er, er, er, gondnok I think....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"Gondnok" is executor. "Megbízott" is trustee.

Why liken 'transfer' and 'trust'? Shouldn't you be looking at 'transfer' and 'shifting'? If you think 'trust' means something else, then there are others words in English:

For 'property': holdings, landholdings, land(s) & buildings, asf.

That yields "shifting land ownership", " moving land ownership", "landholdings ownership shift", asf.

"Shifting Land Trust" may still be okay, too, by putting 'land' in there. Englsih can do without 'transfer' and 'property' IMHO.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The only thing hard about switching the 'stæfcræft' names is getting them by all of the naysayers in Academia. Understanding would be much easier! Maybe folks would like and understand 'stæfcræft' a lot better. Ænglisc is well thought out and straightforward.

One can look to sister Germanic tongues for ways in which to make the new 'stæfcræft' words.

Subject ---> German 'Satzgegenstand', Dutch 'Onderwerp'.

Adjective ---> Danish 'Tillægsord', German 'Eigenschaftswort' (also 'Wiewort' for kids), Icelandic 'Lýsingarorð' (lit. description words), Nynorsk 'Eigenskapsord', Frysk Eigenskipswurden.

The German, Icelandic, Frysk, and Nynorsk all have the same basic meaning.

Adverb ---> Danish 'biord', German 'Umstandswort' (Nebenwort), Dutch 'bijwoord'.

I like the German since it is very clear. It literally means "circumstances, situation, happenstance word".

Again, Academia (somewhere) would have to get behind it. Start small...one word at a time.

Das war's für jetzt!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Yes indeed I misunderstood you. Trustee: actually my dictionary suggests ce'lvagyonkezeköje but I've never used it. Megbizhatatlan vagy! is useful when your partner is sleeping around.
Legal terms for property are quite specific in their meaning: real property (estate), chose-in-possession, chose-in-action, goods, chattels etc. Onc should not confuse or muddy the waters here. I think "handover" might be a good starting point for conveyancing.

However "bank transfer" ie internet banking is now a common usage, as is "transferor" transferee". The issue here is the latinate words have acquired specific collocations and usages, which would be hard to mimic.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

You are right..."megbízott vagyonkezelője" is like an appointed trustee ("megbízott" meaning agent)...I think...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Trustee" is a good illustration of how fraught tinkering with language can be.
I refer you to the relevant page in wikipedia which contains beautiful norman expressions such as "cestui qui trust" , and "feoffor to uses".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_(law)
Quite what equals what in hungarian depends on which legal system is under discussion, common law or roman law. But definitely no "one size fits all" solution here.
As to "subject" in its grammatical meaning I was going to suggest "do-er" for subject, "do-ee" for object and "doing-word" for verb, which might be clearer. One of the claims of Anglish is that it would be clearer, and the meaning could be deduced from the constituent parts. If this is NOT the case there is no good reason to change. So for example "underwarp" "undercast" "underthrown" are no more intelligible than "subject" so why changel? However "wordstock" is readily deduced than "vocabulary" or "lexis", so a change has some merit. In short one could never convince "academia" unless there is some definite long-term benefit.
Adjective and adverb are sometimes described as "noun modifier" and "verb modifier" respecitively in textbooks. Not that this helps the studen much!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

'doing word' or doingword has far more gettaness than 'verb' I believe grammar is a field where Anglish can and should eathly set forth it's worthiness.

I don't rightly get the full meaning of 'modifer' but if going on nowaday meaning of the 'were' bit of 'werewolf' would something like 'were-doingword' work for 'verb modifier'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Anything with "-ee" may not fly with "Anglishers", since it is from Anglo-Fr. "-é ". I think it a useful ending, though. Anyway, I understand what you are saying, but I think there are other words that can be used.

Take "trustee". Why not use "steward", "keeper", "caretaker", or even the French-warped "guardian" (Frankish *wardon)? At one time, British and American English used "warder" to mean "trustee". Why not bring it back to life? The word "trust" comes to English from Old Norse "teysta" (from "traust"), so no strife there. Funny thing about "feofee" is that it is still used in Ipswich, Massachusetts! The root is Anglo-French "feoff" which is Old French "fief" (from *Frankish/ Old High German *fehu- ).

In English, there are too many words that can mean the same thing. The word "fiduciary" shows well what I mean. "Give" and "Take" be better law words I think.

"Beneficiary" means 'someone that gains something', so why not 'taker' or 'gainer' ('gain' form Old Norse gagn + Frankish *waidanōnan) or something like that?

Where there is a will, there is a way. (good all English saying)!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Oops...Old Norse "treysta"

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I WAS going to suggest "do-er" "do-ee" but realized that with a passive verb the subject is the "do-ee" so the whole concept falls apart. Forgot to mention that!
"Carry" apparently comes from "car" which comes from a Gaulish word - Welsh "carr". Now here is an opportunity to include our real heritage!. Carry is fully anglicized ie it operates as a phrasal verb and in compounds using English prefixes. So we have "carry out" (an order); a carryout bag; a carryover {from a previous period), carrier bag; carrier etc.
We could then substitute "carry" for "--fer" so transfer becomes carry over, or carry across. etc. Now this may indeed not suit the purists, but it WOULD be more intelligible.
Believe me there is nothing worse (mildly overblown!) than teaching non-native non-romance speakers words like transfer, confer, refer, infer, offer, relate, translate, maintain, retain, maintenance, contain, contents, retention, contention, extension, intent, intension, attention, attend, pretend, sustain, subtend, invert, pervert, revert, convert, extravert, avert, concede, succeed, proceeds, precedent, recede, recession, concession, accession, accede, decide, recipient, participant, perceive, receive, deceive, reception, deception perception, gaudeamus igitur.... endless endless latin
Who killed English?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Teaching a Korean nun: almost my first words were: how much latin do you know? So we moved from "benedictus" to benefit to beneficiary.. Nunc dimittis.....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The 'were-' bit is broadly taken to mean 'man' (cf. Gothic wair, Old High German Wehr, and Old Norse verr). See also W.Gmc. werold (world), literally wer "man" + ald "age".

Other meanings might be ON Varg-/OE/OHG W(e)arg- (outlaw) and 'weri-' (to wear) meaning loosely "man wearing wolf skin". The Normans warped it into 'garulph' nad 'garwaf' which is Fr. garou (cf. Fr. loupgarou, Walloon leuwarou).

* Werawolf (OHG), Wërwolf (MHG), Werwolf (German)
* Vairavulfs (Gothic)


Check out The Werewolf in Lore and Legend by Montague Summers.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Now here is an opportunity to include our real heritage!."

What does the "real heritage" part mean?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: "I don't rightly get the full meaning of 'modifer' ..."

You would have to learn Latin or look up the Wordbook. It comes from L. modus ( + L. facere (Latin modificāre), and it literally means (in English)----> "to make, or set, a boundary, yoke, or bridle (something)".

The Icelandic word is "Einkunn" (determiner (lit. 'rating')), the Dutch "Bepalend woord" (lit. 'determining word'), German "Bestimmungswort" (also 'determining, or defining, word).

So, maybe 'wordmark' or 'name-chooser' or 'name-meaning-mark', or 'meaningmark'/ 'meaningchooser'...any thoughts?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Teaching a Korean nun: almost my first words were: how much latin do you know?"

I think your words frame, and strengthen, the thoughts behind "Anglish"! Why should one have to learn English (or Greek) so that one can speak flawless, smart English?! How daft and crazy is that?!

"Who killed English?" They who think themselves smarter than we (the folks)! What is done must be undone.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I meant..."Why should one have to learn Latin (or Greek)..."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "real heritage" : I was teasingly referring to Celtic... I think we could allow them just one or two words borrowed into English..but let's not argue the birthright issue again, eh.
Now first you tell Stanmund to go learn latin so as to understand modifier and then you ask me why one should have to learn latin to understand english.... but seriously, if one is teaching english for academic purposes (EAP) any romance-speaker or latin-student is automatically about five to ten thousand words ahead of the rest of the world, way faster in reading and comprehension at least. Likewise german-speaking Swiss who have learnt french from an early age.
I have a suggestion for you to promote plain-speaking: would it be possible to go thru Wikipedia and change words like "inception" to "beginning". Just starting simply as the thin end of the wedge??

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Today's horror words that I had to explain off the cuff: "ethnographic" from Gk ethnos "nationality" and graphein "to write or draw". "neolithic" (Gk) new + lithos (stone)
paleo (gk) I guessed as meaning old. I guess students should learn Greek first too!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

I never told Stanmund to learn Latin...I wrote, "You would have to learn Latin..." to truly get the meaning. Also, I was bringing to light that it is beyond hare-brained to have to learn an outside tongue just to understand the mother-tongue of any given land. Yes, the Swiss do study French, English, asf., but not to be able to speak or understand Schwiizertüütsch, or even Hochdeutsch. This, I think, is one of the best "why's" for standing up for true English, and against needless, never-ending borrowing.

It is almost as if you are saying that English is solely at the behest of outsiders, and that their needs are first and foremost....and that is the way it is....How can this be?

If this is so, that is all the wherefore any English speaker needs to get behind Ænglisc.

The Latin-Roman, Gallo-Roman, and the rest of the World can keep on with Global-speak (it's not English), but let the English and those who wish it, to uphold true English. (my soapbox again)

Yes, I am with you about Gaulish/ Celtic words in English. I was dumbfounded to learn that only a few Celtic words live on in English.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Oh dear, I must have baited you again! I am most penitent. (a nun-ish word)
"it is beyond hare-brained to have to learn an outside tongue just to understand the mother-tongue " : well put, and I absolutely agree.
Unfortunately of course, non-native speakers, need to learn "Global-speak" for international business and to study at university, as so many courses even in countries like Saudi Arabia are now run in English with textbooks in English.
If native speakers wished to do international business or academic study, they too would need to understand Global-speak. In this scenario Anglish would just be a hobby language for purists. Surely it would be better at least to attempt some albeit minor clean up of the worst borrowings? Indeed many business contracts now use "seller" instead of "vendor", it is just a matter of starting a fashion and the herd will follow.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Possibly you are not yet fully aware of how global English is. I have seen companies in Eastern Europe where management speak french or dutch among themselves, the working language is English and the workers chat in their local language. Or an american company further east, working language english, people chatting in russian at work and some speaking the local language at home. Companies in English speaking countries, management language Korean, office language, nominally English, but signs in the toilets to "wash your hands" in eight languages. Go to Amsterdam: you won't hear much Dutch around the city centre. Go to London: English is just for business, so many people chatting in god-alone-knows-what. Real native-speakier English, like Danish, is becoming rarer even in its native countries.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ Ængelfolc:

Out of that lot, 'wordmark' or 'meaningmark' seem to come over better. Has they stand now, they look and feel way more wielder friendly than the Latinate. They could sweatlessly slip into informal grammar vocab. The Latinate grammar seems downright incomprehensible mumbojumbo weighed next to them.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

If it still works in meaning, maybe something like 'wordmark' should be reworded to 'markword' so it follows the existing wrought already on show in English, like: catchword, buzzword, foreword, loanword, crossword, headword, keyword, password, byword, cussword, misword, reword, swearword, watchword.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles

Maybe not for you but without shadow, the needless Latinate grammar in English holds back English speakers from learning foreign tungs. It so so dose, from my ken anyway.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles--- Thanks....I understand all too well about 'Global-Speak English' abroad. It is one of the things that has led me to my work on English. Today, Germany is having a fight in keeping "Anglizismen" (Global-Speak English) out, and forbid Deutsch from becoming 'Denglish'. It's right for Germans to watch over their birth-tongue, as it is right in the same way for the English and the Americans. IMHO.

You are right...clean-up and the withdraw of the worst borrowings would be a worthy errand. Let's start today!

Det være en trist dag, hvis det danske sprog forsvandt fra denne verden!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I meant...and forestalling and forbiding Deutsch from becoming 'Denglish'.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Also, I meant...Det ville være en trist dag, hvis det danske sprog forsvandt fra denne verden!

Rusty Danish!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"...Anglish would just be a hobby language for purists." This does not have to come to pass. It doesn't have to be this way, if one takes a stand.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: Frankly the best way to learn a language is go there, live with a family or something (eg girlfriend), get your listening and pronunciation sorted and learn lots of vocabulary. Get whatever work you can to survive, but try to avoid using your own native tongue. I would also by the relevant "teach yourself" book which will explain whatever grammar you need. Japanese, chinese, are really hard as you will battle tonal meanings and the picture-script. But you will learn a lot and it will change your view of the world.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: I notice that Danish uses "will/would" like English instead of "werden/wuerden"
I know that OE still followed German for the passive but what is the story with will/would?
Secondly, how is it that the so-called past participle is active in meaning when combined with the auxiliary "have", and passive in meaning when used as an adjective? And what about intransive verbs like "swollen", "drunken", "grown-up", is there some mish-mash similar to what happened with the 'ing" form?
Thirdly somewhere I read that the continuous form is a Celtic transplant so perhaps there is bit more Celtic in English than a couple of words.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Wow, jayles...going all academic on the Blog!!! I will handle each thing one by one, I am short on time right now.

Old English 'willan', P.Gmc. *wiljanan, *wiljo "want, wish, desire" asf. (cf. Gothic *wiljan, Old Norse vilja, Old Dutch *willen (Mod.Dutch willen)). It is an irregular verb.

ic wille (present)--> cf. Dutch ik will (present); Modern Eng. I will
ic wolde (indicative past)--> cf. Dutch ik wou (indicative); Modern Eng. I would
ic wolde (subjunctive past)--> cf. Dutch ik woude (subjunctive) Modern Eng. I would

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Yagellsmund (sorry Jayles, been hankering to English-up your Frlike moniker)

Yep, go and live amongst the natives would work with most folk, but not the whole:

/relevant "teach yourself" book which will explain whatever grammar you need/

wouldn't help unless folk can be bothered to wade through a: "A-Z of Latinate grammar terms in English"

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: re will/would: thanks, what really interests me is when and how "will/would" replaced the german werden for future and conditionals. Was it Danish influence or just the Normans failed to learn werden?
The other interesting thing about will/would is how on earth did it acquire the frequentative meaning like "used to " as in "As a child I would walk to school every day".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: sorry about the moniker: it was my mother's fault but she's dead now of course.
Teach yourself books are usually quite good at explaining things in simple terms, but you don't have to understand the grammar terminology to speak a language any more than you need it to speak english.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Intransitive verbs are the only English verbs that can use their past participles as adjectives; 'swollen' and 'drunken' are Germanic verb past.parts, like eaten (O.E. geeten) and beaten (O.E. gebēaten), where the original was formed with the "ge-" prefix .

swollen (uninflected adj., past. part of swell) <- from O.E. geswollen <- P.Gmc. *swellanan.

drunken (uninflected adjective), from O.E. druncena -- from O.E. pp. gedruncen. The verb 'drink' is not found in any cognates outside Germanic.

The prefix "ge-" (for strong and irregular verbs) was lost as Middle English came about, being written as "y" or "i": Mod.Eng "enough" -> Mid.Eng. "enogh", "enow", "inou", "inoh", "inough", "ynough", -> O.E. "genog". Compare Goth ganohs, ON gnogr, OSax genoh, genóg, O.Fris. enoch, Ger. genug, Dutch genoeg -> P.Gmc. *ganakh, *ganōgaz < *ga-(ge-) and *nakh, *nōgaz).


New Middle English Verb Form

Grown Up (early 16th c., past. part. 'grown' of 'grow' ,OE pp. gegrōwen, + 'up') This is form comes from the new type of verb form (two-part or separable verbal expression, use of adverbial particles) brought about at the on-set of Middle English . This verb-type replaced the use of Old English prefixes like "ge-".

English uses has or have with a past participle to describe an action that started in the past and is (or may be) still going on.

"I worked here for two years." (implies no longer working, focused on the past action)/ "I have worked here for two years." (implies still working, focuses on "I", the doer, because of have)

"I had this before". (did have)/ "I have had this before." (having it again)

The 'continuous verb form' (or progressive aspect if one likes) is found in many tongues (Dutch, Welsh, Icelandic, etc), and is widely taken as 'locative'. Only about 4% of all American English, and 3% of British English, sentences contain the progressive (continuous) form today.

"He was a-working" was one way to make the "progressive", but has since fallen out of favor for the form "He is working." (i.e. in the process of).

There is a synchronic, but no diachronic, debate about its the form's origin in English. A guy named Lockwood hypothesized that the progressive form in English was a calque from Celtic, but it has yet to been borne out as true.

OE, among all of the other early Germanic tongues, had the most developed progressive system. Old English use '-ende' (today, '-ing') to make the 'progressive', usually in translations from Latin.

I believe, based on what I have read, that O.E. had the progressive form. It was not used as much as it is today. It isn't unlikely, though, that neighboring Celtic languages may have had an influence, but I currently don't think, based on the evidence, that Old English borrowed this verb form from any Celtic tongue. Here is a good paper on the subject: http://icame.uib.no/ij18/elsness.pdf

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: I see. Abridged....

For the record, 'will/would' is Germanic. German 'werden' is the same as English 'worth' (from O.E. weorðan)---"woe worth the man/day"...asf. Both verbs are from P.Gmc. *werþanan (cf. Gothic wairþan, Old Norse verða, Swedish Varda).

The future in Dutch (zullen (shall, should)) "Het zal niet werken"; in Danish (skulle (shall,should, must) "det skal nok gå bra"; Icelandic (skulu) "Þú skalt sjá!". All Germanic languages (including Gothic) make the future tense with auxiliary verbs.

I digress....

Two things happened to influence the popularity of 'werden': 1. Latin was being replaced as the preferred written tongue and 2) German writers wanted to precisely express tense and voice in German. The verb 'wollen' was used a lot for the future action up until about 1700.

The use of 'werden' as THE future auxiliary happened in Middle High German. The construction WERDEN + infinitve happened around 1800. In Old High German, 'werden' was used mainly for the beginning of an action, state, or happening. In Old High German, 'sollen' (shall), 'wollen' (will, want, desire), and 'müssen' (must, need to, have to) WERE used to express happenings in the future.

In modern German (especially in the South), we do like to use the form: "Ich würde lieber warten" (I would rather wait), "Da würde ich nicht drauf wetten" (I wouldn't bet on it). The words 'would' and 'würde' can have the same usage.

You might like reading a more in depth treatment of this subject. I recommend, 'Modals in the Languages of Europe: A Reference Work' by Björn Hansen, Ferdinand de Haan, and "Die werden-Perspektive und die werden-Periphrasen im Deutschen: Historische Entwicklung und Funktionen in der Gegenwartssprache" by Michail L Kotin.

Now, why 'will' in English and not "werden"? It goes back to...tadaaaa! ACADEMIA and the Church. Old English did not have a separate future tense--- present and future were grammatically one. The reason shall and will became auxiliaries to mean the future came about in the fourteenth century as schools were having their students translate the Latin Bible (due to John Wycliffe's sway). Schools to taught students to use 'will' to translate Latin volo, velle; 'shall' has no Latin equivalent, so it was used arbitrarily for the Latin future tense. And, that is the abridged version of why 'will' is used in English instead of 'werden'.

Viel Spaß!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "...will/would is how on earth did it acquire the frequentative meaning like "used to..."

Well, Academia was at it again...messing up the English tongue! The 17th English rules were really (really) bad for 'will' and 'shall', and even worse for 'would' and 'should'. 'Would' and 'Should' are very flexible indeed! There are no hard and fast rules for them.

For the benefit of all: a frequentative word is a word that marks repeated action.

One of the many varied, unregulated uses of 'would' is to mark habitual action. Don't forget "would" can also behave as the past tense of 'will'. The blending of these two ideas allows a sentence like, "As a child I would walk to school every day" to be written and spoken in English.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

More about "progressive form" and Cletic: "...neighboring Celtic languages may have had an influence..."

What I mean here is that the I think it is likely that the frequency of the continuous verb form in English was influenced by neighboring Celtic tongues, not the grammar structure itself.

Ich wollte nur meinen Standpunkt verdeutlichen. Danke!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Is there any toponymist in yous two? what would you guess to the meaning of '-loss' found in English placenames?

Endloss, Hertfordshire

and

Ingloss, Norfolk

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

Sorry to do it this way, but could 'endloss' work as an Anglish word for some Romance rooted one? In what ways could 'endloss' mean anything? Could an 'endloss' be the result of an 'endgame' ?

German 'endlosschleife' is meaning: /infinitive loop/ or /endless loop/
/endless slip/(?)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

what could the root of '-loss' mean? is it a rare spinoff on...

loos
lees
leys
leighs
laws
less(!)
lows

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

'loos' (as in: Waterloo, Flanders nowadays Wallonia):

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Nowadays English = /ing/

Old English = /ende/

so mighten the placename

/Ingloss/

be the modern wroughting of

/Endloss/

?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

The names could be put together with 'end' + 'loss'.

End: O.E. ende (area, end, bordermark, share of a town, the froward side). It lives on in names like "Boyden-End" in Suffolk, England, and "East End of London", "West End of London".

Loss: O.E. los (to die, destruction, to be lost). Modern 'loss' came from 'lost' (O.E. lēosan). This meaning is in today's word forlorn ( O.E. forlēosan).

or

Less: O.E. lǣs, lēas (free from, without, lacking, bare, not lived on; also small, younger). Compare 'lawless', 'bottomless', 'careless', asf.

End and Ing are not alike. Compare 'Ingthorpe' in Rutland (lmaybe 'Ing's Village'). "Ing" likely means Ing ( Yngvi-Freyr) or the Ingaevones (Folks of Ing, Ynglingas).

Ing wæs ærest mid Est-Denum
Gesewen secgum, oþ he siððan est
Ofer wæg gewat; wæn æfter ran;
Þus heardingas þone hæle nemdun.

* from George Hicks, The Old English Rune Poem, 1705 (from an 8/9 c. writing).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

The "loo' in Waterloo is from Middle Dutch lo(o) "forest, thicket, woods, meadow", from Proto-Germanic *lauhō (“meadow”). Cf. O.E lēah (lea, leigh, ley, ly) "forest clearing", Old Saxon lōh "forest, grove", Old High German lōh "covered clearing, low bushes", Old Norse lō "clearing, meadow".

It is not related loss or less. Loos is the plural of loo (Old Dutch *lōs).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Hi Ængelfolc, I might of missed it, but what is the meaning of the -loss in the English placenames of 'Endloss' and 'Ingloss' or are you saying the 'loss' bits could be personal names?

The Wiki page of UK placenames is utterly lacking in a lot of placename bits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_fo...

I knew the 'loo' in Waterloo was Dutch for leigh, ley etc, I wandered if '-loo' was another way for -loss? Funny how "endz" (areas) like Waterloo are somehow officially in Wallonia! Only last summer, I brought some wonderdom and a smile to a sweet Flemish service station worker when I explained to her what I meant by asking 'where the loo (toilet) was'

I hadn't ever picked up that the 'End' in places like West End, Mile End, Crouch End etc, mean 'area' 'share' 'portion' - indeed it fits in to the latest generation of London youth's use of 'endz' when talking of their area/neighbourhood, so 'end' to mean 'area' is attested in use by millions. And come to think of it, isn't American Football's END Zone kinda akin to English Association Football's Penalty AREA. To take a saying from football...end to end (exciting) stuff.

Possible Anglish: endtoendered/endendered = excited, excitable (from end to end and influenced by engendered)?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

It's far fetched, but maybe the loss in Endloss and Ingloss mean 'waste' so Endloss = 'waste area' Ingloss = Inga's waste?

Coastal erosion in Suffolk = shoreloss in Suffolk

Weathering works in describing land loss and weathered/weatherbeaten in describing surfaces but dose it work in describing a eroded metal bits etc?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

I do not think that "Endloss" and "Ingloss" come from personal names. I think it more likely that "Endloss" means something akin to "an area not lived on" or maybe "a destructed area" (maybe the village was found after a war?). If "-less" is meant, then it might mean "land that goes on forever (as far as the eye can see)".

In the same way, "Ingloss" could mean "an area without Ing (either Ing cant reach it, or Ing forsook it), or it might mean "an area laid to waste (destroyed) by Ing).

The full name that was in the link was "Endloss-Ditton". "Ditton" (also Dixton) is the Anglo-Saxon word 'dyketon' (O.E. dīctūn, dike/ditch farm,settlement,village) (settlement on the dike or ditch, ditch/dike settlement), in other words, 'towns enclosed by a dike'. See Fen Ditton (Wetland by the/a Ditch/Dike) and Wood Ditton (Woods by the Ditch/Dike) in Cambridgeshire.

I don't think the meanings are any deeper than this. Do you have any writings about Endloss Ditton, other than the Wikipedia link?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: NEW

The surname seems to be from Ingloss Manor near Loddon. The manor of Abby was held by a family with the surname Inglose/ Ingloss. They were from Loddon Inglose (Ingloss), Norfolk. They were knights.

It seems this surname has been spelled 'de Ingelose' (late 12th c), Ingelose (c.1275), Inggelose (abt. 1346), Ingloss, Inglose, Inglosse, Inglos, even Englisse and Inglish. There was a coat-of-arms which was a silver Blazon, a bend between two cotisses (bendlets), and a sable. Further, it had "Gu. three bars gemmels or, on a canton ar. five billets".

See "Encyclopædia of heraldry: or General armory of England, Scotland, and Ireland"
by John Burke, Sir John Bernard Burke for more info.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Good stuff Ængelfolc.

I'm reckoning even with the Englisse, Inglish spellings of Ingloss and their akinness to surnames like Lawless http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawless and Inglis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inglis, that Ingloss (like Endloss) means 'waste area' rather than 'English'

My WILD hunch, is that Ingloss (Norfolk) came under Danelaw, hence 'ing' for 'end', whilst Endloss (Hertfordshire) didn't, and kept it's English spelling for End. Anyway, you spoke something about the 'ing' in nowadays English being 'ende' in old English. For me -loss indeed seems to go towards 'waste'

It still could be from Ley, Lee(?) Lea, Ley, Leigh when thinking of names like End(s)leigh. To make a clearing (ley/leigh), you need to first lay waste (loss) to an end (area).

'Anglo' (Angloss) maybe Latin scribes where influenced by the idea of the 'English waste' of Briton lands?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

By the way Ængelfolc, got nothing other on Endloss Ditton nor Ingloss, just happened upon them on wiki whilst googling for lost villages/towns in the UK. They stood out amongst the list for me, never happened upon -loss in placenames before.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

"Ing", I do not think, is the same as "end". The earliest writing of the surname "Ingelose" (Inge+lose), (Ingel-ose), or (Ing +gelose) doesn't bear that out at all. Cf. the name Ingelhouse/ Inglehouse which is also from Ing(e)loss. 'oss(e) might've been some mispoken form of house (no 'h'). So, Ingeloss (Ingle's/ Ingel's House).

The Old Norse for 'end' (O.E. ende) is 'endir'. So, the Norse (Danes, Norwegians) and the Anglo-Saxons said the word the same way.

I believe 'Ing' is truly Ing (Yngvi, Ingwine), meaning the Germanic god. Ingui(n)-Frēa is O.E. for Yngvi-Freyr, so the way they would have said Ing is the same, too.

Don't forget the Anglo-Saxon Rune Poems first line:

"Ing wæs ærest mid Est-Denum gesewan secgum..." (loosely-Ing was first among the East Danes seen by (English)men).

Even though, Ing being among the Anglo-Saxon pantheon is still in question, the fact that Norfolk was in the Danelaw allows for the thought of Ing in Ænglisc.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

Another thought......speaking of the Danelaw and Scandinavian sway, maybe the name Ing(e)los(s)(e) is 'ing(e)l + os(s)', where 'Ingel/Ingle/Ingl means "Tribute to Ing" (O.N. Ingialdr) + O.E. os (O.N. áss) meaning 'god, divine, deity'.

So, loosely, "A tribute to the Germanic god Ing".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Intransitive verbs are the only English verbs that can use their past participles as adjectives" ; a bit too all-embracing, I think. "The swept volume", "The preferred choice", "The man chosen for the task"; these are all examples where the "past participle" of transitive verbs are used as adjectives, which are PASSIVE in meaning. The number of intransitive verbs with the pp.used as an adjective is quite small. This is oddity which I was wondering about - the past participle seems to vary in meaning depending on whether used with "have" to from a perfect tense, or used with "be" to form a passive, or as an adjective. Not logical!.
Re will/ would: thanks for the info; modals are quite a difficult area to teach as they have so many diverse, oddball, and overlapping meanings. Romance language speakers are still usually taught at school to use "will" for the future even today. This leads to unidiomatic sentences like "What will you do over Easter?" when they really are asking about your plans. Even when I was at school, we were taught to use shall/should for the first person and will/would for second and third. Quite why escapes me even now. I wish we could go back to the simplicity of will/soll/kann/mag/muss.
BTW the continuous forms ending in "ing" are actually a tribute to a Germanic god.
It is odd how "Academia" is to blame for everything.. or would it more accurately be the church?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

As I wrote before, English language rules are bad! They aren't rules really at all, more like guidelines or suggestions. So, yes, my statement was to all-encompassing, rigid if you will, ...a mistake.

Remember, verbs in English can shift their valency around. Intransitives can gain an object, transitives can drop on object. Then, there are ambitransitives, too! It's all part of the fun!

I just learned to roll with it: have + pp (perfect), be + pp (passive)

Academia strikes again....! The church and academia were in league with each other at one time, so I guess they share the blame equally.

"BTW the continuous forms ending in "ing" are actually a tribute to a Germanic god." LOL....powerful gerunds in English we have!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc

"Ing", I do not think, is the same as "end". The earliest writing of the surname "Ingelose" (Inge+lose), (Ingel-ose), or (Ing +gelose) doesn't bear that out at all. Cf. the name Ingelhouse/ Inglehouse which is also from Ing(e)loss. 'oss(e) might've been some mispoken form of house (no 'h'). So, Ingeloss (Ingle's/ Ingel's House).


Utterly forgot: grass root of any etymology/toponymy - go back and find it's earliest shape. Ingloss(Ingelose) meaning 'Ingle+house' is way more likely to mean 'house' than oss/ose/os etc proposed for some SW French placenames by this website: http://www.vikinginfrance.com/germanic-toponymy...

Makes me wonder why the French weirdly spell their word for Scotland 'Ecosse' Ecosse - Ecotte, osse/otte = house/cottage/cote/hutt? Ger. Schottland Scothuttland? Ingloss: Inglott/Inglot, Ing's lot of land. Ingel's/Englander's lot of land. You never know.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

I am with about "Ingelose/Ingloss (Ing's/ Ingle's House).

Scotland in French (L'Écosse) is a French misshaping of the Latin Scotia. French borrowings normally have an e-vowel before 'sp-, st-, and sc- in order to make it easier to say in French: espier from Frankish *spehon, eschew from Frankish *skiuhan, esquire from VL scutarius, escalade from It, scalata, escalope from ON skalpr, escarpe ultimately from Goth. *skrapa through Italian, asf. In French, final 'a' is many times replaced by a final 'e', too.

In this case, "-osse" doesn't mean 'house".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thanks Ængelfolc, I already knew about the French trend for adding an 'e' before words beginning sp- and other s- beginnings. I was more wondered by the bow (-osse) in Ecosse than the stern, especially with that French websites talking up Aquitaine placenames with -osse/os and other sundries of '-osse' to mean 'house'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

The '-osse' in Écosse is not a breakable end-word. It is from SCOTIA > E (s) co ss(t) e (ia) > Écosse. Cf. Nova Scotia, Canade (said no-veh skoshia/skosia).

As for '-osse' standing for house with a French ‹h› muet, well English 'house' would be pronounced 'ows'; Scandinavian 'hus' would be said 'oos/os'. Most French 'h' words are said this way (as you may know).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: BTW....there is a 'Thierri d'Ingelhuse' listed in old ecclesiastical works.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I understand the spelling of Écosse now. Thanks.

Ingellus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swerting


http://books.google.com/books?id=YmPa1bvfH3kC&a...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

I suggested that in my earlier post: "'Ingel/Ingle/Ingl means "Tribute to Ing" (O.N. Ingialdr)". I used an "i" instead of a "j" for Ingjaldr. So, are you saying that Ingloss means "Ingjaldr's House"?

Do you think (from your link) that Ingloss is the Swabian dialectical of eingelassen (ingloss')?

Ingloss (maybe really Golosa)? See here http://books.google.com/books?id=TP8HAAAAQAAJ&a...

Golosa in Italian means 'greedy', but with little 'g', golosa 'delicious'; in Spanish it means 'a gourmand, glutton, one who over indulges with food", also used to describe someone with a "sweet tooth" (one who like confections, chocolate, sugar). Not sure what it could mean in Anglo-Saxon, if anything.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc

No to both, I think I have gone a bit wild with it all.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Now, back to Ænglisc! Some words that I think should stay in English, even though they come from outside the Germanic tongues:

* Castle: This building was brought to England with the Normans. The English "Burg(h)" was unlike the Castle in form and function.

* Car (maybe from Gaulish karros): It has been in use in the World by all folks since the 5th millenium BC.

* Street (Latin strata): The word originally only meant 'Roman paved roads' in England. They have been a part of England since about 43 AD. The Anglo-Saxons borrowed the word because they had no word for "paved street".

* Lake: Many have tracked this word to L. lacus, but English lake truly comes from OE lacu (P.Gmc *lakō, *lakiz ). A.Gk lákkos and L. lacus share the IE root *lakw- (“lake, pool”) with OE lagu (sea, ocean).

* Coffee (Arabic qahwa): Coffee was drink unknown to Germanic folks until it was brought to Europe from the Ottoman Empire, although coffee has its beginning further East. The first Western European to write about it in 1573 was German physician and botanist Leonhard Rauwolf.

* Sugar (Sanskrit śárkarā): The "sweet salt" was brought to Europe by the Crusaders going back home.

* X-Rays: discovered by Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen (1895). He called them X-Strahlen, but in German they are also called 'Röntgenstrahlen'. It has even become common to say, "Ich bin beim Röntgen." (I'm being x-rayed.).

Who votes for replacing 'juice' (from L. jūs)with the original 'sap' (OE sæp-which is the same as German 'saft')? Or, OE wōs (mod.Eng. 'ooze')?

Who has other words they'd keep? Why?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc: Anglish as i understand it is a language for "purists". This is fundamentally an emotional decision about who you are - or Anglo-Saxon or Norman-french or Celtic descent - what your heritage is....
... more later...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Kitchen, kiln, kitch, -lock (suffix), toll, etc, a lot of the more older and Germanic looking borrowings can stay. Having said that, the shortening 'kitch' can stay but not the misspelled Deutsch looking 'kitsch' Never been keen on 'castle' don't dig the look of 'schloss' either.

Sap should come to overset 'juice' I could see the organic/homemade food makers/sellers marketing their goods as sap over juice. Juice can come with negegative conotations - additives, garishness, cheap and over processed. Juice doesn't come over as homely a word as 'sap' Apple sap gives off a bigger feeling of 'goodness' and natrualness than apple juice.

How oft is it for German words to be wrought from folk's names has in 'Rontgenstrahlen'? Couldn't a whole heap of English Latinate words be ednewly branded after their inventors etc so we end up with more words like 'watt'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Sapen loss from kegs did bleed now only dribbled tears suckle (service) mouths left in thirst.

Bytheway, hate the words 'quay' and 'Port' and 'bay' 'valley' (even though 'vallen' in Scand.) and 'acre' should be spelled 'aker'

Port crops up in too many places needlessly. Port crushes foresight - too many English 'new towns' over the years crafted or overset as 'Newport' and again in the new towns of Southport and the oversetting of Ellenfoot into Maryport. The new town of Newhaven is a thoughtful exception to the above Victorian portist vandalism. And the port in Stockport, Portsmouth and Gosport are not even from port! To many docks regenerated and then renamed quay. Surrey Docks now Surrey Quays.

Note, a lot of head/headlands along England's southern shores have been renamed 'point' Victorians again I think. Sigh.

Hope Anglish moot knock out some kind of map minus the needless latinisms within maps.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles: Anglish as i understand it is a language for "purists". This is fundamentally an emotional decision about who you are - or Anglo-Saxon or Norman-french or Celtic descent - what your heritage is....
... more later...

@jayles

Why do you write "Norman-french" why not just "Norman"?

The Normans spoke French patoise but they were never French back then.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

"Kitsch" is a German word borrowed into English in the mid 1920's, so why should it be Anglified? It is spelled the same even in French and Italian.

"Kitch" was an shortening of kitchen. It won't do. If one were to Anglify it, it would be 'kitsh' to follow the way it is said.

I am with you on 'port'. English has great words to mean port: harbor, haven, wharf, dockyard, boatyard, and others. 'Quay" is one of the few Celtic words in English. Are you sure you would throw it out? "Bay" is from Iberian. There are even less of these words than Celtic. You'd sure make Dr. Oppenheimer and Brian Sykes most sad getting rid of this word! HAHAHA!

Acre must be spelled right. Yes!

What is Old Norse 'vallen'? Valley and related vale are straight-up Latin. The Old Norse word for valley, from what I know, was 'dalr', from the same word as English 'dale' and German 'Tal'. In Swedish 'vallen' is a plural for 'embankment'.

What is wrong with Schloß? It is kin to English slot (to lock with a bolt), and Danish Slot 'castle'. It's a great West Germanic word. The words mean the same thing, but are used differently.

What about fortress?

"Castle" is the name of something not like an English Burg(h). Should we stop using the word sushi, and just call it "Japanese Raw Fish'?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: yes I meant Anglo-normans or whatever you call William's mates and offspring.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

To continue with the issues:
1) Target market: who is Anglish for? Not for the globish, nor for the Welsh, nor for the Scots, nor for the Fitzwilliams, de Mounceys, Maundervilles, Abbots and Sextons and the like. Nor for those with red haired forefathers who descend from Celts. Nor for any of the latest immigrants to England or the USA. No, it is just for the Godwins and those whose ancestry is unsullied with not a drop of non-Germanic blood. Hmm might not be too many of those who are truly English too. Most people would think Anglish is barmy... you have to be a sort of linguistic person to appreciate it. So is it for the common herd??
2) Channel: No point in producing a product if you can't get it to the target market. How is this to be done? Yes it was done with Hebrew in Israel, but that means teaching it in schools, and one would need a hard groundswell of public backing to achieve that.
3) Premise: Anglish is built on the premise that it is easier to understand. It ain't necessarily so. "Forechoose" or "forecarry" is no more intelligible than "prefer" and definitely more unfamiliar. I have just watched a trainee English teacher flounder to explain the word "defeat", (even though "feat" was on the same page!) "Overcome" , although more English, does not make it easier, as the students didn't know that word either.
4) Downside: with English the mongrel as it is, native speakers can easily learn most non slav European languages.
5) Intelligibility: I have alway supposed that the purpose of language is to communicate with someone. Ever time I see Anglishers using brackets and global English to explicate what they mean, it proves that Anglish is partly ununderstandable to the common man. That's just not good enough.
6) Solutions: I am quite happy to use forestall instead of prevent, but flounder to find something for "overgeneralize" - I just got allembracing, (or all encompassing). People really don't have the time to checkout Old English or frankish when they just want to exprime an opinion. However "overgeneralize" has plainly become English with an English prefix, so why trhrow it out because general is latinate? I checked the Moot and all they suggest is some unintelligible OE word that no normal person would ken.
So no point in using that! No we need a set of criteria that would Anglicize English as far as possible without compromising intelligibility, and acceptibility to the world at large. That would mean I think accepting quite a number of Norman words like "point" which are used in phrasal verbs, like point out, outpoint, and have become totally anglicized. On the other hand we would need in schools to encourage the use of forestall instead of prevent. But it would be hard work to change "submit" and "Notify me when new comment is posted" as there is so much french in business speak.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

finally a recent report in England stated that William's mates and offspring were still ten percent better off on average than Saxons.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

And finally finally while we all squabble over the language, the chinese, saudis, japanese, or someone are busy buying up the countryside, and cities, and former Viking settlements like Ingloss.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

The reports meaning is not the same as what you put forth. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1372919...

"Surnames which indicated nobility and wealth in medieval times are still richer even today, research has suggested." This is the whole meaning...not Norman wealth weighed against Saxon wealth.

"...those with 'rich' surnames left estates worth at least 10 per cent above the national average, and also lived three years longer than the average..."

Take heed, it did not say Norman or French surnames. Nor does it say "above folks of Saxon blood". They did give a few Norman surnames (Darcy, Percy, & Baskerville) as examples, but so what?

BASKERVILLE (Norman Boscherville) is a Frankish-Latin mishmash. Fr. boschet (dim. of Bois, Bosc > VL boscus > Frankish *bosk, meaning small bush) + ville (L. villa, meaning settlement, town).

Everything is "suggested", but not borne out, much less the truth. It's rubbish.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"...while we all squabble over the language, the chinese, saudis, japanese, or someone are busy buying up the countryside, and cities, and former Viking settlements..."

I have one thing to write: Der Träger der Kultur sei die Sprache.

Thought stirring reading (link in German only): Das Schrifttum als geistiger Raum der Nation by Hugo von Hofmannsthal

http://www.zeno.org/Literatur/M/Hofmannsthal,+H...

One can learn a great deal about a people from the state of their language. Language is not so trivial a thing at all. If a peoples language becomes extinct, so does their culture, and often, so do they.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: I must be halfway extinct then: at my local shopping mall they still speak english at the bank, postoffice, and one of the three supermarkets. Throughout rest of the mall - and this in a country where the official language is still english - the signs and labels are only in Chinese, korean, maybe japanese, vietnamese. Same if you take a bus, buy real estate, in the local library, the churches. The changeover took less than ten years.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Thanks for correcting the report on weath and names. The following seems odd:
'Such names indicated a descent from Anglo-Saxon nobility, who came to England after the Norman Conquest and are found in the Domesday book of 1086."
Surely the "Anglosaxon nobility" were already in England BEFORE the conquest?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: /Kitsch" is a German word borrowed into English in the mid 1920's, so why should it be Anglified? It is spelled the same even in French and Italian/

/Kitch" was an shortening of kitchen. It won't do. If one were to Anglify it, it would be 'kitsh' to follow the way it is said/


I led myself up the garden path and fluffed up owing to 'kitch' and 'kitsch' being mentioned in the same breath: My bad again: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=kits...

Ængelfolc: /what is Old Norse 'vallen'? Valley and related vale are straight-up Latin. The Old Norse word for valley, from what I know, was 'dalr', from the same word as English 'dale' and German 'Tal'. In Swedish 'vallen' is a plural for 'embankment/


I mistook Nordic 'vallen' placenames to be cognate to 'valley' and 'vale' And that like in the UK, 'vallen' (valley/vale) lives (mostly orally) alongside 'dale' Might of got the wall(s)/walled embankment meaning in 'vallen' if 'vallen' had been spelt '(w)allen' and English 'wall' had kept its meaning of 'embankment' more strongly.


Ængelfolc: /What is wrong with Schloß? It is kin to English slot (to lock with a bolt), and Danish Slot 'castle'. It's a great West Germanic word. The words mean the same thing, but are used differently/


Guess I couldn't ever get my head around the fact that there seemed to be no English kithborne cognate to the German word for castle 'Schloss' but now I have been made aware it's the English word 'slot', I take back my grumblings. Indeed, 'slot' to mean 'castle' as an everyday word in English is not impossible. Consider the tradition in the UK of landed lords building 'follies' mainly suggesting castles and towers in looks, and oft for no other use other than decoration. Why couldn't someone like an artist or the Anglish moot get lottery funding to celebrate St Georges day and get a rich land owner to commission a newbuild castle folly at the bottom of their estate.


In other words:

If I was awash with sterlings (that word can stay) and lots of land (to mark St Edmund, Cuthbert and Aldhelm's day FOR EVERYONE through English history and architecture) I would give backing to a 'follylike' newbuild castle with modernist streaks. The heading of the project would be: 'Standmund's Slot' to mean: (Standmund's Castle). The folly's doors would hint at the Castle's name by being crafted with emphasis on the door's 'slots, bolts and locks' This would give some meaning to folk that 'slot' means 'castle' in the Stanmund Slot name. 'Slot' would hitch onto words like: 'lock up' in meaning a building (prison, garage). I would also build a clump of worker's dwellings which would latter be set into a selfstanding village called: Stanmundslot which the Ordinance Survey would have to mark on their maps. Hopefully the trend spreads and the meaning of 'slot' to mean 'castle' spreads, maybe start a building firm speciallising in building 'Slot follies' up and down the land for the wealthy.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: ""Such names indicated a descent from Anglo-Saxon nobility, who came to England after the Norman Conquest and are found in the Domesday book of 1086."
Surely the "Anglosaxon nobility" were already in England BEFORE the conquest?"

Yes, the first Anglosaxon nobility was in England before 1066. The above is merely saying that the names (Darcy, Percy, Baskerville, and others) came from Normandy. The fact that the writer used "Anglosaxon nobility" is not 100% right, but to me it'll do. Anglo-Norman nobility would have been more right.

Most of the "Anglosaxon" noble class was "Anglo-Norman" by 1086. The truth is borne out in the Domesday Book showing only 8% of English lands were owned by Anglosaxon Thegns with Anglosaxon names. Some of the Thegns may have taken Norman names to fit in. The Domesday book also shows that Duke William owned 20% of English land, the Church owned 25%, and the greatest followers of Duke William (all were not Norman btw) owned almost 50%.

Those that got a "lion's share" (25% of English lands) were: Bishop Odo de Bayeux (he was also the earl of Kent!), Count Robert de Mortain (1/2 brother of Duke WIlliam- they had the same mother), William fitz Osbern (he was over the Flemish division of William's army), Roger of Montgomery, William de Warenne (grandnephew of Gunnor and Duke Richard I or Normandy), Bishop Geoffery de Coutances, and Geoffery de Mandeville.

The Thegns that lived after 1066 had it rough. Most of them fled to Flanders, North to Scotland, or went East to become Varangian bodyguards

So, is it any wonder that folks with an Anglo-Norman name may have had family behaviors passed on to them to help them succeed, even into today? Look at the "wealth families" of the World. They keep their riches by teaching their children the family ways to forever grow and keep that wealth.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Forgot, along with 'lock up' 'bolt hole' also means some kinda 'building' See! 'slot' to mean 'castle' 'fortified place' 'country retreat' is hidden within lots of existing words for buildings already.

jayles there are many ways to target and market to folk out there. Follies are full of mirth and playfulness, why not a rural local council commission some kind of modern water tower or insinarator made to look like a castle, and name it 'Slot Bolt Hole' Why not? there is a 'castle Howard', why not the likes of 'Slot Bolt Hole' or a new incinarator playfully named 'Burnover Slot'. Even the likes of: 'Burnslot Castle' or 'Burnslot Incinerator' would start associating 'slot' with 'castle'

Making council and business buildingstock into landmarks can't do any harm. Maybe English Heritage could help by making a law that any new castlelike folly has to have the word 'slot' in it, to distinguish it from 'traditional' historic castles, so has not to act as competitor nor mislead tourists and piss off existing castle landmarks within the tourist industry.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

*there are many ways to target and market Anglish to folk out there*

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

"Sterling" is most likely from 'steorra' + '-ling > steroling > sterling meaning "small, little star. Some early Norman coins bore a star.

The Old French 'esterlin' is found in a charter of the abbey of Les Préaux (1084-1104 AD). The OFr word is 'esterlin' is from a Germanic source: Initial French 'e'+ste(o)rlin-(g) or maybe from 'Easterlings' (some etymologists do not like this, though, because it does not neatly and comfortable follow English word development). I can't rule it out, however, since the "Easterlings" (from Northern Germany, were the first-ever moneyers in England.

Anyway, it's a West Germanic word....indeed it can stay!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

sandlot
sublot
underplot
wastelot
woodlot
outplot
overplot
dryplot

Along with 'lock up' and 'bolt hole' all these existing words for places also make it a lot eathier for 'slot' (meaning castle) to blend in. Thanks More Words. http://www.morewords.com/ends-with/lot/

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc "Sterling" is most likely from 'steorra' + '-ling > steroling > sterling meaning "small, little star. Some early Norman coins bore a star.

It was good enough already but that makes me feel even better.

Nothing seems wrong, just Interesting that your explanations for the roots of 'sterling' and 'vallen' was made without using obvious contemporary words like '(star)ling' (-ling suffix) nor 'wall' (walled embankment)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: "...just Interesting that your explanations for the roots of 'sterling' and 'vallen' was made without using obvious contemporary words..."

Can you tell me more about what you mean? Why do you find it so striking? It is my belief that the root-word must be shown to see the truth of it.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc

All I mean, is that I was surprised you didn't write something like:

"Sterling" is most likely from 'steorra' + '-ling > steroling > sterling meaning "small, little star (starling)"

Most folk understand the '-ling' suffix to mean little (goose - gosling etc) but then again, the -ling wasn't always a dim. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=ling...


Maybe it was too obvious to mention, but I wondered why with 'vallen' that you wrote 'embankment' without hinting also at vallen's link to 'wall' (in an embankment sense).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

An oversight, that's all. It is rather straightforward, though, isn't it? Well, here you are:

Vall (pl. Vallen) from Germanic *wallaz, from L. uallum (likely borrowed in the late 5th c., along with 'street'). Cf. Old English ƿeall (weall, weal), Old Saxon 'Wal', German 'Wall', Dutch/ Frisian 'Wal'.

See: Walton, Wallsend, Walford, Wallmer (in Kent, means 'sea wall'), Anglo-Saxon Wea(l)lingaford

It is another Latin word I think is okay to stay.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Another root for "Sterling":

A much better etymology (I think) is given by Frank Stenton and Michael Dolley in their book "Anglo Saxon Coins". It answers all of the historical and linguistic questions almost beyond strife.

The new coin minted after 1066 was heavier, of a stable weight, and of better metal quality than other money coins. This would have meant that a new special name was needed, like the unchanging integrity of the 'aureus solidus' minted under Constantine.

The thought put forth follows thusly:

L. solidus translated to Gk. στερεός (stēreos, 'hard,stiff, solid'. Cf. austere) < from Indo-Germanic *st(h)er (stiff, rigid), cf. ME/ Scottish dialect 'steer' (13th c., 'strong, stout'), North English dialect ster, stere, steer (strong, stout), from unattested OE *stēre or *stiēre (strong, rigid, fixed).

So, “stere-peninga” (Anglo-Norman penny, so as to distinguish from the coins in France) > "*ster+(l)ing" > "ster(l)ing".

Compare "farthing" (feorða(n)-peninga > feorðling, feorðung > farthing, meaning "feorða (fourth) 'of a' peninga (penny)").

Sterling is first found in writings around 1078 AD. The words 'esterlin' and 'sterilensis, sterilensium' were brought over into Old French/Normaund and Latin from Ænglisc.

See also: (Sterling) by Philip Grierson, in: DOLLEY, R.H.M. (ed.) Anglo Saxon Coins, Section XV. London, Methuen, 1961; “The Weights and Measures of England” (Science Museum, London, 1987) by Professor R. D. Connor.

Even with this it is still a Germanic-English word.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "I must be halfway extinct then..."

All it takes, is for 'cultural relativism' to take hold, and for the lead culture to breakdown because of severely misguided guilt or some other such nonsense.

Why should it be wrong for all new-comers to be mindful of the culture of any given land? The short answer? It is not and never has been.

Has this happened where you live?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"...whatever you call William's mates and offspring..."

Guillaume le Bâtard and his lieutenants were mainly Normans, Flemish, French, and Bretons.

The offspring of these 'Normans' were Anglo-Normans > their offspring were English.

"Norman-French" is one of the ways to name the tongue they spoke.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Compare "farthing" (feorða(n)-peninga > feorðling, feorðung > farthing, meaning "feorða (fourth) 'of a' peninga (penny)").

So 'farthing' means 'fourth' of a penny, 'firkin' seems to have something to do with 'fourth' too.

Somehow I don't mind 'fourth' but not that keen on the spelling of 'four' wish it was something stronger looking like 'fow' I must have something against any false-cognates with French.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

'Firkin' means "fourth of a barrel of brew" or "half of a kilderkin". (1400-1450 ferdekyn, ferdkyn, firdekyn, also ferthekin). It is from Middle Dutch *vierdekijn" (vierde 'fouth' + -kijn dim. suffix, meaning "little fourth". A 'kilderkin' (O.Dutch 'kindeken' or 'kinneken', 1570. kylderkin, which is about 81.83 L) was an old English unit of volume equal to half a barrel or two firkins of ale or beer.

"Four" (foh-ur) was 'fēower' in Old English. Cf. Old Frisian fiūwer, Old Norse fjōrir.THe word four is fine. Just say it like an Icelander "foh-ūrr" by deepening the 'u' and rolling the 'r' really hard. Better?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I have to build up some tolerance and stop bullying good English words. Four is back in the good book.

Instead of 'fir sapling' or even 'firling, 'firkin' could (if it wanted to) mean 'a young fir tree' The -kin dim. in names like Wilkinson, Atkinson, Hopkinson, Hodgkinson, Wilkins, is meant to have been gotten from England's nearest continental neighbours the Flemish, so what nowadays English words bare the -kin suffix from old English like 'kilderkin' rather than Dutch. Whatever happened to English's own -kins?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Wilkins, Wilkinson (Anglo-Norman meaning "Son of the Child of William", from the Normanized Germanic personal name William + kin (dim suffix meaning 'child, small, offspring', + son "son of")

Atkinson (Anglo-Scots, from Atkin, Aitken (Scot), Aiken (N.Ireland var. of Aitken) meaning 'little Adam, 'Child of Adam' + son)

Hopkinson (English-Norman from Hobb, Hobbs, Hobbes (pet form of Germanic personal name Robert) + kin (dim. suffix) + son)

Hodge, Hodges, Hodgkin, Hodgkins, Hodgkinson (Anglo-Norman, from Hodge (either from Germanic personal name Roger or the nickname Hocg, Hogge 'hog' +kin +son)

No Dutch here....just Anglo-Norman Germanic names.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

That's what I think too Ængelfolc but look...!

-kin diminutive suffix, first attested mid-13c. in proper names adopted from Flanders and Holland, probably from M.Du. -kin, properly a double-diminutive, from -k + -in. Equivalent to Ger. -chen. Also borrowed in O.Fr. as -quin, where it usually has a bad sense.

This suffix, which is almost barren in French, has been more largely developed in the Picard patois, which uses it for new forms, such as verquin, a shabby little glass (verre); painequin, a bad little loaf (pain); Pierrequin poor little Pierre, &c. ["An Etymological Dictionary of the French Language," transl. G.W. Kitchin, Oxford, 1878]

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Has this happened where you live?" Immigration issues and cultural swamping are simply side-effects of underlying overpopulation; but yes the current "politically correct" climate does not help. One moment it's Gastarbeiter and then it's muliticulturalism, and we find out, as per Angela Merkel, that it does not work for us. Arthur, Harold Godwin, both had a different approach to immigration!
One has to look the brite side though, at least my bank offers the choice of Cantonese or English when I telephone them. I choose English, of course.
But as time passes it all seems trivial....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: one approach to Anglish would be to look at the non-Germanic words by frequency. For example "information" and "government" are in the top 3000 words in English. Are we going to change or accept them? (and inform, govern, governor information technology IT information gap, governor-general and so forth - it's not just the word it's the collocations too)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

One must not get obsessed by immigration issues, for we all came "out of Africa", except of course those 'Nieanderthaler' living near junction 29 on the 'A' drei.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

oops junction 19

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The diminutive suffix -kin, of Teutonic origin, is found early in German and Dutch, but there is no trace of it in Old English.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

The ending -kin does not make any of those you mentioned a "Dutch" name. That is like saying the -(s)son ending makes them Scandinavian. English names are a mish-mash, too, of many bits. If the names formed in England, or the name shape developed in England, then they are English.

"...first attested mid-13c. in proper names adopted from Flanders and Holland..." names the time and lands from which the ending comes from. It does not mean that all names with "-kin" are Dutch, Flemish, or Frisian.

If you find it out of bounds, use the Old English dim. endings -oc, -uc or Old Saxon -ik in its stead.

So, Wilkinson -> Willikson, Willocson; Atkinson -> Atikson; Hodgkinson -> Hodgucson; Hopkinson -> Hopocson.

The endings are still found in 'bullock' (OE bulluc, 'young bull'), 'hillock' (hilloc, small hill), bollocks (OE beallucs), buttock (OE buttuc), and so on and so forth.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I have always liked the -kin suffix. They have always been inbounds. I understand them better now.

Not so much -y (as in bothy, but along with -ling, -ock is another dim. ending I like. Always wondered how to Anglish 'Kitchenette' - 'kitchenkin' seems to work better than 'kitchenock' or 'kitch' (think titch) - indeed maybe 'titch' could be worked as a dim. suffix too: 'a titchmarsh' 'a titchwain' 'a cottitch'!

Look here: The Diary Of C. Jeames De La Pluche With His Letters
By William Makepeace Thackeray _ the word 'cottitch' is used instead of 'cottage' Seems 'cottage' may been English from head to toe: 'cot+titch' cot(tage) = cot(titch)

http://books.google.com/books?id=QbXVW9gX3HoC&a...

I know (cott)age and (ham)let are Ger origin but still like better something like 'cottock' for 'small village' or 'cottage'

-ock dim. ending looks like it works best on words twinned with 'll' and 'tt' - maybe 'ilock' for (islet/isle/small island) and 'billock for (small headland)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Well I would love to make Anglish work, and there are good substitutes for some common words like "person"; however there are also some common words such as "use" for which there is no ready allpurpose substitute. I don't believe that remanufacturing words for OE such as "benote" will do; it just makes the whole thing unintelligible to the average reader. Equally, subbstituting "wield", for me at least automatically brings to mind a picture of some Scots chief wielding a claymore, so "you need to wield a screwdriver" suggests impalement to me; it is a matter of connotations. Secondly it is not always possible to remanufacture all the derived words - so user, useful, useless, useable, use (noun) might come out as "wielder", "wieldful", "wieldless" "wieldable" - which are largely unintelligible to someone on the Clapham omnibus. "Workable" is not an exact substitute for useable either. So it's no USE trying to substitute everything.
On the other hand, there are many low frequency words that could just be dumped: this from Wikikpedia:
As with Latinate/Germanic doublets from the Norman period, the use of Latinate words in the sciences gives us pairs with a native Germanic noun and a Latinate adjective:

* animals: ant/formic, bee/apian, bird/avian, crow/corvine, cod/gadoid, carp/cyprine, fish/piscine, gull/larine, wasp/vespine, butterfly/papilionaceous, worm/vermian, spider/arachnid, snake/anguine, tortoise (or turtle)/testudinal, cat/feline, rabbit/cunicular, hare/leporine, dog/canine, deer/cervine, reindeer/rangiferine, fox/vulpine, wolf/lupine, goat/caprine, sheep/ovine, swan/cygnean, duck/anatine, starling/sturnine, goose/anserine, ostrich/struthious, horse/equine, chicken/gallinaceous, cattle/bovine, pig/porcine, whale/cetacean, kangaroo/macropine, ape/simian, bear/ursine, man/human or hominid (gender specific: man/masculine, woman/feminine).
* physiology: head/capital, ear/aural, tooth/dental, tongue/lingual, lips/labial, neck/cervical, finger/digital, hand/manual, arm/brachial, foot/pedal, sole of the foot/plantar, leg/crural, eye/ocular or visual, mouth/oral, chest/pectoral, nipple/papillary, brain/cerebral, mind/mental, nail/ungual, hair/pilar, heart/cardial, lung/pulmonary, bone/osteotic, liver/hepatic, kidney/renal, blood/sanguine.
* astronomy: moon/lunar, sun/solar, earth/terrestrial, star/stellar.
* sociology: son or daughter/filial, mother/maternal, father/paternal, brother/fraternal, sister/sororal, wife/uxorial, uncle/avuncular.
* other: book/literary, edge/marginal, fire/igneous, water/aquatic, wind/vental, ice/glacial, boat/naval, house/domestic, door/portal, town/urban, light/optical, sight/visual, tree/arboreal, marsh/paludal, sword/gladiate, king/regal, fighter/military, bell/tintinnabulary.

Note that this is a common linguistic phenomenon, called a stratum in linguistics – one sees analogous phenomena in Japanese (borrowing from Chinese for scientific vocabulary, and now English), and in Hindi/Urdu (Sanskrit, with many Persian borrowings), among many others.

So we need some pragmatic solutions IMHO.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Here is a list of latinate words included in the top 250 oftenest words in English:
person
use
place
states
general
part
during
govern
course
fact
system
form
program
present
government
possible
group
order
face
interest
case
problem
national
social
president
power
country

It would be really important either to find acceptable-to-everyone insteadwords
or faute de mieux just keep them on .

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

So let us take an example: "place" eg your place or mine?
Just looking in a thesaurus for words in lieu we have: (as verbs)
put.........norse
rest...........rester in french
lay ..............Ger liegen
leave ..........?? strong verb so Germanic
positon........french
consign...........french consignee
identify.............french
file .....................ah! don't think thats english
locate............latin locus
arrange .............frankish via french
categorise ................not germanic
rank.....................Rang in german?
Now what you're asking everyone to do is choose a Germanic substitute. But how is the layman or woman supposed to know which is which? (No-one is going to spend all day looking them up). People would HAVE to have an automatic Anglish checker like a spellchecker.
I've given you my guesses off the top of my head; have I got them all right? Is anyone but a fanatic going to know the difference? One would need simpler guidelines like no words with latin prefixes or suffixes. C'est tout!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"file" is of course "NO-NO" french when it pertains to a filing system in an office; but "YES-OK" Germanic when one is filing one's toenails.
Straightforward enough!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"So let us take an example: "place" eg your place or mine?"

place (space): abode, dwelling, home (stead), house, flat (O.E. flet)

place (rank): standing

place (job): work(stead)

LEAVE is Germanic.

place (locate): allot (Frankish), store, set, stow, put, park, lodge (Frankish *laubja).

place (order): rank, reckon, group

place (identify): finger, peg, name


People already know these words, They have to choose them over the Latin-French.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

As I wrote earlier, 'group' is not a Latinate word. It is Germanic from P.Gmc. *kruppaz.

FYK (For Your Knowledge)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: your putforwards are better than mine. But how are people supposed to know which are germanic and which are latin? Obvious to you and and everyone in the Sprachschuetzpolizei but not to your average Joe.
Sorry I forgot what you said about group, but that illustrates the problem. On the other hand I seem to have car keys but no car. Anfang Alzheimers?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: you should be proud of me: I have actually used "wordstock" instead of "vocabulary" in a report to my boss: we shall see if it is understood or not.
However, it is so automatic to use Latinate words: for example:
"NB Continuous and final assessment criteria need clarifying and finalizing"
becomes:
'Ongoing and endtesting standards need to be made clear and ??????"
Can you suggest something (better)??

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Or better
"Ongoing and end rating benchmarks need to be made clear and wrapped up." >??

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Ich bin Stolz drauf! You are right about folks choosing Latin words without having to think about them. It is how most of us were taught. Think back to when you were learning these "higher" words...you already spoke English and were taught to say this <Latinate> instead of this <English>. In short, when we want to speak a cleaner English, we are trying to undo our educational brainwashing.

The English words that you wrote in stead of the Latinate ones are good choices. Thoughts like "final assessment" are somewhat new, so it is tougher to find other English words to mean the same thing.

"Ongoing and end-rating benchmarks need to be...

...spelled out better and settled upon."
...more straightforward and buttoned up."
...worked out and pulled together."
...straightened out and acknowledged."
...ironed out and set forth."
...better broken down and standardized."
...more thoroughly understood and set up."
...made more understandable and steadfast."
...able to be better understood and set in stone."
...sharpened up and given standing."

I hope this helps you. More later...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "...I have been wondering (as English do) whether this is just a hobby, or there is some "real" or "career-related" purpose in your quest?"

Germanic tongues are more than a hobby for me. I am, as of now, an amateur etymologist and Germanic philologist. I am also looking into writing a book or two with very narrow focii with a few Germanic tongues.

Germanic Studies is my thing.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Drawn to a wonderful wall poster of UK sea fish in a chip shop the other day. Poster had all the kinds of fish bearing both their English names and other translations underneath. I was rushing (so might of missed some) but remember:

Icelandic
Faeroese(!)
Norwegian
Danish
German
Dutch
French
Portuguese
Spanish
Italian

Clocked most (if not all) of the English names when lacking a cognate with either the Dutch or German would instead match the Scandinavian ones. Clocked that a fair few fish bore sundry namesakes in English - should be some good English replacements for the likes of /sole/ and /plaice/ etc amongst the regional sundriness of names for fish in the UK. Most keening, was lots of the German translations for the fish ended in '-butt' Got me thinking about the '-but' in 'Halibut' seems that '-but' in English meant any kind of 'flatfish' back then, and still dose in German. Unlike the English, the Germans have (when ever needed) gone out their way to keep their language ordered and German. All flatfish in German seem to have a '-butt' ending. Indeed it would be better if all the names of flatfish in English followed 'Halibut' and ended in the '-but' ending too. Can't hurt to make use of an ending that hints at the ilk of fish. Halibut is already an everyday name, if all the flatfish names followed the O.E. '-but' ending wouldn't it be more scientific and ordered? Anyway, should be loads of other names knocking about to replace: Sole, Plaice, Dab, Turbot(?) Even the Keltic and Norse ones in all likelihood have English namesakes out there. Why not something like: Halibut, Flukebut (Fluke), Flounderbut (Flounder), Brillthbut (Brill), Scaldbut (Scaldfish), Knotbut (Topknot) Might sound dodgy at first, but a lot of fish have more than one name, and Halibut is a household name unlike the others, so sticking on '-but' shouldn't rock the boat that much and should be welcomed by science, fisheries and food sellers. Any replacement for Plaice, Sole and Dab should at least bear a '-but' ending.


Halibut - /large flatfish, early 15c., perhaps from hali "holy" (see holy) + butte "flatfish;" supposedly so called from its being eaten on holy days (cf. cognate Du. heilbot, Low Ger. heilbutt, Swed. helgeflundra, Dan. helleflynder). The second element is a general Germanic name applied to various kinds of flat fishes; cf. O.Swed. but "flatfish," M.E. butt (c.1300), perhaps ultimately from PIE *bhauh- "to strike/

Turbot - either Scand. by way of O.Fr. or from L. turbo

Flounder - either a misshaping of O.F /founder/ or Du. /flodderen/ 'to flop about'

Plaice - /from O.Fr. plaise, from L.L. platessa, perhaps related to Gk. platys “broad,” or from the root of plat- “flat.”/

Sole - /'flatfish' from O.Fr. sole, from L. solea "a kind of flatfish,"/

Fluke - /'flatfish' O.E. floc "flatfish," related to O.N. floke "flatfish," flak "disk, floe" (see flake). The parasite worm (1660s) so called from resemblance of shape/

Dab - /etymology of the name dab is unclear, but the modern English use seems to originate from the Middle English dabbe.[3] It is first recorded in the late 16th century/[

Brill - (believed from Cornish: /brythel/ note Welsh: /brith/)

Topknot - never heard of it before. Name itself seems a bit on the newen side to my earholes.

Scaldfish - name believed to be from looking like it has been dipped in scalding water

Witch - (also Whiff, Megrim) http://www.wordswarm.net/dictionary/megrim.html ?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

that should be...

*Turbot - either Scand. or from L. turbo by way of O.Fr.*

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

There are a few etymologists and dictionary that put forth that "turbot" might be from the Latin "turbō" trying to link the shape (a Rhombus) of the fish to the Latin. One has to only look at the root of the word Halibut (Dutch Heilbot) to see this is highly unlikely. Also, most of the sea words in Normaund come from the Scandinavian tongues.

"Turbot" is most likely two words (Germanic compound): tur (thorn (törn) + bot (butt "flat fish"))

German: Steinbutt
Dutch: Tarbot
Swedish: Stenbotta, Butta, Botta (but also Piggvar)

I have learned to ALWAYS question boldly when words are said to be from Latin-French roots. Many times I have been shocked by what I found out by digging past the veneer (from W.Gmc. *frumjan. See?).

Those who unthinkingly aside any meanings in favor of the Latin or French are stand out (usually egg-headed academics of Academia) and are untrustworthy.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I meant, "Those who unthinkingly set aside any meanings in favor of the Latin or French stand out (usually egg-headed academics of Academia) and are untrustworthy.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

BTW, most "academics" are Francophiles and Latinophiles.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ Stanmund:

Flounder (the flat fish) is is from Normaund 'flondre', which itself is from O.N. flythra.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"BTW, most "academics" are Francophiles and Latinophiles."
Is that what it takes to get a Latino woman?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Pretty much....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

A whole writeup of someone thoughts on the etymology of Turbot...

http://www.staff.hum.ku.dk/mjd/etcib/turbot.html

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

1) 'The holy trinity' -> 'the holy threesome' ???? (but it sounds like a romp)
2) Usage of "of"; as I understand it this was used to translate the french "de" in both its partitive and possessive meanings by academics and church people from the middle english world. However it really is a non-germanic usage, and doubles the grammar,...
for instance: the sister of the duchess of York - > the Yorkduchess's sister.
(and what about duchess?)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Wlyan138, if you are as wordful in Anglish as you seem and if you wish to further its note/brook(-ness) and help it gain exposure (outsetness?) to the (Englishspeaking) world, I suggest (and would like for you to) overbring/translate Wikipedia writ/article into Anglish.

If you want to start with topics closely akin to English, Anglish, or Anglo-Saxon like yore/history/yore and speechcraft/linguistics, ok. But I suggest overbringing/translating writs about nowa/modern day things. Instead of overbringing the Wiki writ on the Norman Infall into Anglish, what about World War I and II instead? Overbring or write writs about nowa happenings (current events) and put them on Wikipedia. I would love to read about the "War on Terror" and other nowa happenigs in Anglish

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

1) This is an example of a word that should stay because the meaning is tied to Christianity. The idea developed from the church, and was brought to folks of all stripes. Although, if one really wants to Teutonicize it, The Holy Three-in-One, The Holy Threefold, Godhead...

2) Yes, 'of' is French 'du', Polish '-ski', German 'von' (from 'x' land, kingdom, house), 'zu' (names the land which is ruled over by that noble), or sometimes 'von und zu' (from and ruler of...), Dutch 'van', asf. How is it "non-Germanic usage"?

3) Duchess, Duke, Count, Viceroy, Vassal, Serfs and the like were all outside English at one time. The Normans brought these ranks along with the idea of the Feudalism (from Gothic *faihu) to England. It was the way that the Franks had put their society together. It was a medieval pyramid scheme: only one guy wins.

Earl/Jarl, Baron, Baronet, Knight, King, Queen, Marquis, Margrave, all have Germanic roots.

Instead of:

Duke---> English could use Herzog (Old English Heretoga 'army leader'. Cf. Old Frisian hertoga leader of an army, duke; Old Saxon heritogo, Old High German herizoho, herizogo, Old Norse hertogi)

Count---> Earl/Jarl

And so forth.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Wlyan138:

One of the Anglo-Saxon ways to speak about 'terror' was with the O.E. word 'folcegesa': "something that causes fear among the folks".

O.E. folc "people" + O.E. eġesa "to terrorize, to greatly frighten (from O.E. eġesian "to terrify").

O.E. eġe is Mod.E. awe (with some bearing on O.E. eġe from ON agi "fear" as seen in the Mid.Eng aghe).

So it would be >> Folkawe = "to terrify, terrorize people". Maybe, Folkfear? Folkslaughter? Call it what it is....today 'terror' is less about fear and more about death.

Just trying to help....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The Trinity as spoken about in Old English

"Fæder and sunu and frofre gæst"..."in þrīnesse þrymme wealdeð". (note the single form of 'wealdan' is used)

Trinity in Old English is written in many ways, such as...

...þrīnesse (ðrynesse , ðrīnesse); OHG thrinissi, ON threneng
...þrȳnes (þrīnes)
...ānnesse, ānnes (OHG einissi, ON eineng, Ger. einig)


"...ne synd þæt þreo godas þriwa genemned, ac is an god, se ðe ealle hafað, þa þry naman þinga gerynum..."

"...þonne seo þrȳnes þrymsittende in ānnesse..." (727 AD)

So, threeness, thriceness in today's English, maybe?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: "...should be loads of other names knocking about to replace: Sole, Plaice..."

Plaice >> O.E. fage, facg

Sole >> O.E. floc

Salmon >> O.E. læx (lox)

Sparus Aurata (Gilt-headed Bream) >> O.E. ðunorbodu

Gudgeon (Gobio) >> O.E. blæge

Dolphin >> O.E. mereswin

Moray Eel >> O.E. merenæddra

Mullet >> O.E. heardra

Sturgeon >> O.E. styria

They are out there...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I forgot...

...Trout >> O.E. sceóta
...Pike >> O.E. hacod (lit. "hooked fish")

...Mussel >> O.E. musla (OE musla (also the sense of 'little mouse') is not from the Latin musculus, but is an original Germanic word. Both the L. and the Gmc are from PIE *muHs-)

...Torniculus (type of sea snail) >> O.E. pinewincla (fused in modern English with 'periwinkle', but is not from Latin. It is an original Germanic word.)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Often it is said that Ænglisc lacks richness of wordstock, that without Latin and French words, Ænglisc speakers did not have words for lofty thoughts and ideas. Well, the more I learn, the more I see that this is wrong! Take a look...

Treatise >> O.E. Lǣdenbōc

Reptiles >> O.E. Nǣdercynn

Mutability >> O.E. Āwendedlicnes

to be Proud/ Arrogant >> O.E. Āhlǣnan

Despondency >> O.E. Mōdsēoc

Agriculture >> O.E. Eorþtilung

Proclamation >> O.E. Frēabodian

I think Ænglisc is more truthful. Look at how the Anglosaxons spoke of taxes >> O.E. heregild ("army money"). The name showed what the money was for!

I have said it before, Ænglisc never needed words to be brought over from other tongues. Latin-French words are a ghostly yoke on Ænglisc. The mark of the Norman Overlords and academic snobbery.

What more does one need to be moved to speak true English? More later...

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Three-In-One" was the brand name of an lubricatigt oil in my youth. I used it on my bike. It is the connotations which give us cause for mirth.

Re "of": I wasn't very clear: I was thinking of phrases such as "the book of John", "a book of poetry" , "trousers of leather", where "of" is used to introduce a descriptive phrase, french styl, instead of something more Lederhosen-ish.

Finally, more travail, seeking to explicate the word "introduce" to a student, I flipped back to the beginning of the unit, only to find some smart bloke had used "lead-in" instead; and "foreword" at the beginning of the book. Now while it's nice to be anglish-minded, "introduce" and "introduction" are both in the top one thousand words of modern english and people ned to understand them. But so the evil contagion of Anglish smote......

Finally finally, I do struggle a bit with OE, never having learnt it and all,
лушче по-русский

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"three-in-one" see my other writings on the Trinity.

The way "of" works in your examples is perfectly good Germanic stæfcræft (grammar). Just as an Englishman can also say "leather trousers", nowadays a Dutchman can say "broeken van leer", but "lederhose" when talking about the German kind. A Swede could say "läderbyxor" or "byxor av läder"; A Norwegian "lærbukser" or "bukse av lær"...and so on.

It is understood that Globalish has to be taught when one is a teacher. One has to show what "introduce" means. I get it. It's a job. It doesn't make it easier to take.

Glad to know that someone wrote the English words for "introduction" in the book! LOL!

Sorry, I do not read Cyrillic, but there are many good books on Old English. Old English is not really needed to speak true English. All one needs is a thesaurus and an English etymological dictionary.

Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Old English is not really needed to speak true English." Oh thank goodness!!
I have always found modern languages more useful, unless of course one wishes to be a priest, although once or twice I have taught latin roots for academic words, only to be met with glazed-over cold-cod eyes from the students. Retirement beckons....

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Too cheeky...you always are writing that Anglish cannot be understood by the masses. I was only putting forth that there are words today that can be said instead of the Latinate ones. And, the best way to find out which ones those are is to look them up with a thesaurus and an English etymological dictionary. Most folks wouldn't take (or have) the time, but this a way true English can be brought back.

As for modern languages being more useful, I think they are no more useful that the older ones, like Old English. Learning Latin and Old English will help in broadening anyone's understanding of what we know today as English. Its not needful to learn the old to speak good and true English. That's all I was saying.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

In case one was wondering what the words in today's English literally look like:

Treatise >> O.E. Lǣdenbōc >> "Latin book"

Reptiles >> O.E. Nǣdercynn >> "Netherkin"

Mutability >> O.E. Āwendedlicnes >> "Shiftable likeness"

to be Proud/ Arrogant >> O.E. Āhlǣnan >> "to own + to lend"

Despondency >> O.E. Mōdsēoc >> "Mood sick"

Agriculture >> O.E. Eorþtilung >> "Earth tilling"

Proclamation >> O.E. Frēabodian >> "Leader announcement"

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Some Folk Names in Old English:

Norþmandisc >> Norman

Normandig >> Normandy

Norþscottas >> Scots

Norþwēalcynn >> Bretons, Welsh

Norþlēode, Anglþēod >> Anglii

Eotalware >> Italians

Lǣdenware, Rōmw(e)alhe, Rōmāne, Rōmware >> Romans

Langaland, Denemearc >> Denmark

Frankland, Francrīce >> France

Francan >> French folks

Eotenas >> Jutes

Swēoþēod >> Swedish folks

Swēoland, Swēorīce >> Sweden

þā Deniscan >> the Danes

Dene >> Danes

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Instead of:

Duke---> English could use Herzog (Old English Heretoga 'army leader'. Cf. Old Frisian hertoga leader of an army, duke; Old Saxon heritogo, Old High German herizoho, herizogo, Old Norse hertogi)

Count---> Earl/Jarl

And so forth"

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


Herzog/Heretoga/Hertugi = 'Hertug' in Danish, so maybe 'Here(s)tug' in nowadays English.

(Here)ford, tug, 'tugger' 'tug of war' 'tug of here' 'war tug' 'war cog' 'heretug' 'herestug' (?)

'drag queen' drag king' ''drag here' 'heredrag' 'Hardraw Force/Foss, Yorkshire' (?)

'kill tug' i.e 'killing machine' (?) etymology of name 'kellogg' rather than 'kill hog' (?)

p.s:

guessing German 'Herr' is from Herzog

how about 'tugger' making a good shortened name for 'heretug'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Furthermore what about 'sprog' in 'army sprog' -- 'here sprog' ?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund:

"Herzog" has Here, heer "army" in it. "Herr" nor "Here,Heer" is not from "Herzog".

Herr << OHG herro << P.Gmc. *harjaz >> Gothic harjis, Danish hær, German heer, O.E. here (also fyrd), Old Saxon heri.

English 'harry' (to ravage) is from OE hergian (to destroy, lay waste to) with bearing from Norse herja (OE herg- + ON herja).

Herr "gentleman, sir, superior, master, lord" is from P.Gmc. *hairaz "old, venerable" >> ON hárr "gray", herra "to knight", OE hār, OHG hēr, Old Saxon hērro, Gothic hais.

"how about 'tugger' making a good shortened name for 'heretug'" I do not think so.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: "Furthermore what about 'sprog' in 'army sprog' -- 'here sprog' ?"

Look up the way in which this word is meant in Australian slang. I hardly think it a good fit for your meaning.

Why try to make a new word when 'heretoga' already is an English word? The words 'here' (army), 'herebert' (skillful army general), 'hereberga' (army barracks), 'heregyld, heregeld,heregeold' (military tribute), herewǣpen (war weapon), herewic (military encampment) asf, are all Anglosaxon (English) words that sadly were put aside. 'Heretoga' is an everyday Teutonic word. Today, 'here' is at the roots of the verbs harry and harrow.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Most folks wouldn't take (or have) the time," (to find real enlish words)
I agree. Absolument!
"Most folks" wouldn't even have the inclination either. They are not exactly marching on the streets demanding a return to anglosaxon roots, are they? How might we change this?
Twoothly, (as owls say) who are "most folks"? I take it you meant native english speakers. IMHO they are in danger of being swamped by waves of immigrants, in much the same way as the Celts were after the Romans left England.
We should also think about how everyone is going to be fed too. When I was born there were less than 2 billion homids on this planet, now there are 7 billion and we are probably heading for over 9 billion in the next few decades. Given the limits of our current agriculture to produce enough fodder, how many are going to care about which word is really Saxon or not?
As Karl Marx said: Give them the means of self-destruction, and they will surely use it.
Lastly I use "put forward" instead of "suggest" as it already exists as a phrasal verb.
Denk mal daran!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

It's funny how "hercog" is in hungarian and I never consciously connected it with German. I must be a right herbert!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "When I was born there were less than 2 billion homids on this planet, now there are 7 billion "

If this is true, you should be around 83+ years old. Hmmm.

I have read that the "Day of 7 Billion" is to either be 26 Aug 2011-July 2012. And? What can be done to stop the population from growing? What ever happened to "natural selection"? Steve Jones (University College London)has put forth that humans are "10,000 times more common"...so he means that there should only be around 700,000 human beings? Paul Ehrlich (writer of the book,"The Population Bomb") said that "We [humans being] will breed ourselves into oblivion." Really? Do tell...

Of course, the "father" of this idea, as we all know, was Thomas Malthus' "An Essay on the Principle of Population as it Affects the Future Improvements of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of M. Godwin, M. Condorcet and Other Writers".

Look on the bright side, if Japan continues with their "anti-human" policies, by the year 3000, only 500 Japanese will be living! ;-) That's about a 99.999608027594851322044528065224% reduction in the Japanese population! Wow!

Think about this, most women in European countries are NOT helping those countries (Spain, England, Germany, Denmark, asf) maintain the population. Europe is not doing itself, or the World, any noble service. In fact, 83 countries and territories (about 44% of the World population) are thought to be in the "below-replacement fertility" mess.

It is worth looking at 'mean global age'. In 2050, it is estimated to be 38 years. Curiously, in 2010 it was 28.4 years. What could this mean?

May I put forth this website as a place to "denk daran": http://www.pop.org/projects/debunk-overpopulati...

"how many are going to care about which word is really Saxon or not?" Good thing FOOD, HUNGRY, THIRSTY, NEED, HELP, THANK YOU, and GOD are ALL worthy Anglo-Saxon words!

My 2 Marks. Now back to Ænglisc.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

There are many, many Germanic borrowings in the tongues East of Germany...take a look at Polish and Czech. Spelling is a slightly off, but the word and meaning are still the same.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Not quite yet, Shall we make it 2.5 billion at birth? Must use my glasses more....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

That would put you in the 61-65 range. World pop in 1950 was 2,521,000,000. ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Yes the question remains however will the number of native english speakers rise or fall in the next few decades, and how many will be motivated to clean up English? Or how would one motivate them?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Incidentally where I live sheep used to outnumber humans by 25:1. but it's less so now.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Or how would one motivate them?"

How were they "motivated" to dirty it up?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "most women in European countries are NOT helping those countries ....... maintain the population" I believer you have the wherewithal to correct this situation... go forth and spread yourself as wildly as possible in the name of Anglish!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Attacking the church and academia will indeed bring peril to your soul

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

It is quite true that as children native speakers learn phrasal verbs and mostly saxonesque wordstock first, and only come to the more academic and latinate words as a result of compulsory education.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Academia is a tough target; it would be easier to target business via plain-speaking; this would then provide a platform to influence academics

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Yes, I'll breed true English speakers!! LOL! Funny enough, I read a letter from our parish priest, and reckoned the percent of Germanic and Latinate words. What did I find? Astonishingly, it turned out to be roughly 80% English, 20% Latin. There is hope!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Yes, I think you have something there...going after businesses would be better. I am a businessman, and was curiously looking over a letter from an engineer to see how much of the words were actually Latin (like I did with the church letter). Again, I was shocked! About 75% of the words in the letter were Germanic. It seems that it is only in academic circles where we see a lot of Latin and Greek.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Attacking the church and academia will indeed bring peril to your soul"

LOL! I think not...peril to a mainstream academic career maybe! I don't mind that. Who said anything about attacking the church? I can more easily accept their input into English, than that of wanton academic borrowing.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Folks wanting to find out how to make headway in cleaning English of most of the foreign words should read about Philipp von Zesen and Joachim Heinrich Campe. Their work in part was making German words to put in stead of foreign ones, and then popularizing them. All I can say is, it worked rather well.

Also, it is likely that not many Englishmen are aware of William Barnes and his book, "Elements of English Grammar " (London, 1842). His goal, which he took very earnestly, was to "keep up the purity of the Saxon English language". He also wrote "Outline of English speech-craft" (1878).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"England is Gothic by birth, Roman by adoption." -George Perkins Marsh, pg.18, "The Goths in New England" (1843)

Thoughtfully well said!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"'kill tug' i.e 'killing machine' (?) etymology of name 'kellogg' rather than 'kill hog' (?)"

KELLOGG, Kellock (ME kellen (also killen, cullen) + hogg) means "one who kills hogs", a butcher. The name is first found in Essex court rolls as Kyllehog from 1277 AD. The name is often confused with the Hiberno-Norse name Kjallák(r) (from Irish Ceallach << Ó Ceallaigh), Scots-Irish Killock, Kelloch.

No "killing machine" here. In fact, some have guessed that 'hog' (OE hogg, hocg) might be Celtic (cf. Welsh hwch). But, it is more highly likely to be from ON höggva (to cut, castrate). A 'hog' originally meant a "castrated male pig" (not a breeding pig, but an eating pig). So, KELLOGG in this sense means "one who kills castrated pigs for eating".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: a) I introduced the topic of overpopulation to highlight the relative importance of Anglish; there are I believe more pressing issues. As I understand it wheat for Rome was mainly grown around Carthage and over the centuries this led to the deforestation and desertification of what is now Tunisia. So all I am suggesting is that it might be more important to focus our attention on, say, colony collapse disorder of honeybees, than worrying too much about latinate words in English.
b) I do understand your interest in etymology and in a way it is a shame that you are not already working in some academic situation where you could undermine the enemy from within. People might even read your books if your standing were better.
However for all I know your business may be vital to the economy (but hopefully not weapons dealing)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "All one needs is a thesaurus and an English etymological dictionary."
I would be much easier if there was a nice program on the web that simply highlighted the latinate words in your document and suggested non-latinate ones instead. Thesaurus is nice but often just suggests even more latinate words and perhaps a saxon one and presumes you know which are which - esp which really came from frankish. Now there's a nice project!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Like the sound of that jayles, though it's beyond words why the world's foremost tongue lacks some kind of etymological rootfinder program giving the stock of highlighted words. Would be also a good little sideworking (feature) of kindles both digitally and whilst skimming books. That it has not been done by now, shows how tinpot the ruling Academicia and the likes OED, Websters, etc are. Maybe a sideworking like this somehow rocks the boat for them (?)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

How dose 'sideworking' 'cut it for: 'feature'

/the new 700ZX contains a number of sideworkings/

How about 'againafter' for: 'deja vu'

/it felt like a bit of againafter going on/

Anyone?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: Fr. deja vu means "already seen". Both words, 'already and seen', are Germanic English. There is no need to 'reinvent the wheel'.

I am not sure I see how "side working" would mean "distinctive part". That is how you used the word in your sentence. The English word "hallmark" could be used, and is used in the mainstream today.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

a) You are right, there are 'bigger fish to fry', but for this blog, Anglish is what is highlighted and foremost here. There is room for the bigger woes outside of this blog. I myself do worry about and take on these things in my daily life. I hope others do the same.

b) One of the best ways to understand a people (culture and history) is through their language. Yes, from within is the best way to make change in academia. If I got into the club, maybe that would give me a higher standing, and people would care to read my book(s). Although, maybe they will want to read them regardless of the academic critics. J.K. Rowling ring a bell? J.R.R. Tolkien? It took some doing, but they made it beyond the academic wall.

No, I am not a weapons dealer!! My business does fill a great need (legal, moral, and ethical) in the economy.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "No, I am not a weapons dealer!! " Of course not, I believe you! No, really, I do.
Rowling? Tolkien? I confess I have read neither. You may shrive me. But successful books today are written alost like plays, eg the da Vinci code, with scenes and dialogs ready for filming. You could write "Earl of the Wings", but "Parry Hotter" is too obvious.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The pitfalls of etymology:
a) session: sitting as in "afternoon session" at the cinema. Oh yes. from sedere to sit (L)
but what about "football practice session" .... they don't sit...

b) introduce: -> "lead-in" . Fine. But introduce is most often a verb "make known"
"May I lead-in my boss Mr Obama?"
"May I make known my boss, Mr Obama?"
It's the formality which is elusive.
c) reduce, deduce, produce, adduce, seduce, (extrajuice please?)
why suddenly "conduct" not conduce, why educate, not educe????
The really interesting thing is how impossible it would be to guess the meanings even if one knew the etymology of the prefix and main verb. Anglish may even suffer the same fate.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

a) "football practice session": the meaning of session here (a meeting to perform some deed) is from the legal definition meaning "a continuous series of sittings or meetings of a court, legislature, or the like". It has also been put forward that the thought may have come from "Courts of Quarter Sessions". They were local courts traditionally held at four set times each year throughout the former British Empire.

b) Latin intrōdūcere literally means "to lead/bring inside". Introduce seems to be a more common term when equals are acquainted. PRESENT is taken as the more formal, or so I believe.

c) L. conductus (conduct) is the past participle of L. conducere (conduce). The past part came to mean "to guide, escort; behavior". The L. educate is from L. educatus (pp. of L. educare "bring up, rear". ē- (outside, away) + -duc- "lead" + -ātus - "suffix indicates a borrowing from Latin, but also indicates a process of some kind"). So, "educate" literally means "the process of leading away or to the outside <of one's perspective>". The word L. educe is from L. educere "draw forth, to lead out, bring out", is related through L. dūcere "to lead". There meanings and uses are, however, very different.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"I'd like you to meet..." is a nice anglish way of introducing people.
"May I present..." ("Darf ich vorstellen..") is fine in German but too demeaning or snooty for normal business or social life in English. Dangerous to translate verbatim (or word-for-word).
Some words are relatively easy to substitute eg reduce -> cut back (on) (noun cutback)
Others such as education much more difficult eg "learning" 'schooling" "training" all change the underlying concept. "development" would be closer but I guess is french.
Earlier "hallmark" was put forward for "feature" but really a hallmark identifies something, whereas features are the salient points.
Rather than attempting open slather on all alien words I think we need to begin by setting a target of an acceptable level of latinate words in normal "business" or social writing. Every language has borrowings, old and new, the question is how much is okay? and why? what is the criterion? the thing-by-which-we-judge (from the Gk kpnvw to judge)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

HALLMARK = feature

"One hallmark of his personality is his drive."

"Honor and integrity will be a hallmark of this administration"

"Restricting abortion has been a hallmark of his career."

It seems to work to mark a 'feature' just fine.

About DEVELOPMENT (develop + ment): Origins have been somewhat cloudy, but new info reveals the following:

develop >> from OFr. desveloper "to unfold, unfurl, unwrap" >> L.des- (dis-) "asunder, undo". veloper "wrap up" >> from V.L. *vlopp-, wlopp- >> PGmc. *wrappan-, *wlappan- (“to wrap, roll up, turn, wind”). Same etymology for 'envelope'; also related to 'warp' and 'wrap'. Cf. Mid. Eng. & O.E. wlappen,

-ment >> Latin suffix used to make nouns, and to mark a result/ effect of an action.

The word 'development' is a Latin-Germanic compound that English got later from French...around the 17th century. So, it might be ok to keep it in the English wordstock.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Situation normal; alternative words work for some of the meanings and usages but not all. eg a) This year's models include several new safety features
b) Her eyes are her best feature
I don't think hallmark would work well here. To me "hallmark" will always suggest the little markings on silverware which tell you when it was made and where. Dictionaries give about seven usages of feature, so it would be hard to cover with just one substitute.
"Suspend" as in "Japan will suspend production at three nuclear power plants"
Japan will put production on hold at ....
However one can also suspend an employee, etc
Once again we would need multiple substitutes to cover the various usages.
In the end, when we get to technospeak it may be better to stick with the latinate words just so everyone is clear what is meant. I think some of them are there and used because there is no obvious "anglish" alternative. (otherchoice)
Yet again in the same news article I found "painstaking", "stricken" "vow" and other good english words. Journalists and newswriters are usually very good at using "anglish" expressions wherever possible. After all writing is their craft.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Recent studies of Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA haplotypes have shown that most of the genetic heritage of the British Isles is from an ancestral Atlantic Coast population group that includes the ancient Iberians, the Basques and the Atlantic-coast French. Anybody who wants to restore the Germanicness (or Theodishness) of English for racist or xenophobic reasons is actually fighting for a seriously ill-conceived cause. In any event, the Anglish movement is not in any danger of taking the Anglosphere by storm. All in all it seems to be harmless and somewhat interesting, if a little eccentric and esoteric.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I was wondering when someone was going to bring up the DNA/Xenophobia argument. It's just plain wrong to put forth such conclusions, as written above, as true, immutable, irrefutable, unchangeable facts. At least, at this point in time. The DNA science, and by extension the arguments, are in their infancy and are going through huge growing pains all the time.

For every study or set of results that show "most of the genetic heritage of the British Isles is from an ancestral Atlantic Coast population group that includes the ancient Iberians, the Basques and the Atlantic-coast French", I can show the exact opposite results "proving" the "Germanicness" of the British Isles. It is inappropriate to argue using genetics because of the ever shifting outcomes. No definitive conclusions have yet been borne out, only opinions and guesses have been given. There are still many assumptions being made across the board, even, and especially, by the Hiberno-Basque-Celtic champions Oppenheimer and Sykes. The truth about British genetics is very likely somewhere betwixt the Anglo-Saxon and Hiberno-Celtic-Basque opinions.

Arguments about race, DNA, xenophobia, asf have no place here, as those involved in this blog are talking about the English language and, to a lesser extent, culture, not race, ethnicity, and certainly not, genes. Language and culture have little to do with DNA, otherwise Normans and Russians would be speaking a form of Old Norse, not Celtic/Gaulish-Roman and Slavic languages.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Once again we would need multiple substitutes to cover the various usages."

Yes! I am with you! I think you are right here, and likely about the "techno" wordstock, too. What else would one call a CD (compact disc)? It goes back to what I said about names of things and thoughts that came to English, like 'potato', 'cross/crucifix', and 'socks'. Although, I see no reason why English-speaking techies couldn't find English names for their future findings.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Language and culture have little to do with DNA," But what exactly is wrong with beautiful Norman/anglo-french words like "sheriff"; or celtic words like "carry" why would you deny us our heritage? What is the basis for IMPOSING your ideas about what is acceptable English and what is not? or for IMPOSING your Germanic words upon us? Why should we accept it? Why is Germanic better than celtic, better than anything else?
Frankly in Londinium today I hear more Urdu, Gujurati, Arabic, Tamil, Polish, and the rest than English (outside business circles of course). Must all these people too succumb to the Germanic tongue? If not why not?
Now that should stir things up a bit!!! ;=))

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

1. "sheriff" (O.E. scīrgerefa) is not Norman, French, Celtic, or Latin at all. It is a Germanic English compound word: shire (O.E. scīr) + reeve (O.E. gerefa, O.E. gerēva), meaning "steward of an administrative district." So, there is nothing wrong with this word staying in the English wordstock! You likely meant "bailiff", right?

2. "What is the basis for IMPOSING your ideas about what is acceptable English and what is not? or for IMPOSING your Germanic words upon us?" This is a loaded question! It hangs upon what one means by "English". Truly, English is the brainchild of Germanic folks. It is, in a broad way, the blending of many North and West Germanic tongues (sprinkled with a little Latin from early Roman contact). It is most appropriate to "impose" Germanic words on the tongue itself, indeed when one wants to keep the true English alive. Now, if you mean the globally influenced mongrel tongue that the world claims to speak as English, well then this argument falls upon deaf, culturally relative, ears.

3. "Why is Germanic better than celtic, better than anything else?" Well, Celtic words are of little regards in English. There are hardly any Celticisms in English at all. The verb "carry" has never been in question. Someone already argued thusly: "Carry is fully anglicized ie it operates as a phrasal verb and in compounds using English prefixes." Moving on, no one ever said that Germanic was better than Celtic or whatever. The same could be asked about the late rebirth of Cymraeg. On 9 Feb 2011, the Welsh Language Measure received Royal Assent, assuring its "official status". Minister for Heritage, Alun Ffred Jones, said, “The Welsh language is a source of great pride for the people of Wales..." Mr. Ffred's words wreak of a Pan-Celtic, ethno-nationalistic, highly ethnocentric hate-speech, right? Pride for the Welsh? What about the other 95% of Great Britain who are non-Welsh? Have they no right to be proud? Next, they should stop calling themselves WELSH, don't you think?

4. "Frankly in Londinium today I hear more Urdu, Gujurati, Arabic, Tamil, Polish, and the rest than English (outside business circles of course). Must all these people too succumb to the Germanic tongue?" YES!! You only hear all of those tongues because of the recent settling of great hordes of immigrants. It is like that in most major world cities (i.e. Berlin, New York, München, asf). Outside of the big cities, it is probably a lot less like what you have described.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "But what exactly is wrong with beautiful Norman/anglo-french words like "sheriff"; or celtic words like "carry" why would you deny us our heritage?"

Nothing is wrong with non-Germanic words in their own tongues. And, no one is denying anyone interest in, or pursuit of their own heritage (unless, it seems, it is the pursuit of the rebirth of Germanic Ænglisc).

If one wants to speak mainly French and Latin words, speak French, Spanish, or Italian. If one wants to speak mainly Celtic words, speak a living Celtic tongue like Cymraeg, Brezhoneg, Gaeilge, or Gàidhlig. It is wrong and brazen to over burden English with borrowings from other tongues. Some borrowing is understood. Wanton borrowing, however, that seeks, willfully or otherwise, to crowd out native English words must be boldly dealt with head-on and halted right away...lest English suffer the same wyrd (fate) as Gothic, Vandalic, Greenlandic Norse, Norm, asf.

To start Pan-Celticism in earnest maybe someone could revive Kernewek (3000 speakers)or Gaelg (1700 speakers).

If one speaks English, one should speak English words.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Every language has borrowings, old and new, the question is how much is okay? and why?"

I think there are many "right" answers to this question. Germanic and Roman folks had been in contact prior to the landing of the brothers Hengest and Horsa in 449 AD. It has been said that many millions of Germanic folks were living within the borders of the Roman Empire in the 4th century. What's more, Teutonic traders were doing business with the Romans in Gaulish towns bordering Germania in the 3rd and 4th centuries. Also, lest we forget, Ænglisc was open to Latin through the few Celtic borrowings.

Indeed, it was the Romans war dealings with Germanic folks that brought the most Latin to Ænglisc. There are five areas where Latin borrowing has been plentiful: commercial (trading/agriculture), military, law/government, religion, and intellectual. And, there are five Latin loan time frames that would need to be looked at: Continental Borrowings (before 449 AD), Latin through Celtic (mainly place names, 449 AD-597 AD), Latin through Christianity (about 450 Latin words through Frankish, 597 AD- 1066 AD), the Normans (about 5-10,000 words <of which 70% of are still more or less used>, 1066 AD-1260 AD), and the Renaissance/Scientific Discover/ Printing Press Era (1500 AD-1800 AD, about 10,000 Latin and Greek words).

I would take out most of the Latin/French/Greek words from 1066 AD onward and put English words in their stead. Often, one finds that two borrowed words can be traced back to the same Latin root! The reason modern English has about 25% borrowed wordstock from Latin and French is mainly due to these last two time-frames.

"Scholars", writers, translators, asf, wanted to replace much of the Norman-French words borrowed earlier, and thought (wrongly) that English (at that time) was not able to create works like could be done in Latin, Greek, or even Italian. They had an intellectual/linguistic inferiority complex likely brought on by the Norman invasion.

These "academics" wantonly translated lots of words directly from the Latin and Greek in the vain, misguided hope that the tongue could be intellectually lifted--or as "W" would say, English needed to be "smartified". ;-p-- and de-Frenchified. These translations were so ridiculous and numerous that the term "inkhorn terms" was used to described the harebrained practice.

We would likely get rid of 15% of the borrowings and doublets by gutting the borrowings from 1066 AD onward. As for a standard, we should average the borrowing rates of all of the other Germanic tongues, and use that average to guide our borrowing rate. This number would also help to reckon, more or less, how much needless, crazy over-borrowing there was from 1066 AD- 1800 AD. The thought with this whole thing (for me) is getting words through Latin/French wanton over-borrowing instead of using the English words already in English. Also,we have to think about words that have been rightly Anglified. Like when a borrowed Latin noun becomes a verb through the addition of a Germanic suffix.

Again, academia and the church are at the forefront! My 2 Marks...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"The thought with this whole thing (for me) is getting words through Latin/French wanton over-borrowing instead of using the English words already in English."

That sentence did NOT turn out right! LOL....do over....

For me, this whole thing is about to showing that most of the Latin words in English were a result of misguided, wanton over-borrowing, and were/are not needed. Also, I would like to highlight the fact that they (academics) turned to Latin (and to a lesser extent, Greek), instead of thoughtfully using and being proud of the rich English word-stock that was already at hand to mark new thoughts and things.

Bottom line: Upholding language, is to uphold a culture.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"...to showing..." = the showing

;-o

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Translate this to Anglish, please...

The Modern Whig philosophy and principles and the solutions to those principles are all about effectiveness. Whigsapproach each issue on its own and using our Whig philosophy we can approach each issue in a pragmatic way.

Our focus is not on ideology, its on what is most effective. We have our principles which we hold firm to. Where we are pragmatic is in the solutions to those principles. We focus on on what we like, or what you like but what works best and the most effective solutions. Whigs believe that this is what public service is all about.

Pragmatic, balanced and non-ideological approach to public policy puts the American people first.

Solutions-oriented, methodological yet flexible in approach towards ‘centrist’ policy proposals.

Greater citizen participation in the formation of public policy. Highly informed citizens is the new normal.

Focus on core issues that affect all Americans as a whole, not just one group or a few special interest issues.

Freedom of political thought and action, not stuck on ideology.

Historical political truths are replaced by new truths and realities as citizens participate without prior bias using only modern Whig and basic Constitutional guidelines.

Therefore the Whigs are not a traditional political party, nor do we have a traditional party platform. We believe that traditional solutions will remain ineffective.

Whigs practice independent thought, stress citizen participation, want the curtailment of lobby interests, a review of electoral methods, all to ensure a healthy Republic .

The Whig philosophy is a philosophy that stresses method, and seeks to refine or rebuild the methodologies of our representation.

Please explore the following sections to find out more about the Whig Philosophy and Whig Principles.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@addyatg: maybe I will make a go of it....looking it over....it is already made up of about 60-65% true English (Germanic). Let's see who comes up with what.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I think this info fitting to our banter on what is English and what is not. Worth thinking about anyway:

"The Dansk Sprognævn (Danish Language Council) collects and registers all new Danish words. As with all languages, modern Danish is influenced and enriched by foreign words. One of the Council's tasks is to decide which words are considered Danish, and which are loan words. 'Bar', 'bus', 'film' and 'slum' all fit Danish rules of spelling and pronunciation, and so are now considered Danish words, but 'freelance' and 'playboy' are used, but considered mere loan words."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/european_languag...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

From the same BBC website, on German:

"Home speakers can be found in France, The Netherlands, Denmark, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Kazakhstan and other republics of former USSR."

I want to highlight the use of "Home speakers" here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/european_languag...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Outside of the big cities, it is probably a lot less like what you have described."
Well maybe up till now You could make a last stand for Anglish in some remote valley in Northumbria, in the hills north of Jedburgh......fending off the incoming hordes.....rather like Arthur did to the Saxons in the first place.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Me thinks it not so grim. Although....

Well, think about the Anglo-Saxon and Norman invasions, and weigh it against today's immigrant invasion. Self-serving Politics is at the root of each with a bit of cultural relativism, a knowledge poor folk, and a brainwashed folk that are told by the "elites" everywhere that their culture is over bearing and shameful (sometimes evil), and nothing to be proud of.

But, the tide can turn...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ addyatg
easy really, there's your oversetting into anglish, almost no loanwords

The now-time Whig witship and lawlays and the loosenouts to those lawlays are all about bringaboutliness. Whigs go-to each issue on its own and using our Whig witship we can tackle each issue in a deedsound way.
Our mindfasten is not on thoughtlore, its on what is most bringaboutsome. We have our lawlays which we hold strong to. Where we are deedsound is in the loosenouts to those lawlays. We mindfasten on what we like, or what you like but what works best and the most bringaboutly loosenouts. Whigs believe that this is what folkly thaneing is all about.
Deedsound, evenweighty and unthoughtlorely go-to to folkly lawling puts the American folks first.
Loosenouts-minded, waylorely yet bendsome in go-to towards ‘centrist’ lawling putforths.
Greater landflok partaking in the shaping of folkly lawling. Highly intold citizens is the new normal.
Mindfasten on core issues that bestir all Americans as a whole, not only one group or a few sundersome careabout thoughtlings.
Freedom of political thought and deeding, not stuck on thoughtlore.
Yorelorely political truths are insteadened by new truths and realities as landfolks take part without beforely bias using only now-time Whig and groundfast Landlawsome guidelines.
Therefore the Whigs are not a eldways political party, nor do we have an eldways party upheldness. We believe that eldways loosenouts will bide on as unbringaboutsome.
Whigs live out unoffhanging thought, stress landfolk partaking, want the lessening of lobby careabouts, a lookin of electoral deedways, all to ensure a healthy Republic .
The Whig witship is a witship that stresses deedway, and seeks to sharpen or build again the deedwaylores of our aspellings.
Please look through the following offcuts to find out more about the Whig witship and Whig lawlays.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

ferthfrith: nicely done though now I don't understand it.
Perhaps if one took out all the Germanic words instead it would be easier?
Eg: La Modern Whig philosophy et principles et la solutions a cestui principles tout concern effectiveness.
Just as mumbo in a different way.

BTW off the cuff I though "political" came from the Greek "polis" meaning er,,,,, a city??

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

On the other main (ie hand) to teach "deterioration" I began with "worse" -> worsen -> worsening. There really are some words we need to loose.

In the last few days I have specifically taught "unco-operative", "disrespectful" and "sullen". En passant I thought "spy" was from latin but I see it those damn Franks throwing a spanner in the works.
so I can use them when dealing with one particular student. Ah the power of words.
Difficult to distinguish between "sullen' and 'sulky" although "sullen" seems to better describe behavior than personality. Couldn't come up with any real english words for
"unco-operative" or "disrespectful" - open to real-world suggestions.
We test students every week in some way. So we have spreadsheets headed:
"Continuous assessment actuals" - I've made mine "Ongoing assessment actuals"
but balk at "Ongoing rating outcomes". Just sounds like someone rating TV shows.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

or something to do with naval ratings...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Also: I wrote this:

"Yes indeed hindsight gives us wisdom,
but with wisdom comes age
and with age comes agues
and in the end death itself
is the end
of wisdom."

Now if we use "ailments' instead of "agues" it just destroys it, makes it sound so banal. So sometimes we need to keep nice (short) borrowed words. Angliscizing everything mindlessly is not always the answer.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: anglish is hypothetical, it is what-ifly, it often makes wordmeaning clearer than foreing words, but other times wordmeaning cannot as easily be drawn off from the word. Yet what these words: put-forth, lawling, deedway, and so on, all have over foreign words is that they have an inner framework that draws an image to the english speaker's mind. that is not to say that upon first seeing these words, they will be understood, but the same goes, even more so for foreing words. However these anglish words are very powerful in their ability to draw forth image in the mind, they have almost a metaphorical richness that goes far beyond the raw symbolism of foreing wordstock. Unoffhanging and dependent both draw forth the thought of something needing something else. But only unoffhanging draws forth the mindimage of something hanging off of somrthing else, thereby showing dependecy or offhangingness.
Of course jayles, we are not saying that all anglish words would be readily understood, though some indeed would be. What we are saying is that anglish words are richer, truer, and not the cold, raw, frameworkless things that foreign words are. whether this upside of anglish warrants these words being taken up into nowtime english is yours to settle on. I myself will work to see them do so.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

what anglish will always be, if nothing else, is the schoolsome follow-after (academic pursuit) of english's germanic side for the sheer glee of doing so, whether or not the masses take on anglish.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

also jayles, a heavily foreign-worded text like the one i overset will always seem awkward in anglish, forwhy of the sheer number of words needing oversetting. But in everyday speech, slipping an anglish word into our talkthroughs (coversations) here and there will not seem as odd, and context will usually help one understand the meaning anyway. In this way, slowly setting in anglish words, not all at once, but bitmeal, into english, do i beleive emglish can gain back at least some of its germanicness

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Now if we use "ailments' instead of "agues" it just destroys it..."

Well, 'ague' firstly means "fever, shivering (mainly from malaria)" and secondly, "sickness". The word ague is a shortening of the Mid.Fr 'fievre ague' (acute fever) << Latin febris acūta. How are you using ague here?

"Angliscizing everything mindlessly is not always the answer." I am with you...doing anything mindlessly is never the way!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Yes indeed hindsight gives us wisdom,
but with wisdom comes age
and with age comes (ailing)
and in the end death itself
is the end
of wisdom."

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: You've found another Frankish word with a little Latin flavor!

Banal << O.Fr. banel (ban + el/al) >> ban (from from Frankish *ban. OHG bannan, pannen & OE bannan is a cognate. ON banna, from P.Gmc. *bannanan) + al (from L. -alis, suffix to make adj.'s and nouns meaning "a kind of" or "like"; first used only with Latin loanwords, but now is fully Anglicized and used with Germanic verbs, too, like bestowal, betrothal.)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"spanner" >> span (O.E. spann/ spannan, P.Gmc.*spannō/*spannanan) + er (from O.E. -ware, P.Gmc. *-warioz)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Yes indeed hindsight gives us wisdom,
but with wisdom comes age
and with age comes (woe)
and in the end death itself
is the end
of wisdom."


"Yes indeed hindsight gives us wisdom,
but with wisdom comes age
and with age comes (throe(s))
and in the end death itself
is the end
of wisdom."

"Yes indeed hindsight gives us wisdom,
but with wisdom comes age
and with age comes (want)
and in the end death itself
is the end
of wisdom."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "We test students every week in some way. So we have spreadsheets headed:
"Continuous assessment actuals" - I've made mine "Ongoing assessment actuals"
but balk at "Ongoing rating outcomes"."

Why not just say "Ongoing assessment outcomes". 2 out of 3 isn't bad. It pretty well fits the ratio of home-to-borrowed words in English anyway.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"schoolsome follow-after (academic pursuit)"

This can be said much better so as to be better understood in today's (not 'nowtimes') English.

One would better understand the following to mean "academic pursuit": 1) book-learned, bookish, learning past-time 2) bookish, learned, book-learned undertaking 3) bookish, learned work

No need to make any new words until all of the words in today's wordbook are back in full use.

My 2 Marks.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc : yes I agree and "ongoing assessment outcomes" actually sounds quite normal. I also liked "with age comes ailing". I think I only chose "ague" for the alliteration, but "ailing' is actually better.
I think I was grandstanding a bit anyway.
So you accept that Anglish is just a "bookish pastime", eh?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: As a matter of curiosity, why is it that we have the "ish" ending on punish, distinguish, embellish, finish, abolish, etc (polish?) when in modern french there is no such ending. Is this an english corruption or some Norman dialect ending?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "So you accept that Anglish is just a "bookish pastime", eh?"

No, but thank you for using my Anglicism. As I wrote earlier on, I am not so much on board with "Anglish", but Ænglisc. They are like night and day.

The ending "-ish" is normally a Germanic ending (cognate with Old English -isc, O.H.G. -isc, German -isch, ON -iskr, Gothic -isks, also whence French -esque. The French is from Italian -esco, which is from Gothic and/or Lombardic).

The words you listed have another kind of -ish. It is in truth an Old French ending that is from borrowed Latin i-stem verbs (verbs with infinitives in -ir). The suffix is actually -iss not -ish. The pronunciation was influenced by the Germanic, so yes, an English corruption of the Latin. So...

punish << O.Fr. puniss (inf. punir)
distinguish << O.Fr. distinguiss (inf. distinguir)
embellish << O.Fr. embelliss (inf. embellir)
finish << O.Fr. finiss (inf. finir)
abolish << O.Fr. aboliss (inf. abolir)
polish << O.Fr. poliss (inf. polir)

...and so on and so forth.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Couldn't come up with any real english words for "unco-operative" or "disrespectful" - open to real-world suggestions."

disrespectful (insulting) = cheeky, fresh, churlish, boorish, uncouth, wise guy, wisenheimer, or *

*smart-alec(k): (Americanism) An impudent or obnoxiously self-assertive individual, a wise guy, as in New teachers often have a hard time coping with the smart alecks in their classes. This expression, dating from the mid-1800s, probably alluded to a person of this description who was named Alec or Alexander, but his identity has been lost.

SOURCE: "smart aleck." The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Houghton Mifflin Company. 27 May. 2011. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/smart aleck>.

uncooperative = unhelpful, bullheaded, pigheaded, headstrong, willful, unbending, wayward, unyielding, stubborn, strong-willed

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I have brought the "Whig Party Philosophy and Principles" in to Ænglisc (true English, not Anglish). I have also kept three non-Germanic words. They are: Republic, political, and Constitutional. Why? There are no good words that would be readily understood to mean the ideas these words mean. Now, one could borrow from some of the Germanic tongues to find new Germanic words for these ideas. Let's take a look:

Constitution: Danish Forfatning, Grundlov (basic law); German Grundgesetz (basic law), Verfassung (writing, drafting); Icelandic Stjórnarskrá (legal administative writing); Dutch Grondwet (land law); Nynorsk Grunnlov (basic law); Swedish Grundlag (basic law), Författning.

Republic: new Ænglisc Cyneƿīse (folk wise), Icelandic Lýðveldi (folk power). All other Germanic tongues have sadly taken the Latin.

political: Every Germanic tongue has taken this word in. In German, one can still say 'staatsbürgerlich', but that is a Latin-German compound.

I think readers will find this Ænglisc draft easy to read and understand. I have tried to keep the original framework true, but some of it had to be written another way to be understood. This should be the goal of 'Anglishers', and those of us who wish to keep English, well, English: knowable, speakable, readable, usable. Otherwise, this is all a worthless bookish past-time for all. Remarks and ratings welcome.


Latter-day Whig wisdom and standards and the keys to those standards are all about their strength of bearing. Whigs tackle each thing on its own and drawing on our Whig wisdom we can take on each thing in a down-to-earth way.

Our mind is not on one-sided beliefs; it’s on what works for the good of all. We have our standards which we hold steadfast to. Where we are wise is in the keys to those standards. We home in on what we like, or what you like but what works best. Whigs believe that this is what working for the burghership is all about.

* Down-to-earth, broad, even path to law-making puts the American folks first.

* Geared toward finding outcomes and having unyielding standards, yet open to bids from the 'political middle' for over-sight.

* Greater burgher stake in the framing of laws. Highly learned burghers are the new everyman.

* Spotlight on the main things that bear upon all Americans as a whole, not only one group or a few lobby group wants.

* Freedom of political thought and deed, not stuck on one-sided beliefs.

Old political truths are taken over by new truths as burghers work without narrow-mindedness only drawing on latter-day Whig and main Constitutional benchmarks.
Therefore the Whigs are not a wonted burgher group, nor do we have wonted group beliefs. We believe that the same old ways will stay worthless.

Whigs undertake free thought, underscore burgher input, and want the cutting back of lobby earmarks, and to have another look at the ways and means in which lots are drawn, all to uphold a healthy Republic.

Whig wisdom is that which underscores the means by which something is done, and seeks to sharpen or overhaul the ways of our spokesmen.

Kindly look through the following works to find out more about the Whig Wisdom and Whig Standards.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Well, American isn't English either....technically. So, I left four non-Germanic words in. And, before any one gets crazy about lobby and group:

lobby << Latin lobia, laubia < Frankish *laubja (cf. Old High German *laubia (later lauba))

group << from Fr. groupe, from It. gruppo, from P.Gmc.*kruppaz through Gothic or Lombardic (cf. O.E. cropp, ON kroppr, Gothic *kruppa)

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Well that gets my vote; it is as understandable as the original (which is pretty much hot-air anyway). It is unfortunate that when people hear the word "burgher" these days they think one is talking about burgers: indeed instead of president one could use "burgherking" ;=)

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Here is a book you may like reading:

The English is Coming!: How One Language is Sweeping the World
By Leslie Dunton-Downer (2010) ISBN 978-1-4391-7665-8

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

instead of president one could use "burgherking" ;=)

ROFLMAO!!!! HHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That is a really great one, Jayles!!

It is sad that most folks do not know that 'burgher' is an English word that still could be said today.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "it is as understandable as the original (which is pretty much hot-air anyway)."

Yeah, the original was not very well written. I can't believe it was from any political writings. I only wanted to show that English is every bit as usable as Latin/French for law/politics/government things.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"uncooperative = unhelpful, bullheaded, pigheaded, headstrong, willful, unbending, wayward, unyielding, stubborn, strong-willed"
eg I do find your behavior rather unhelpful. .......... yes that's very useable thank you.
"pig-headed" I would consider rude.
"headstrong" not rude but not complimentary.
whereas "strong-willed' might be taken as a compliment.
Latinate words are often neutral, and formal, sometimes that's why we use them.
Apropos of nothing, "makacs" and "onfeju" : at least one can be direct in Hungarian.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc: there's one problem with your oversetting- you have othered the meaning of the original. yes it might be understandable, but it doesn't capture the meaning of the original. What you seem to be upholding is a lessening of the english wordstock, without coming up with any new words for the loan words that are taken out. Well this to me brings about a sorry lessening of the richness of english, and makes us less able to put forth subtelty of meaning, and nuance which our now-time english lets us do. In everyday speech, you could likely get away with simply using already existing english words for the most part, but in academics, if you do not uphold coining new english words to insteaden foreign words, then what you uphold is a loss, maybe a great loss, of english's richness.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ferthfrith: "there's one problem with your oversetting- you have othered the meaning of the original."

I think that not to be true. Let's see what other will have to say. I ask that you show me how the overall meaning is not the same as the original. In good Anglo-Norman, I say: Prove it.

If one takes a look at the meanings of all of the word that I wrote in stead of the Latin ones, and likens the Latin/English writing, then the "Anglish" writing, it is clear that my writing is much more understandable and does not lose any meaning at all.

"What you seem to be upholding is a lessening of the english wordstock, without coming up with any new words for the loan words that are taken out." You are also wrong here. Your words show you do not know or understand where I am coming from.

Go back and read all of my writings. I am for the upholding and keeping of true Ænglisc, not some tongue akin to JRR Tolkien's Elvish. I am much more earnest about bringing old English words back in to the wordstock and back to life, than Anglish seems to be. I am against wanton borrowing. I am also against making Global English by the same token. I am for making more words only after all of the dead or near-dead words have be brought back. And, I am for future words for things being made from English.

It is true, as I have written over and over, that academics, academia, in other words, the elites have been at the heart of the slow fall of true English. Indeed, English was shifted on a path of French/Latin/Greek borrowing. Yes, most of these words need to go.

One will, however, never switch the folks back by trying to thrust weird gobbledegook and "new words" that are not acknowledged and have never been witnessed in any past English writings. Take "now-time English". It's understood, but it is too clumsy and comes across as lowbrow and made up. It doesn't ring true. It does not fit the way of English word-making.

Here is how it is better written with English: latter-day English, today's English, the latest English, leading English, new English, newfangled English, asf. I have to say also that I don't see anything wrong with using all Germanic rooted words that are in English, even if they came down another road into English (like from Frankish, Normaund, Latin, Gothic, Old Norse, or Old High German). Words like vogue, guide, guard, lobby, furnish, asf are all good Germanic words that have Germanic pronunciation, too. Butter, cheese, wine, street, church, and many others, are also good English. They have been fully Anglicized (and Germanicized) and are in use in Germanic tongues everywhere. How would one "Anglify" butter? Cowmilkfat? Milkfat? What about cheese? Sourmilkcurd? Anyway....

The goal should be to shut down the "loanword borrowing machine" and strength the "Germanic compound machine", much in the way that Iceland still does. Icelandic is probably the best standard for English to follow.

It is not about being against the making of new English words instead of borrowing. I am all for that. English, though, already has a lot of words that are not in use. Those have to be look at, too. It is folly to make a bunch of new words and throw them on to of the old without having an idea of what to keep and what to throw out. I am against wanton word making and the wantonly taking words out only because they look foreign.

If "Anglish" ever were able to have its short-sighted sway over the English tongue, I fear that it bring about its death rather than uphold its richness and being as a living tongue.

3 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Latinate words are often neutral, and formal..."

We do not see eye to eye on Latin words being "neutral" in any setting. I think it might seem that way, since they are un-English words. True English words meanings seem to tug at the heart strings a lot more, such as "pigheaded". You take it as straight up rude. Obstinate doesn't sound rude? Recalcitrant sounds like a pharmaceutical. What about contumacious? Insubordinate? Don't they all sound a little too stuffy?

I don't think these words work on English speakers (unless they are brainwashed academics), since they don't hit home in the English heart. It is easy for English speakers to be free from the full bearing of their meaning.

How about stubborn for pigheaded? I always like to say churlish, boorish, uncouth, or loutish instead of rude, but we all have our own way I guess.

Now, we are of the same mind when it comes to Latin being "formal". Yes, Latin (and even Greek and French) have been wrongly regarded as the tongues of the learned. It had a lot to do with 1066, but that doesn't make it right or worth keeping as the norm.

My 2 Marks.

2 votes Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

alright Ængelfolc, here are a few byspells (from anglo-saxon bispell):
wisdom for philosophy: Ya, i went to oxford and i majored in wisdom. Sorry, that doesnt work.
key for solution: Like in, i have found the key to the problem, right? No, once again, that sounds ridiculous, that is a gross warping of the meaning of the word key.
mind for focus: Focus is a state of mind, not the mind itself.

You did not give a word for service, and while meaning might not have been othered here, you fail to show the richness of your "pure" english by failing to show that english trully does have a word for service (anglo-saxon, might i add, did have many words for service, but im not sure where you stand with bringing back anglo-saxon words. you see, you thought what i wrote sounded elvish, well if you want to bring back anglo-saxon words, and i myself am all for that, then english will be sounding very elvish indeed, which in my mind is not a bad thing).

Some more byspells:

outcome for solution: here again, outcome does not mean the same thing as solution. outcomes can be bad, while solutions solve things.
take over for replace: like im going to take my old tire over with a new one. No, take over, does not mean replace, and though you might get away with it in your oversetting, it is a very weak oversetting (old truths taken over by new truths. Does this mean that the new truths are now in control of the old truths, and that the old truths are still there somehow?)

means by which something is done vs. method: One whole phrase for one word, that smells like a weak, poor language to me. Why not think up a new word, tap the potential of english's germanicness. do not fear newness. deedway for method. wonderful, one word for one word, following the wordbuilding laws of english (noun-noun). or will the word deedway lead to the death of english?

Your oversetting is midworthed (mediocre. hmmm, i wonder what your already-existing english word for mediocre might be,). I mean it's okay, but it's easy to see that it is not a loyal, truthfast oversetting.

I mean come on, words like deedway and midworthed are going to lead to the dead of english? thats belaughly, they are made up of english roots. they give off the very being of englishness. they are english indeed.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "How about stubborn for pigheaded? I always like to say churlish, boorish, uncouth, or loutish instead of rude"
Yes I agree I feel most latin words borrowed in the last five hundred years are "foreign", and so less emotive. Maybe this is why they are favored by modern managers.
I can call a student (customer, employee or co-worker) unhelpful, stubborn, obstinate, uncooperative, disrespectful, disruptive, sullen, wayward, or headstrong, maybe uncouth too." willful " as in "willful disobedience" is fine too. These words are generally descriptive of observed behavior, rather than an emotional reaction on my part.
I wouldn't risk "pigheaded" nor "idiotic". They give the impression that I myself am too judgemental, reactive and emotional. Bluntly my boss would not support me.
Of course it is all mealy-mouthed, but the way of our PC society today.
Is it not the same in your business life?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"deedway" ??? halvany gozom sincs rola

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Nem vagyok mano, se mano-ul beszelek

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"byspell" ?? ez biztosan valami mellekbubaj egy torpetol, ugye?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ferthfrith:

Thanks for your thoughts. I am underwhelmed by your "evidence". Your critique is full of ad hominems, is wholly groundless, rooted in folly, and fails to acknowledge that ALL of the words (except 4) are true English words. Your writing had the following: issue (3x), using (3x), centrist, partaking (2), citizen, normal, core, political (3x), realities, part, bias, party (2x), stress (2x), electoral, ensure, Republic, and Please. And, you did not "over-set" guidelines, which is a Latin-English compound. I mean, you come on! You were making up words and you failed to make any to put in their stead? You have only helped to show that my "over-setting" is true and right. Allow me to shed some light on what I mean.

* "wisdom for philosophy": It works, if one understands the words meaning. Philosophy written in Old English (or Anglo-Saxon if you like) was wīsdōm. To study philosophy was written as uþwitegung (which is a lost word). The Greek word simply means "love of wisdom, knowledge". In this case, philosophy meant "any system of belief, values, or tenets; a personal outlook or viewpoint", so "Whig Wisdom" means just that. Also, wisdom is a synonym for philosophy. Look it up.

* "key for solution","outcome for solution": Well, "...sounds ridiculous..." to one who doesn't understand English well. Not all solutions solve things, and not all solutions work. Your point is moot. 'Key' can mean many things in English like "something that is crucial in providing an explanation or interpretation; a means of achieving a desired end; the correct initial move in the solution of a set problem". Indeed, in Old English cǣg, cǣge (key) meant "solution" or "that which serves to open or explain". The proto-Germanic root *ki- means "to cleaver, split", "put forth". Hmmm... I guess it's bad English. 'Solution' can mean "in that state of being solved", as inferred in "solutions-oriented". Outcome, "a conclusion reached, end result". If something has been "solved", an "end result, conclusion" was reached. All you did was calque it---> "loosenouts". Tell you teacher you're gonna "loosenout" the problem. How about "loosenup"? Digout? Shakeloose? Talk about ridiculous. BTW, I'm fine with Old English being a wellspring for new English words. It's better than making up a bunch of gibberish, unless gibberish is the goal---which mine is not.

* "You did not give a word for service": I guess I could have written 'thrall' (O.E. þrǣl << ON þrǣll 'slave'). After all, 'service', 'servitude' and 'serf' are from the L. servitium "slave". One word was not needed to get the meaning across. I chose to use the richness of the English wordstock. One of the many words for 'service' depending on meaning was þeowian. Ah, but here you have a new shiny word: Burgherthralldom (Public Service). It is a fine calque. You're welcome.

* "mind for focus: Focus is a state of mind, not the mind itself." Try again. You have to look at the whole bit: "Our mind is not on..." meaning---not focused on. Tadaaa! Remember, 'focus" means "to fix attention (on); concentrate", and is from L. focus "hearth, fireplace".

* "take over for replace": It is not a weak "over-setting". Why? The meaning is right. That is all that matters. I could have written "put in stead of", "push out", "shift", "stand in for", "drive out", "unseat", "shut out", "get rid of", "give way to", " cast out", "take out", "throw out", "topple", or "bereave", but I chose what I wanted. And, it works. You really stretched yourself, I mean it is obvious you were really reaching to try and make a valid point..."Does this mean that the new truths are now in control of the old truths, and that the old truths are still there somehow?" Big fail. ;-p LOL!

* "means by which something is done vs. method: One whole phrase for one word, that smells like a weak, poor language to me." It seems to me you have little knowledge of Old English and English grammar. Many times, English did not have "one word" to tell about everything. Compound words had to be made along with phrasal verbs, much like modern German does today. DEEDWAY sounds like the name of a gas station or something hokey. I could've wrote "means" or "way", which is method. Method means "way of doing things" or "means by which something is done". DEEDWAY is a Frankenstein word, and would quickly lead to English becoming the laughing stock of tongues. One more thing, some of the ways one would've meant 'method' in Old English were þing (thing), wīse (cf, German 'weise'), and weg (way).

* "Your oversetting is midworthed...it's easy to see that it is not a loyal, truthfast oversetting"---Wow! Clearly delusional. Of the two writings, mine is the only one that can be read and easily understood!! LOL! I kept four (4) Latin words, you kept twenty-six (26, and you were making stuff up!). I'd say mine is true English, since it is made up of words that are actually in the wordbook, and can be traced back to Old English.

As for "mediocre", there a many words one could say depending on meaning: middling, so-so, fair to middling, fair, run of the mill, middle of the road, mainstream, asf. If you wanted to be nasty about it, lousy, no good, awful, shoddy and on and on.

It seems that we have froward goals: I "over-set" for meaning and understanding; you "over-set" for a one-to-one word match (which can't fully work in English because of the Germanic stæfcræft).

Anyway, thanks again for your thoughts, and for showing the rightness of my work. No hard feelings. Cheers!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"byspell" is OE bīspel(l), biġspel(l), in use before 990 AD, which meant "example, proverb". It's a cognate with latter-day German Beispiel "example, tale". Zum Beispiel, an abschreckendes/warnendes Beispiel in German means a "cautionary tale".

By-spell (as it is written today) is listed in Webster's Dictionary with only the meaning of "proverb", and is marked as "obsolete".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: you miss the subtely of english. you think you can do away with words like solution and replace and focus with no afterfollows (consequences. sorry, outcome doesnt work here). The truth is this- many of english's foreign words are very much in everyday-use, and they are used in specific ways. Native english words and their latin equivalents are, well not really equivalent much of the time, they each serve their purpose. You think you can work around this by oversetting words with phrases. Jesus we could lessen the english wordstock by half if you had your way and wouldn't have nearly the richness and power of expression we have today.
Lessening the english wordstock as you do calls for a heavy realiance on context for meaning to be understood, as you take two or more words, and bring them down to one, making two or more meanings once expressed by two or more words, now expressed by one, with meaning in each case hanging off on context.

Ya compond words are words, phrases are not words.
how about this. let's drop the word tree and call it the thing with leaves on it. that works.

you do away with subtely of meaning to make forth your "pure english" and you think thats wonderful, all the while you have little regard for the important role that foreign words play in filling in gaps of meaning.
You call my words gibberish, on what grounds, that theyre not in common use? Big shit, new words are spoken everyday, and some catch on you know. What is a real word anyway?
Loosenout and deedway are ridiculous. On what grounds, your taste?
Your judment of my words is feeling-grounded, and based on nothing logical.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I am surprised you are against anglish, Ængelfolc, for someone who claims to uphold english purity. What Ængelfolc shall we do with words like biology or mathematics or industry or agriculture? Some of these academic words OE did have words for, and that is great, let's bring all these words back. astrology had tungolcraft, mathematics rimecraft, philosophy outhwitting. OE i believe had a word for agriculture, tillingcraft or something. But let's say the word cropcraft is brought into english. Would that be a bad thing because it has never existed in english? I dont think so, not at all. All germanic coinages add to the richness of the germanic side of english.
what shall we do though for words that english has never had an equivalent for. I think you would underwreathe coining new words in these cases. Science could be ikindwitting, from OE ikind which meant nature. Economy could be worthdom or something.
but to be against coinages is silly. Words are coined all the time by the academie francaise for byspell, and by many other language overseeing groups.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ferthfrith: "afterfollows (consequences. sorry, outcome doesnt work here)"

Your sad "findings" (O.E. fandung, tǣcning, bīsnung "proof") are left badly wanting and without any weigtht or bearing.

Hmmm. Well, 'consequence' means "the effect, result, or outcome of something occurring earlier". Odd. 'Outcome' is in the meaning of the word itself. It WILL work here... it's okay.

1) The word is the present participle of L. consequī, meaning "to follow closely". So, one could also say in the stead of the Latin: "it follows that" (Yikes! A phrase!), "aftermath", "end", "fallout", "outgrowth", "aftershock", to name a few. Such already is the "richness" of English.

2) "Tree" (O.E. trēo(w), PGmc *trewan) is a Germanic English word that has been in the tongue since before 900 AD. There are many lone words, but the way of a Germanic tongue is to make compounds and phrases to talk about new things. Phrases are made of words, and are great to use in English.You have missed your mark here. Moot.

3) "you have little regard for the important role that foreign words play in filling in gaps of meaning": Either you haven't read my other posts, or you don't understand them. It is some-what true that I do not regard foreign words that fill in "gaps", since many times an English words exists that could be used instead, but that's all. In science, academia, fashion, technology, asf, it is more than a few gaps. Whole new English words would have to be made.

Now, I don't take kindly to folks putting words in my mouth or thoughts in my head. I do not think or believe any of what you put forth in your rant. I am not against "Anglish", or against making new English words or "coinages", and I am not for, nor do I uphold, English "purity" (that is folly).

As for "subtlety", do you really think that a glut of words is subtle? Shades of meaning are not merely marked with lots of lone words, but how the words are crafted and come together to shape meaning in an other than straight-forward way. Lots of words are not needed for a tongue to be rich. That is not true. Is the poem Beowulf a lesser poem because it was written at a time when English had less that 500,000 words? What about Cædmon's Hymn written in the late six-hundreds?

New words are outgrowths of a living tongue. How do you think "ginormous", "smackdown", "microgreen", and "Bollywood" made it into the Merriam-Webster wordbook in 2007? Pop Culture. That usually where new words come from. The folks make up the words as needed. See if you can make "loosenout" trendy, where folks will say it to mean "solution".

Now, "Cropcraft", maybe, since "craft" is still in common today, but that could easily mean "farming", too. And, we have "crop-sharing". "Deedway" (which is a family surname, in case you didn't know) for method will likely never fly, since you have to convince all of the academics and scientists. Those groups love Latin/Greek words. They were trained to believe they are higher register (smarter) words. Further, I think that we should look to other latter-day Germanic tongues to put in stead of Latin/French/Greek ones. I don't see why we shouldn't borrow from sister tongues. See, no feelings, all well thought out.

"as you take two or more words, and bring them down to one, making two or more meanings once expressed by two or more words, now expressed by one" Yes, it is a hallmark of English and Germanic tongues in general. Look up "kennings". The kenning is a great weapon in the English arsenal.

I think bringing back the words "lost" in Old English and highlighting the English words in latter-day English are needed to strengthen the heart of the tongue. After that, then I think new words can be made better, more easily, and taken in quicker by the folks---they have to be "de-Frenchified".

"Agriculture", by the way, was written Eorþtilung (Earth tilling).

Thanks again for your thoughts. Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

For Fun:

SCIENCE >> O.E. woruldwīsdōm >> worldwisdom, worldknowledge

NATURE (order of things) >> gecynd(e) >> Mid. Eng. kind(e) >> Mod, Eng. kind ("The Book of Genesis" was called "Gecyndboc" by Ælfric). Shift back to the original meaning would have to happen for this to work.

ECONOMY (Gk. oikonomíā ----> oîko(s) 'house' + nomia 'law'---> "household management") >> maybe 'worthship' (O.E. weorþsciepe, cf. German Wirtschaft, which is just a calque of Gk.οἰκονόμος) or 'marketworthship' pr 'worthshipthrift' or 'landworththrift' (country economy). Most every Germanic tongue today uses the Greek.

INDUSTRY >> Mod. Eng. Business (O.E. bisiġnes(s), "movie business"), Trade (O.E. tredan, "plumbing trade"), Craft (O.E. cræft, cf. German 'Kraft')

BIOLOGY (bíos 'life' + lógos, logia 'study of') >> funny thing about this word is that it was made up around 1800 by German scientist Karl Friedrich Burdach. English should look to Icelandic for a new word, since all of the other Germanic tongues use the Greek, likely since a German-speaker coined the word. See what I mean about scientists and their love of Latin/Greek words?

Icelandic Líffræði (life science) is a great model for English: Líf (O.E. līf "life, body") + fræði (O.E. frōd "wise, wisdom, understanding") >> so, maybe 'lifelearning', 'lifeunderstanding', 'lifewisdom', lifeknowledge' or something like it.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

biology >> līffrōd

Now this might work to get the academics and scientists to take an earnest look at switching over!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Correction about BIOLOGY:

Burdach coined the term "morphology" in 1800. The first to use the word biology, however, was by another German scientist, Michael Christoph Hanov (1695-1773), in his work Philosophiae naturalis sive physicae dogmaticae: Geologia, biologia, phytologia generalis et dendrologia (1766). Hanov did this because he believed that "souled beings" had to be split from "un-souled beings". Therefore, a new word was needed.

Interestingly, 'biologi(a)' was used in 17th century Germany and earlier to mean 'biography'.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "...words are generally descriptive of observed behavior, rather than an emotional reaction...is it not the same in your business life?"

Well, couldn't you say any of the above, if you framed it up by saying, "Your behavior is..." or "I find you behavior..."?

"I find your behavior churlish." "Your behavior is pigheaded."

Yes, sometimes in the business world PC words have to be used. I try to get away with speaking English whenever I can, though. Sometimes it leads to edgy stuff, but at least its honest and straight-forward. I have found most folks have a high regard for that.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: yes and no. I think people hear and remember the word, not exactly how it was used. The other thing is, as you probably realise, if it comes to defending what was said to one's boss, it's better if not to have said "pigheaded" at all. As it is I was able to use "rude, sullen, disrespctful, and uncooperative" this morning, (which I had carefully pre-taught last week).
In teaching English for business and academic purposes, there isn't time to teach everything, so we concentrate on the most useful words, and exclude words that could create trouble; so I wouldn't teach "pigheaded"; say this to your boss or a policeman and you are in trouble.
If I were teaching for journalism, creative writing, policing, or terrorism, then of course "pig", "pighead" and "pigheaded" would right there on my list, along with how to say good morning in Arabic.
I always remember being taught the "f***" word in Slovakia, just they forgot to tell me how rude it was. (There is a roman road along the A5 in England called "Foss Way")

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I notice "oversee" is making a comeback in job advertisements, (in lieu of "supervise")
and we already have the Senate Oversight committee. However I haven't seen "overseer" yet (for supervisor); to me "overseer" brings up pictures of plantation slavery, so I guess that's why

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Re: economy; if we ditch "economy" then we also must ditch "economical", "ecological" , "eco-friendly" "eco-niche" "eco-farming" etc. Likewise if we ditch "place" we must also ditch "replace", "emplacement" "placement", "outplacement" ..
same with all the "ology" words.. (except they're all academic)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

You mock my coining of new words and then switch over to being seemingly more open to them, all to show yourself as logical.
By purity, I mean words that ring well to the english ear. words that are made up of known parts, and that are therefore felt as being owned by the english speaker, rather than given to them by a wordbook.
having more words to express shades of meaning is indeed a token of a strong language. it means not having to rely on context, it adds richness.

500 000 words at the time of beowulf. that's a huge number, and without all the scientific jargon that nobody understands, nowtime english would likely have a lot less words than that.
Deedway will never fly because of academics? Well then you might as well drop all that your doing cause academics will be against it.
aftermath", "end", "fallout", "outgrowth", "aftershock."'
Let's test these out in a sentence: Jim, do your homework or youll suffer the consequences.
suffer the aftermath. Like what's left after a disaster?
suffer the ends. No explanation needed.
suffer the fallouts. well this could work though not fully, since it means something more along the lines of bad side-effect rather than consequence.
suffer the outgrowths. like a growth on the body right? this one doesn't ring well, though admittedly it's not that bad, though it does express something more like something that is made by something, instead of something that follows from actions or events.
suffer the aftershock. like an earthquake right? this one is too figurative and intense for my liking.

and here's the thing with outcome. it's neutral, whereas consequence is not. consequence is mostly used to describe an undesirable result. outcome even has a slight differenece in meaning to the word result. Result expresses a direct following from something, like this workout routine has given me great reults. But outcome expresses a kind of collection of actions or events that folow out in something happening. it would be really stupid to say this workout routine has given me really great outcomes. So you see, our many-worded language does give us the ability to express shades of meaning, and you can't simply do away with foreign words without compromising that.
Also, i am well aware that tree is native english, i was being sarcastic if you didnt notice.
there you go again with the word industry, thinking we can drop it and be fine filling it in with either business, trade, or craft. It doesn't work. Industry brings to mind the mass production of things. business is an entity involved in money-making, and means everything that entity does while going about doing this. trade is along the lines of skilled work. Craft too is along the lines of skilled work, but expresses finer work still. the word industry serves a good purpose and i wouldnt like to see it go without a coinage being put in its stead. How about worthship form the german wirtshaft, though I dont really like this since worthsip meant something like honour or respect, and it makes more sense using it in that way. Hmm I don't know maybe makingdom or felemaking (fele from OE for many, akin to german viel) or michelmaking.

also, as for the greek ology, why not just use lore. this is how it was used in OE, and it stems form the root learn, so its quite logical. biology would then be lifelore.

indeed new words are made everyday by native speakers. this is how new words should arise, i believe, instead of being imposed by an "academie". they should be welcomed and praised.

icelandic is truly a language to look up to. I envy those who speak, they have such a powerful language, so fully owned, so fully understood by its speakers.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The best way to influence the future of realworld english is via what children are taught at school. For centuries english children were taught French and/or Latin as their first foreign language, so romance borrowings come naturally. If children were taught Dutch, they would more easily use germanic words, and borrowings, and English would become more germanic over the succeeding generations.
However, in the real world Chinese, Arabic and Hindi might prove more useful.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

very true jayles, youre spot on. school is likely the single most weighty influence on how english speakers get their language. Come to think of it, i myself did learn most of my french/latin/greek wordstock at school, often from a wordbook. How sad, we learn our words as kids by looking them up in a wordbook. But for sure, if we switched over to teaching a germanic langauge at school, this would strengthen germanic english. Actually, i first became interseted in anglish, and in the potential of germanic english, after learning german.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ferthfrith:

You do not understand, nor seem to want to. Listening begets understand begets wisdom.

* "You mock my coining of new words and then switch over..." NO, you misunderstand again. Read...think...read again...think...understand. I ask again, read my other posts on this blog. I mock wanton word-making and wanton borrowing. They are the same evil, just on froward side of the same coin. I cannot be any more forth coming and straight forward: over-borrowing >> bad; making words for the sake of a one-to-one swap >> bad; loanwords taken when it is from mixing of folks and folkways >> good; making new English words when one is needed for a thought or thing, if one isn't already in the wordbook >> good.

* "500 000 words at the time of beowulf." No, I wrote ,"less than 500,000 words". The point being that great written works were done without so many words.

* "you might as well drop all that your doing cause academics will be against it.
aftermath", "end", "fallout", "outgrowth", "aftershock."'" Uh, you must be joking! Right?! These words are already used by academics and scientist all the time. They are real words that are in all English wordbooks, except maybe an "Anglish" one. They are already accepted. English speakers have been trained to take "consequence" as less neutral. Your "byspells" are one-sided and only prove the weakness in your position.

* "there you go again with the word industry, thinking we can drop it..." We can, and often do. Business, trade, and craft are used interchangeably with "industry all the time. So, industry is rather "superfluous", like most borrowed words. For all of your "byspells", I ask that you look at the meanings written in the English wordbooks. Just because one "feels" or "takes" a meaning in a certain way, doesn't mean it is right. The wordbook is the guide one should use when trying to show the truth of his findings.

You are right about O.E. weorþsciepe, worðscip, wurðscip, weorðscipe (c.1300 AD). I did not even think about it being the English word "worship". Too hard to change that meaning around.

I am all for bringing back "lore" (German lehr) or frōd and broadening their use.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles, @ferthfrith:

I am with you guys! We have talked about academia and the church being roots of the downfall or lessening of the English tongue. English is much more akin to Danish, Frisian, Dutch, and German at it's heart. Let's make German a must to learn for all learners (since it is the second most spoken tongue in the EU) and maybe Mandarin.

To be forthright, German (really Oberfränkisch ;-p) is my first tongue, so I tend to lean a little more toward anything German. But, I am for any of the Germanic tongues, since I am a striving Germanist.

Funny thing about a lot of these "scientific words": most of them seem to be coined by German scientists! ;-( Take "ecology" << from German Ökologie (Greek oîk(os) + logia), coined by the German zoologist Ernst Haeckel in 1873. See, brainwashed scientists!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

wow Ængelfolc maybe you should stick to german. let the native english speaker's deal with english.
English speakers have been trained to take consequence as less neutral? what is that suppost to mean. we take it as less neutral cause thats how its fucking used in everyday speech, we werent trained.
You wish to get rid of foreign words and insteaden them with with native words. well, you said that academics oppose this, and i was pointing out that if that is your thinking then what you are doing should be thought of as useless by you. yes native words are of course used by academics but you wish to do away with foreign words which you say academics are against doing.
You mock wanton word-making". well i guess this is where we disagree Ængelfolc. What to me is a sound coinage is wanton to you.
I stand by my opinion that the variety of words in english brings about a richness of expression, and that to do away with foreign words while having their specific meanings be absorbed by native words which themselves have specific meanings, is to impoverish the english language.
Wow Ængelfolc you really have a hard time grasping one of english's hallmarks: that of using many words to express many shades of meaning. honestly, if you cant see that industry is not the same as business, or trade or craft, then theres no use going on quibbling about this. im not sure what kind of english you speak but it's not the english that's spoken where im from, nor the english that's spoken on tv, nor the english that's read in books asf. we clearly have different understandings of the english language.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ferthfrith:

Profanity and hateful speech are signs of a weak, feeble mind trying to forcefully express itself. Clearly, this means you. There is no need to be rude on this blog.

You are frustrated since you can't handle the well-grounded rebuttals to your positions. It seems, like I said, you don't acknowledge the truth of what anyone writes, even when it can be backed up by many (old and new) sources, like dictionaries. Opening the ears opens the mind.

Academics like Latin/Greek roots to name scientific things. What you have put forth would fall on to deaf ears (deedway, loosenouts, asf). I never said that the academics would take on any new words that would put forth, only that they do use existing English words.

"Sound coinage"? That means to me that the word made follows English rules, is made from English bits, and sounds "English". It has nothing to do with it being wanton. A well made word or word-string can also be wanton.

"...grasping one of english's hallmarks: that of using many words to express many shades of meaning..." This is a latter-day (over the last 400 years or so) thing, that many English academics have argued actually has weakened English and lessened it's richness. I guess it depends on where one stands. This supposed "hallmark" is not lost on me, but after much study, I do not think so highly of this idea and question it.

"...theres no use going on quibbling about this..." Yes! Let's move on. You are not open to anything but your own thoughts. I come hear to talk about making English better; to openly (with an open mind) talk about ideas with others, not to attack them. Bad form, ferthfrith.

"im not sure what kind of english you speak but it's not the english that's spoken where im from, nor the english that's spoken on tv, nor the english that's read in books asf. we clearly have different understandings of the english language." I speak English, like you or anyone else. The proof is in my writings. We do understand English differently, and even native speakers understand English differently, too. Education, zum Beispiel, is a big factor. You are making a value-judgement about me that is unfounded and ignorant.

INDUSTRY: any general business activity; commercial enterprise; organized economic activity concerned with manufacture

BUSINESS: a person, partnership, or corporation engaged in commerce, manufacturing, or a service; profit-seeking enterprise or concern; an industrial, commercial, or professional operation; commercial activity; dealings; (adj.) of, noting, or pertaining to business, its organization, or its procedures; a trade or profession.

TRADE: of or pertaining to trade or commerce; the people and practices of an industry, craft, or business; amount of custom or commercial dealings; business; a specified market or business: the tailoring trade; an occupation in commerce, as opposed to a profession; to buy and sell (commercial merchandise); to deal or do business (with); Business or commerce; economic activity.

CRAFT: an art, trade, or occupation requiring special skill; the members of such a trade, regarded collectively

SOURCES:
Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition
2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins
Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009

The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition
Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011

So, it would seem business can mean 'industry', 'trade' maybe in a less formal setting. Certainly, 'trade' and 'craft' can shift back and forth, and can also mean 'business'. I am not sure where I "don't get it". Indeed, there are special uses for these words, but if another of the many meaning were to be highlighted... I didn't write the wordbooks, I only go by them.

Ferfrith, your ideas would seem to fit in well over at the "Anglish Moot". I am sure they'd love your input, since you seem to be of similar mind and purpose.

Again, no hard feelings! Mach's gut...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

profanity? hah that's funny. it's my thing see, i like it, so sorry if i offended you. I swear not cause im angry but cause its part of my everyday speech. You cant fucking interpret peoples emotions on a blog.80% of human expression is by facial expression and voice pitch. You are making a value-judgement about ME that is unfounded and ignorant.
your sarcasm could be taken to be a weak, feeble mind trying to forecefully express itself.
Im not even gonna go in to the conclusion you drew from those definitons you gave. the defintions prove me being right, they are in essence identical to my defintions. it should be clear enough that trade, craft, and business are indeed words with different meanings, and cannot be freely interchanged.
Can't handle your well-grounded rebuttals? wow you really are high up in the air Ængelfolc. you havent proven anything to me. i could go on talking this topic through, but i hate the inefficiency of blog-conversation. I have better things to do, like actually going out and talking to people, and spreading anglish, instead of sitting in front of my computer blabbering on about the sorry state of english
hah and you cite your dictionary sources. 3 dictionaries, 3, jesus. wow you really are something Ængelfolc, thourough indeed, you should be proud. i hate to judge without having ever met you, but you seem to take this blog way too seriously, as if it feeds your sense of importance, your ego or something.
Zum beispiel, mach's gut? once again Ængelfolc, stick to german, you seem to know and like it more than you do english.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ferthfrith:

“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.” -Plato

My words, just as your words, speak for themselves. Your reply is exactly what I expected. It makes what I have written ring even more true. Thank you!

All we have are the words on this blog by which to judge, nothing else. So, what one writes is all that can be known. That's all anyone here can do. Trying to go beyond that is not a right or becoming way to be.

I hope now we all can get back to talking about English on this blog in a fruitful, worthwhile way.

Cheers to all!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

ferthfrith & Ængelfolc: You two have much common ground in common. Simply different solutions.
There are also often differences in the AngloSaxon and a more Teutonic approach to business: for example AngloSaxons often go to business meetings expecting an open discussion, only to find the other side meticulously prepared and equipped with a set-in-stone proposal. The approaches can be very different.
Finally as the Hungarian King (forgotten his name) said before the first battle of Mohacs: "know thy enemy"
Of course he lost.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@ jayles: Als "Teutone", bin ich genau derselben Meinung. Wenn auch die Loesungsansaetzen der Angelsachsen und der Teutonen ganz anders sind, gibt es noch einen guten Weg und einen schlechten Weg. Leider ist dies, wo die Meinungsverschiedenheit liegt.

Your words are wise and ring true, jayles. Good show, and thank you!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Wasn't it Luis II of Hungary? I thought "know thy enemy" was from Sun Tzu (The Art of War)?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Here are some old science words that were coined by Germanic speakers. They all spoke Germanic tongues, yet they chose to take from Latin and Greek to make these new words.

neuron, chromosome >> Heinrich Wilhelm Gottfried von Waldeyer-Hartz (German)

genetics >> William Bateson (English)

gene >> Wilhelm Johannsen (Danish)

biceps brachii >> Bernhard Weiss (German)

iris >> Jacob Winslow (Danish)

dinosaur >> Sir Richard Owen (English)

cell >> Robert Hooke (English)

histology >> August Meyer (German)

Unbelievable, right? Sadly, French/Latin/Greek were/are the tongues of woruldwīsdōm (science).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Wasn't it Luis II of Hungary? I thought "know thy enemy" was from Sun Tzu (The Art of War)?" Genau; es war als Witz gemeint.

Yes discussion and negotiation styles do vary quite a lot around the world. It is wise to know what to expect; truly great people can switch styles to suit.
.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Genau; es war als Witz gemeint." Sorry, verstand den Witz sofort nicht. Obwohl haben Sie recht. Ich verhandle einen grossen Betrag des Auslandsgeschaefts, und verstehe ganz genau. Trotzdem lauert Engstirnigkeit immer irgendwo im Hintergrund.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Ich bin selbst engstirnig, d.h. ich will dass die Auslaender sich genau wie echten Englaender benehmen; mir ist das viel bequemer, hoeflicher. Warum die Koreaner das nicht machen koennen? - das ist mir voellig schleierhaft

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Das ist eine ganz andere Sache. Ich denke, dass fast jeder auf diese Art und Weise 'engstirnig' ist, und richtig so. Das ist fuer Auslaender nur richtig, die Sprache und Braeuche des Gastlandes anzunehmen. (Besonders, wenn sie dauerhaften Residentstatus oder Staatsbürgerschaft erwerben wollen) ..m.M.n...

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfol: Jedoch wenn man in Korea aufgewachsen sei, und an der koreanische Bildungssystem geleidet hat, denkt man nur auf koreanischer Weise. Das koreanische Bildungssystem konzentrierte sich wohl auf Routine/Auswendiglernen, aktiv entmutigt das fuer sich selbst Denken; in der Tat waren bis in den letzen Jahren alle Tests als „multichoice“ formiert.. Das Ergebnis ist, wenn man eine koreanische nach ihrer Meinung fragt, koennen die Antwort leise vorkommen, "Ich weiß absolut nicht; niemand hat mich nach meiner Meinung je bisher gefragt". Daher ist es eine wirklich große Angabe fuer sie, in eine voellig andere "europaeische" Gesellschaft zu integrieren.
Auf der selben Weise ist es oft eine wirklich große Angabe fuer jemand mit einem ganz anderen Verhandlungsstil zu operieren.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

ferthfrith: "Thourough indeed, you should be proud.... but you seem to take this way too seriously, as if it feeds your sense of importance, your ego or something."

This is a common anglosaxon response to the teutonic work ethic. I find it maddening too sometimes. If you ever live in Germany you would have to see the upside: they make wonderful cars, and everything works; everything is tidy and orderly; but don't make jokes or talk about your private life while doing business; it is separate.
We all have our foibles!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"mit einem ganz anderen Verhandlungsstil " better: bei einem ganz.......

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Your German is very good! You are also right about the Anglo-Saxon (which includes America) vs. the Teutonic ways of doing things. LOL! It is so true, and so funny at the same time. Did you live in Germany before?

Von meiner Sichtweise muessen die Einwanderer sich zur Kultur der Wahlheimat anpassen. Multikulti ist gescheitert. Einzelne Kultur, einzelne Richtung; viele Kulturen, viele Richtungen (im Wettstreit) >> Verfall der Hauptkultur des Landes.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Here are some old science words that were coined by Germanic speakers. They all spoke Germanic tongues, yet they chose to take from Latin and Greek to make these new words.

neuron, chromosome >> Heinrich Wilhelm Gottfried von Waldeyer-Hartz (German)

genetics >> William Bateson (English)

gene >> Wilhelm Johannsen (Danish)

biceps brachii >> Bernhard Weiss (German)

iris >> Jacob Winslow (Danish)

dinosaur >> Sir Richard Owen (English)

cell >> Robert Hooke (English)

histology >> August Meyer (German)

Unbelievable, right? Sadly, French/Latin/Greek were/are the tongues of woruldwīsdōm (science)"

Seems Jacob Winslow also even chose some French to go betwixt his gospelsome first name and his (utterlilike English looking) Danish last name. Though seeing has Winslow ended up in France, maybe it was an early example of the French bullying outsiders to frenchify their names.

Would it be wrong to say England have been the longest and biggest Romance fetishers - Nan Bullen to Anne Boleyn, Battenberg to Mountbatten rather than Battenburgh, Battenbury or Battenborough etc. Anyway, don't understand why this fashionista didn't go wholehog, drop the 'Winslow' bit, leaving: Jacques-Bénigne 'Guineslou'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_B._Winslow

......

/Jacob B. Winsløw, also known as Jacques-Bénigne Winslow, Danish-born anatomist (1669, Odense – 1760, Paris)/

/Winsløw greatly admired Bishop Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, the famous preacher, and, as a consequence, he slightly changed his Danish Christian names to those of Bossuet/

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

ÆngelfolcL "Did you live in Germany before?" quite a while ago now
www.targettraining.eu

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund: "Would it be wrong to say England have been the longest and biggest Romance fetishers..." LOL! No, I don't think that wrong. For a while, when French culture was "in", folks tried to Frenchfy themselves on purpose, especially in Britain.

WINSLOW (OE wine(s) "friend's" + OE hlǣw, hlāw "hill, hillock, barrow"; cf. Gothic *hlaiw "grave, tomb, cave", Old Saxon hléo, OHG hlaeo, hlēo, lēo, MHG lē); English name is from a place in Buckinghamshire; OE hlǣw is still found in modern place-names (esp. Scotland) like "Berwick law", "Houndslow", "Marlow", "Eastlow", "Westlow", and "Ludlow" >> Wineshlauu (849 AD, The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle), Winneshlaw, Winneslaw, Winneslow > (here begin the Anglo-Norman corruptions of the English original) Wynselawe, Wynselowe, Wynslowe >> Windslow, Winslow.

***HOWEVER***

In the case of Jacob Benignus Winsløw (baptised as Jacob Christian Winsløw), the name Winsløw was taken from the city of Vinslöv in Skåne (today in Sweden, but back then was part of Denmark), where his father was born.

So, vin(s) + löf (löf, löv, løv, lef, lev) >> Vinslöv >> Winslof >> Winsløw >> Winslow

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

So what exactly is the origin of "Hounslow" which is on the Picadilly line to Heathrow airport near london? Nothing to do with the hounds slowing down then? It was a coachstop for stagecoaches going west along what used to be the A30....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: Houn(d)slow >> O.E. hundes + O.E. hlāw (hound's burial)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

So what about "install" which prima facie has latin roots, but thence goes back to the same gemanic roots as "forestall"? Of course "installation" is also an issue.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Install (-ation, ment) << in (O.E. in, O.N. í, Gothic in, OSax. ín, OHG ín, PGmc. *inna; also tobe said from Latin) + Frankish *stall; cognates with O.E. onstellen, German einstellen, anstellen, asf.

Latin suffix -(a)tion << -ātiō (form of -tiō). = tells of an action/process, result, state or wuality of.

Latin suffix -ment << L. -mentum << L. -menta = tells about an instrument, medium, or result of something.

So, install (-ment,ation) = a Latin-Germanic compound.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Someone translate this into Anglish, please....

This is from the US Air Force website --> http://airforce.com/careers/detail/airborne-cry...


Airborne Cryptologic Linguist

Career Description

Persian Farsi, Chinese, Russian, Pashtu, Japanese, and Korean are just some of the languages you can learn as an Airborne Cryptologic specialist. Why do you need to know a different language? Because your primary job will be to receive, record, translate, evaluate, and report on foreign communications and intelligence. Many of the skills and equipment you'll use are classified, and since you'll be part of an aircrew, you could find yourself in any part of the world doing your job.

Career Tasks

Operate airborne signals intelligence systems and mission equipment
Use radio receivers, recording and related equipment to translate, evaluate, and report on communications
Perform and assist in mission planning and developing air-tasking orders
Receive, transmit and relay encoded and decoded messages
Record special interest mission information and maintain the status of mission aircraft, targets and air-tasking order information
Perform aircrew duties, including emergency equipment usage, and preflight/postflight inspections
Maintain technical aids, logs, and records

Relevant Interests & Skills

Aircraft
Electronics
Computer Science
Foreign Languages

Training

After eight-and-a-half weeks of Basic Military Training, every Airman goes to technical training to learn their career. Here's the basic information about Airborne Cryptologic technical training:

School locations: Lackland AFB [TX], Fairchild AFB [WA], Goodfellow AFB [TX], Monterey [CA]

Length of course: varies

College degree earned: Communications Applications Technology

College credits earned: varies

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I notice that they are not seeking anyone fluent in Anglish or offering training therein.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Airborne Cryptologic Linguist >> Loftborne Deorclǣrisc Tungcræfter? ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Airborne Cryptologic Linguist >> Skyborne Deorclǣrisc Tungcræfter??

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

MAYBE more true:

Airborne Cryptologic Linguist >> Skyborne Fæstdeorcrūnġereċċanlǣrisc Tungcræfter??

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

My bad...."sky" is not good "Anglish", it's Norse.

Scēogeboren Fæstdeorcrūnġereċċanlǣrisc Tungcræfter

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Even better? Scēogeboren Scyldwrītendeorcrūnreċċanungslǣrisc Tungcræfter

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Help I need a cryptologist to decode that!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Cryptology >> ( nīwe Eald Ænglisċ) Hȳddonrūnwrītingslǣr?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "Help I need a cryptologist to decode that!"

LOL! I was just messing around with some Ænglisc...maybe it will lead to a good "Anglish" word. At first, I muddled the new Ænglisc word a bit. I was trying to get the meaning of "cryptology/cryptography". Cryptology, as you know, is literally, "study of secrets (codes)".

Scēogeboren >> "airborne" >> lit. Scēo (cloud, sky) + geboren (borne)

Hȳddonrūnwrītingslǣrisċ >> "cryptologic" >> Hȳddon (hidden, secret) rūn (code, cipher) wrītings (graphic, writings) lǣrisċ (lore,knowledge, science, "study of...")

Tungcræfter >> "linguist" >> Tung (tongue, language) + cræfter (crafter, "one who is skilled")

So, in today's English (w/o Latin) >> "Skyborne Hidden-rune-writings-lorish Tongue-crafter"

Oh well....I tried. ;-p

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

1) it's the air that holds them up there not the sky;
2) "air" is now so deeply embedded in English both as noun and verb and in collocations- airborne is itself a Fr/Eng compound - that it would be difficult to replace. Eg "airing cupboard" , "airs and graces" , aircraft, the programs was aired ,,, etc
3) how about "codebreaker", sounds much more english even if code is fr.
4) A "tonguecrafter" is someone who carves tongues,or puts studs in tongues; it's a messy business often bloody. The term is also used for the people who boil and preserve ox tongues, a tasty delicacy favord by the early Saxons.

Ah so plausible!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Tonguecrafter" is also a tool attached to a four-cutter which moulds the tongue part of tongue and groove flooring timber.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I also notice they still want Russian as a language. Guess that's why we were taught Russian в школе не ужели??

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

1) I guess one could use "loft" or "heaven" instead of "sky". SKY, however, still means "the upper air; the upper atmosphere of the earth". I don't see it as a stretch for this sense. Words for "air" tend to be words like wind, brightness, sky in I.E. tongues anyway. AIR is a very old borrowing from around 12-1300, where it began to edge out O.E. lyft, luft (today's loft), so maybe it's okay.

AIRCRAFT, AIRWAY, AIR WAR are all Latin-Germanic compounds. We could have Flightcraft, Flightway, and Flight War instead, right? "Airs and Graces"? Isn't that like "pomp and circumstance"? Who needs that? This sense is from the French from 17th/18th c. I would call it "grandstanding and comeliness" or "flaunting and loveliness" or "showboating and lithesomeness", if asked. Why can't one "freshening or drying cupboard" ('cupboard' is another Latin-Germanic compound)?

2) Things would have to change, and other words made or used to tell about these things (if English were to change, of course).

3) How about "war-runebreaker" or "? ;-)

4) I've never heard of this. Isn't this just a "butcher"? Not only did early Saxons enjoy it, but almost all Germanic folks--- still in Germany today. Also, never heard of the tool you mentioned either.

"I also notice they still want Russian as a language." Well, Russia is in the news again, and not in good way. Russian is in good company with the other tongues mentioned. I never learned Russian; maybe I should start.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

This link isn't about English, but I think it fitting here. It also underscores what I mean by "Der Träger der Kultur sei die Sprache".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110604/ap_on_re_us...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The question of what foreign language people should learn is interesting. Clearly for career purposes, the major languages, English, Spanish, Arabic, Mandarin are the most useful. However there is so much romance borrowing over a germanic foundation in english that few non-slav European languages are really foreign. The wordstock is so similar. French and Dutch people rarely have difficulty in writing quite english-sounding english, whereas people from Asia (excluding India) almost always write unidiomatic English in a distinctly non-European style; really foreign. Russian and other slav languages stand midway; although there are noticeable borrowings from french in particular, and the structure is latinate, most of the wordstock seems as alien as hungarian, or mandarin, and thus a great hurdle. Lastly in Russian syllable stress is variable, often changing with wordending. Once one gets beyond the textbooks where stress is marked, knowing where to put the stress becomes an ongoing nightmare. Eg okNO window; okNA of a window; OKna windows etc
However it will light up your chances with slav women!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: I cannot speak about Russian, but I do know the Slavic words for beech, larch, and yew trees are borrowed from Germanic.

I do speak Polish (not well, but enough). French sway is easily heard, since Polish has a lot of likeness to French in it's fricatives and nasal vowels. Also, there are a lot of Germanic and French words in Polish. Some German words are: 'chleb' << P.Gmc *hlaiba- "loaf"; 'szlachta' << PGmc *slahta "noble family"; 'rycerz' << MHG ritter "knight"; taniec << OHG/Frankish *dansōn "to dance" asf.

Some Polish words from French are: rekin << Fr. requin "shark"; ekran << Fr. écran "screen" (which is truly from Frankish *skrank)

Yes!!! The case endings....the noun case endings....Nominative, Accusative, Genitive, Dative, Instrumental, Locative & Vocative....Psza krev Cholera!!!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Something else interesting about the Polish tongue fitting to this blog:

According to Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski, "Unabridged Polish dictionaries presently contain some 200,000 entries; one-third of these are foreign adaptations, while about one-fourth are still close to Old Slavonic words."

Seems Polish suffers from the same thing!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Well if you could get past the cyrillic script you would find russian quite similar to polish; as one travels west from russia, the language slopes off into ukrainian, by Lviv it's sloping off again into polish, or further south slovak. Psza krev would be "pcov krovj" in Russian.
Much the same happens with german and surrounding tongues, and with what they speak in Barcelona (Catalan?).
This points up that the entire concept of a "pure" language is misplaced. Yes we don't want to be flooded with unnecessary borrowings, but words like "banana" and "potato" would be sensible. (Anglish: "chimpfood" "earthapples" I suppose).
As you may know in the 19th century hungarian, like most Eurolanguages borrowed the word "pianoforte" for the new instrument. However the "Hunglishers" of the day decided they wanted a "pure" hungarian word and created the current word "zongora".
Nice but IMHO unnecessarily separatist. They went on to hungarianise many words several thousand of which survive today, many calques of German eg Fallschirm (oh no that must have been later!) Anyway
"Kálmán Szily presented approx. 10,000 words in his book A magyar nyelvújítás szótára ("Dictionary of Hungarian language reform", vol. 1–2: 1902 and 1908), without aiming to be comprehensive"
I am not at all convinced it was a good idea. Just makes the language so oddball.
I see nothing wrong in Europeans sharing and borrowing words from each other where necessary esp technical words. We do in fact share a common European culture and history and ancestry.
Time for a cuppa!

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

PS lifted the hood on my made-in-Australia car and discovered "OPEL " on the engine and german everywhere. Those damn Anglishers at it again!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Part II Of course this doesn't mean that as Europeans we have to share everything; we can still retain our regional identities and regional culture. Indeed some things like english warm beer, hungarian "langos" (deep fried dough) should definitely not be spread or borrowed at all!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "...the entire concept of a "pure" language is misplaced. Yes we don't want to be flooded with unnecessary borrowings, but words like "banana" and "potato" would be sensible."

Yes, I am of the same mind as you. I guess that everyone means something different by "pure", but it is folly none-the-less. Indeed, Anglo-Saxon (before the 7th century) had few Latin loans that it got through trade before they came to Brittania because of where their homeland sat. They were too far out of Rome's reach.

Once the Anglo-Saxon's came over, the Celtic speakers helped to add about 200 Latin words (like street) to the A.S. wordstock (although, only a few Celtic words such as 'whiskey', 'flannel', 'bog', and a few others).

"Language Purity" movements are not uncommon. You mentioned the Hungarians, but also the Danes had an aggressive movement against French in the 18th and 19th centuries. German did, too, against Latin (and it was successful). English has had several movements over the last 700-800 years off and on. I am all for it, if it thoughtfully gets rid of unnecessary foreign influence.

Technical borrowings needn't be foreign. A good 'byspell' is Television. In German today, one can say "die Television". I find that terrible. There is nothing wrong with "das Fernsehen" or "der Fernseher". Icelandic has "sjónvarp". In German, we also say "der Rundfunk" for radio, broadcasting. Icelandic says "útvarp". AUTO is German (can be said auto), but the true word is "der Kraftwagen". Others in German are: cellular/mobile phone "das Handy"; airplance "das Flugzeug"; computer "der Rechner"; photograph "die Aufnahme, das Bild"; electricity "der Strom", asf. So, technology words do not have to necessarily be borrowed.

"...my made-in-Australia car and discovered "OPEL " on the engine..." You must have a HOLDEN (Opel is branded as Vauxhall in England)! Let me add "insult to injury": Opel is subsidiary of General Motors. ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc:

This site concerns itself with English, which is a living language, and a real one. Anglish is imaginary, like Esperanto or Atlantean (or Antlantish?). Have you an issue that is relevant to today?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@dogreed:

Thank you for asking, but I don't know why you are asking me this. Read my writings on this blog for the answers you seek. "Global-English" (being the World Lingua Franca) is a real issue for English. I'd say that is one of the greatest issues of English today. And, it goes way beyond the corruption of the tongues itself; there are socio-economic overtone's to deal with. What's more, English's "global language status" comes at the great expense of other languages, threatening other tongues survival---English included.

"Living languages" are to gain new vocabularies and ideas; there is no strife about this. To my mind, "living language" does not mean "take on as many and as much of all other languages in the World", in the misguided notion that diversity, acceptance, and cultural understanding will be achieved. These ideas are both dangerous and foolish.

Furthermore, I am not an "Anglisher", rather I am for English (Ænglisc). I am with you about "Anglish"; I have likened it to Tolkien's "Elvish".

Please expound on your question. Thanks.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@dogreed: "This site concerns itself with English..."

While the site www.painintheenglish.com does deal with English, these rolling remarks within this site deal with the question of Anglish and its relevance to English growth and development.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "...words like "banana" and "potato" would be sensible."

They are, although many tongues have their own word (albeit usually a regional one): Polish "ziemniak"; German "Erdapfel (which was also used to tell about a 'globe'), Erdbirne, Grundbirne; Dutch "Aardappel"; Icelandic "jarðepli"; Swedish "jordpäron"; Nynorsk/ Bokmål ‬"jordeple" and others.

Think about this: the French word today is "Pomme de terre"; in the 16th c. the French said "Cartoufle" (cf. other German, Ślůnski, Danish, Russian, Icelandic words for "potato").

Banana can be said in many other ways like "Adamsfeige", "Paradeisfeige" (German, sometimes Dutch), "bjúgaldin" (Icelandic-rare), among others.

But, I guess what is easy and common prevails---especially when a word is decided on globally. Also, that is not to say that the origin of the food, thing, or thought should carry its native name. There is something to be said for that. It fits in with what I have said before: "Der Träger der Kultur sei die Sprache".

Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

correction: "Also, that is not to say that the origin of the food, thing, or thought shouldn't carry its native name."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Good: and what about the yoga-speak; the names of the poses in yoga; are we to use sanskrit or translate; eg veravadrasana = "warrior" pose ??? "aana" means pose; and we now get "plankasana" as their is no sanskrit for the plank position. (Plank here is not quite the same as the current planking craze).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: could possibly find an idiomatic way to say in German:
"I always take my brolly with me in case it rains".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

What an interesting thread! Ængelfolc you should certainly have your own blog for Ænglisc.

While I do fault academia for encouraging the use of Latin and Greek based words, it's probably not for the reason that many think. Actually, it's pretty simple. I had to write a lot of term papers and research papers that usually had a length requirement of X pages. Well heck, why use often and talk when I could use a longer words like frequently and conversation to push me towards that minimum page limit ... and those 50-cent words sounded more impressive. So one becomes used to do that! And once I gained a reputation for being able to write well using those 50-cent words, then the boss always came to me to either write a proposal or proofread something he had written.

But nowadays, I try to stay clear of Latinates. Strangely, I have no issue with Greek based words. Sometimes I think I was a Greek soldier in a previous life. I even learn a little Greek years ago.

I should mention that I am "conversant" ... meaning not fluent but able to talk if the other person speaks slowly and clearly ... and keeps the words simple in Russian, German, and Spanish. I learned Russian at the Defense Language Institute; learned German while living in Berlin, and Spanish while living in Latin America.

I often help others learn English and have even aided in a few professional translations. One of the things that I point out is that the basic English likes short words and to build other words using them similar to German. Having said that, it's very hard for me to keep away from Latinates and I don't think that one can teach latter-day English without them.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Loan words that I would keep ... A lot actually.

1. Computer ... I don't know who used it first but US companies like IBM and Apple have taken it and exported it to the world in its current use. We own it now! No sense in trying to go back to yank it out and create yet another word. Besides, it has spun off some English words into other languages. You can see ads in Latin America for "el laptop" and "el notebook" ... libre wi-fi!

2. Military terms. I'm a vet and let's face it. The French-based ranks is widespread and engrained ... especially the officer ranks. Even Germany has Leutnant, Major, and General ... as do the Russians. The military is heavily influenced by French military terms and you're not going to change that institution.

3. As I said before, I don't have a problem with Greek derived words, especially scientific words. I know what a hydrogen atom is. While I know that hydro means water and gen is basically "born of" or "created from", I don't associate the hydrogen atom with directly with water except that I know it is part of the compound of water H20. But the German way of saying it Wasserstoff (water stuff) strikes me as almost childlike and bangs one on the head that that is "water" ... yes, I know that hydro means water but doesn't slap me in the face like "water stuff" would.

To calque economy into English would only make sense on the personal (home/house management) but not on a grander scale. And to calque ecology wouldn't make any sense. Just accept them. If you can't find a better word then just use them.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

One more thing ... I feel like I should have taken notes along the way. I did go to the Anglish wiki site and looked around. It's not very user friendly for discussion and debating ... and there doesn't seem to be a lot of debating the terms. And I don't know if there is some method of making a decision on what goes and what stays.

I picked the word battle and here what is listed:
Non-attested:
hurly-burly
clash
struggle

*** Hurly-burly? WTF? Clash ... Maybe. Struggle ... Doesn't have the intensity for me of two armies on a battle field.

Attested:
bedlake ... ?
bedew ...?
hild ... OE word that I recognize. I don't know OE well enough to know if this is a good use. But it wouldn't be something instantly recognizable.

One that I didn't see "camp" or maybe "kamp" from OE for battle ... similar to German "Kampf". But a "campfield" (battlefield) could be confused with a campground ... at least spelling it "kampfield" would help there. Maybe "clashfield" or "clashground" would indeed work. Oh well, I like the word battle so I guess I'll keep some form of it tho I could use clash as a verb.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Anwulf: in Hungarian "szamitogep" is use for computer; it means calculating machine.
Not suggesting something similar would work in English; it's too late now anyway.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Spanish has "ordenador" and maybe they use that in Spain but in Latin America I see "computadora" ... and sometimes hear "el computer".

The people that I know from Quebec use computer ... France probably has an official French word for it.

German has "Rechnung" and "Computer" ... Computer is common among my friends.

Since you speak Russian ... компьютер

I'm sure that their are some holdouts around the world! lol

The problem now would be to accurately describe it. (Three words there that need Anglish words ... problem, describe, accurately).

I can do math, write, draw, communicate (written, sound, and sight) with it ... So, what is it? What would you call it if you didn't already have a name for it?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

there is an existing term "ready reckoner"; so something based on "reckon" might be feasible (or do-able).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf, when did you go to the DLI? What branch were you in? What was your DLAB score? I will get to go to the DLI soon!

I would like to talk to you about the DLI so I can get some good advice/tips form someone who was there. I leave for Air Force BMT in on July 4.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ready Reckoners were tables for financial calculations ... I think that would apply nowadays more to calculators. I know that my old textbooks from my university days has financial tables in the back. I wonder if they still print those tables?

But you did stirr an old memory from my early tech days and sure enough, I found it ... Claude Kagan had a proposal for what he called the "Home Reckoner" or "HR"back about 50 years ago. http://www.retrotechnology.com/dri/thehomerecko...

I think he got the idea for the name from Jules Vernes story. Who, in turn, probably knew about a device called the Step Reckoner.

The verb reckon has a broader meaning than simply to calculate so if I were trying to peg a word for a computer then "reckoner" would probably be it. Oh well ... What could have been ...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@addyaty ... I went there many years ago for Russian and I was Army. Actually, I DLI at Presido was overcrowded and they were building new barracks so a few classes, mine among them, were sent to a branch campus set up at Lackland, AFB where you're going for Basic and where the Army had its English language school for foreigners. So while I missed out on glamor of Presido, I can't complain because the instruction at Lackland was excellent and I enjoyed being there. As a side note, our graduates performed better at the next phase training, especially on military terminology and listening comprehension.

DLI was one of the few schools that I went in the military that wouldn't keep giving you shot after shot to pass. We had a 50% washout rate. The class was composed of Army and AF personnel. We started with 128 and graduated 64. It was 48 weeks with a 4-week break at the mid-point so we could use our leave time.

All I can tell you is that you if you begin to flounder, get help fast. Go to the instructors and ask for some one-on-one time after class. I imagine nowadays that they're much more high-tech than when I was there. I'm guessing that you can have CDs made to listen to in your room. I don't know what language you have, but we had a few sergeants who were come thru for their second language. I remember one in particular who had been thru DLI for German and was coming thru for Russian ... He didn't make it. If you're taking a language that you're not familiar with already, don't assume that you'll have an easier time just because you already have a second language. It'll be a good time and you'll always remember it ... Good luck!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: "Ængelfolc you should certainly have your own blog for Ænglisc."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: "Ængelfolc you should certainly have your own blog for Ænglisc."

Vielen Dank für das Lob!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "I always take my brolly with me in case it rains".

Well, I take it that you are just looking for an unusual word for "brolly", since you likely know how build the rest of the phrase.

Instead of Schirm or Regenschirm, one could say "das Regendach" or, even funnier, "die Musspritze".

Hope this is what you seek. Cheers!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"campfield" (battlefield) could be confused with a campground"

Why not 'fightfield', 'warfield' (war is actually a Germanic word (Frankish *werra), where 'battle' is straight up Latin from 'battuālia'), or 'kriegfield' (English already uses kriegspiel)?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: sorry I was actually wondering how you would deal with 'in case'; 'falls' seems to mean the same as 'if'; phrases like "fuer den Fall, dass.." or 'gegen die Moeglichkeit, dass... ' seem to convey the meaning but I have never seen or heard them used.
Of course one could say in German 'I take my brolly with me whether it is raining or not"
but I was wondering if there really is an idiomatic equivalent of 'in case".
Perhaps it is like 'whereas", which is okay in English, but "wohindagegen" decided uncommon in German; comments appreciated

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Here are my thoughts about the choices you offered:

1. Fightfield/fightground ... maybe ... Even tho fight can be used to describe anything from individuals to countries, it doesn't have the same nuance when it comes to the area covered. It doesn't seem to rise to the level of battlefield in the scope of size. Units fight each other as a subset of a battle.

2. Warfield/warground ... again, maybe ... This one has the opposite issue in that its too big. Units fight a battle as part of a war.

3. Kriegfield/kriegground ... Kriegspiel isn't really used that much. I rarely heard outside of Germany or unless someone had just rotated in from a unit stationed in Germany. Kind of like you hear soldiers in Germany use "machts nichts (nix)" but it's not common stateside. Altho, krieg is a known word unlike the OE guth.

They fought a battle ... They fought a fight? Naw ... They fought war? Too big in scope. The fought a krieg? Schlacht? Or from OE ... Hild, Sacu? Sacufield sounds like soccerfield. Hildfield? Shlachtfield? (Make it an English "sh").

Out of all of those, if I had to pick one ... It would be from the last two and probably lean toward shlachtfield/shlachtground or even shlachtfeld. But then that is probably my bias since I know German better than OE.

On a different word, I was trying to a find another word for the verb "to use" ... (mid-13c., from O.Fr. user "use, employ, practice," from V.L. *usare "use," frequentative form of pp. stem of L. uti "to use," in Old L. oeti "use, employ, exercise, perform," of unknown origin. Replaced O.E. brucan.)

The only thing that I could remotely find that wasn't Latin based was "to brook" from OE brucan but the meaning of latter-day "to brook" doesn't include "to use".

Sometimes you just gotta keep what you have! lol

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@AnWulf. Thank you! I will find out which language either toward the end of Basic or when I go to Monterey. I scored a 136 which qualifies me for Chinese, Arabic, Japanese, and Korean. I have no interest in any of those, but if I had to pick based on after-military plans, I'd choose Chinese. Korean would be ok because of it's alphabet, but I heard that it is *the* toughest language... and also useless after-military. Out of sheer interest, I hope to get Arabic, that is, if i get stuck with one of those four.

I have read online that I will get to make a wishlist with three languages but, obviously, military needs come first. On my list, I would put German, Russian, and Icelandic. I'd be happy with any Romance, Germanic, or Slavic language.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

On the other hand reviving 'wont' as in I was wont to.... might be nice, instead of used to

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

addyatg: "Korean...*the* toughest language": this depends on your own first language. Tonal languages such as Mandarin, Thai, Vietnamese are often very difficult indeed for people from non-tonal languages. Learning Chinese-style hieroglyphics is also time-consuming indeed. The other factor apparently there is not much literature of any interest in Korean (???), compared to say Mandarin, or Arabic.
On a less serious note, if the Hungarians had won the battle of Lechfeld in 955, and settled in western Europe, subsequently invading England in 1066 and imposing their language on the common folk (instead of the laissez-faire approach of the Normans, it is just possible that people in the US today would all be speaking Magyar........

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

addyatg: "On my list, I would put ... and Icelandic" I didn't realise that the recent clouds of volcanic ash which stopped flights all over Europe were in fact a terrorist reprisal attack on the IMF.....

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Re battle: slaughter is modern form of Schlacht.
Re computer: of course saxons did not have any computers; but they did jot things down on scrolls marketed under the brand name: "eyepad".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@addytag ... When I enlisted, I was able to lock down the language before going to basic. I took the DLAB because the recruiter asked after my ASVAB score came back if I would like to learn Russian. Then the guys downtown, at first, couldn't find an open slot for Russian and asked if I go with Korean. I told the guy that I wanted a shot at being assigned to Germany ... He said, "Well, just because you take Korean doesn't mean that you'll go to Korea." Yea, right ... I said no thanks to Korean and then another guy found the slot in a slightly different MOS and I signed up.

My brother went thru DLI for Mandarin as did a guy I went thru Basic with. He told me that the grammar of Chinese was simple but the tonals and the writing were a real pain. I had a quickie intro to Japanese and it seems pretty complex. I have no experience with Korean and no desire to learn Arabic tho I did learn a little Persian from a Iranian girl. ;)

My guess is that isn't a great demand for airmen with Icelandic skills. I don't think that we need to monitor their military transmissions to any great extent. Probably not much of a demand for German now that the Cold War is over. Still need Russian, Chinese, Arabic, Farsi-Dari-Pashto (for Afghanistan), and a few others.

To be honest, I haven't done anything professionally with Russian since I left the Army. So pick languages that you want to learn for whatever reason. Japanese was hot back in the 80s, Chinese is somewhat in demand now. But I think we'll see them go the way of Japan ... an influence in the market but not dominating it. I disagree with Jayles about Arabic ... There's really no great need to learn it unless you want to work in the Saudi oil fields.

The AF will be a good life. We called the AF "civilians in uniform" because it's much more casual than the Army. At least you won't have to crawl thru the mud! lol

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Jayles ... they're related. Schlacht is battle; Schlachten is slaughter. The verb schlagen is to hit or strike; erschlagen is to slay; schlachten is to slaughter.

As for Lechfeld, if the Hungarians had won would they have settled or just push their raids farther west?

If Hitler had not decided against taking Malta, German would be a much more dominating language in Europe right now! ...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I have been trying to use non-French and non-Latin based words for a few days and it's darn near impossible!

Try - from OF trier
Use - from OF user (from L uti)
Base - OF - Latin
Impossible - OF - Latin

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: sometimes we can use "seek to" instead of try: she sought to escape...
sometimes "ground" for base: the system is grounded on the data server...
but yes often it's a "no-can-do" situation. Most languages have borrowings so does English, just struggle (or try) to avoid the unneeded ones, although sometimes those latinate words have a very specific and irreplicable meaning, nuance, or neutrality.

I was surprised myself to see that Hungarian raids extended as far west as Spain. but
the point was that language is often a fluke of history. The US could easily be Spanish or French speaking now if the Louisiana purchase had not gone through.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf:

About "Kriegspiel": The point was that "Krieg" is not foreign to English.

About "try": Anglo-Norman/Old French trier << it is suggested that it may be a metathetic variation of Old French tirer << Germanic *t(a)iran (cognates with Gothic *distairan and *gatairan, and is related to the verb tear).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"We called the AF "civilians in uniform" >> or the "Chair Force" ;-)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"fuer den Fall(e), dass.." is right. Or, one can say "falls" or "im Falle". So, "in case it rains" >> "falls es regnet".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I like "Shlachtfield", but maybe "Slaughtfield"? Maybe "skirmishfield" or "frayfield" (fray << Frankish *frithu; "fray" is a shortened form of "affray" (related to "afraid") and is a Latin-Germanic hybrid word).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"I have been trying to use non-French and non-Latin based words for a few days and it's darn near impossible!" >> I have been striving (<< Frankish *strid) to work with no French and no Latin rooted words for a few days and it's darn (American English softening of 'damn'--so, it's okay) near beyond.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Thought this article was interesting and appropriate for this blog:

German linguists oppose influx of English words
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/14/ger...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@addyatg: See the link below...

http://airforcelinguist.com/

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I follow the link from the airforcelinguist to the sample DLAB ... @addyatag, I hope your DLAB was tougher than that. That was simple. I thought my DLAB was really strange until I started Russian and then I realized that it was based on a slavic language with multiple, declined endings.

@Ængelfolc, that was an interesting. Maybe someone would point that "market" was imported into English via French from Latin.

I'll go on your word that "try" is old Frank and possibly Germanic ... otherwise it becomes awkward to work around it.

I think I'll just have to accept the word "use" ... It's just too darn ... well ... useful! And I like it much better than the other import ... utilize which comes from the same root! I rarely use "utilize". I always say "use".

Generally, I'm ok with one or two-syllable word imports. It's the three+ syllable imports that I really start me looking for something different. And it has been a challenge at times to find non-French/Latin words to use!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles ... I agree about the nuances ... at least in part. One has to wonder if those nuances are there because there was a real need for it or are the there just because of our perceptions. English was the on the lower tier below French and Latin and then still below that of Latin for many years. The "cultured", "elite", "educated", etc. learn French and Latin. I imagine that this showed off by using them even with the lower classes who, in turn, related those words to being more worthy than mere Anglo-Saxon/English words.

Is there really a nuance between despise and hate? Is hate that much stronger? Or less polite? Have we had centuries of conditioning to accept that French/Latin based words are better? Even now we're often told in the US that we should accept the "diversity" of other languages than requiring that our gov't carry out its affairs in English. Those who promote English first are labelled as haters ... Even on this thread, the mere idea of attempting to forego the use of French/Latin words brought out the label of racist.

The mere fact that English has not only survived all these trials but thrived is amazing. In one way, we should be grateful. Since English was looked down upon, nobody was trying to control it. It was allowed to change in such a manner that Anglo-Saxon lost most of its declination and gender in the process. A good thing in my eyes.

OTOH, it picked up a lot of French/Latin words, the god-awful French spelling habits and rules, and "thou", "ye", and "you" got all mangled up (mainly as the result of imposing the T-V (tu-vos/vous) rule on thou and ye).

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@AnWulf: "I'll go on your word that "try" is old Frank and possibly Germanic ..."

It is seemingly more and more likely that "try" it is from Frankish. Some say that "try" is from Gallo-Roman *triare, but is "of unknown origin". Yet others stop at the Old French word trier (‘separate, sift’) as the root. Still others write that it is from Vulgar Latin *trītāre (p.p. of Latin terere (to rub). When one, however, puts a little elbow grease into the research, one can find the truth of it all. Looking at all of the root meanings, it becomes clear that the root is in all likelihood PGmc *tiranan, *tirōnan (“to tear, separate from..., tear apart”). The Old French trier, whence English "try" meant “to choose, pick out, separate from..., sift, cull”.

In years gone by, academics always believed a French/Normaund word to have a Gaulish-Latin root. Today, those old findings are being found to be untrue in many, many cases. Take the word 'farm'. It was always said to come from Latin firmo, firmus, firmāre, but this is not so.

As it happens, the Romans borrowed Germanic *fermō, *ferhumō, whence firmo, firmus, firmāre. Latin lestagium is from Old English last; L. bannus << Frankish *bann; L.Fevum << Frankish *fehu; L. soc(n)a << Germanic scīra (O.E. scīr); O.Fr. forest << M.L. foresta << Frankish *forhist ....and the list could go on and on.

These new findings highlight the heavy Latin/French bias by academics, and why one can never assume anything. Germanic tongues have given a lot more to French and Latin than has been acknowledged.

Just my 2 Marks. Mach's gut!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: Is there r:eally a nuance between despise and hate? Oh quite definitely. I might indeed despise (or look down on) you (as I do all underlings) but I certainly don't hate you! Underlings are neither worthy of hate nor love!!!! ;+)) nothing personal.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: After long years learning latin and french at school, like so many grammar schoolboys I find it easier to make up the word "irreplicable" than find a real English word. Hardly surprising, is it? If one wastes the teenage years sitting at a desk learning stuff only befitting a catholic priest, that really is all one is good for, n'est ce pas? Of course such an "education" affects one's English. Far better to learn Welsh or Dutch.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc, thanks for the link, but I have seen it before. :-)

@AnWulf. Yes, the actual DLAB was a little tougher than that. The rules regarding nouns and adjectives were like Esperanto: all nouns end with A and all adjectives end with O and all plurals end with S... or something like that. The possessive was like the Latin Second Declension Masculine Genitive -i as in dominus/domini and murus/muri. So "Adam's book" becomes "Adami book" or even "book Adami".

The past verbs were like Anglo Saxon with a "ya" prefix. The man ya-wrote book about languages.

After that easy stuff, they showed about five little icons: a donkey head, a man, a dog, a duck, and a purse. Each word had a made-up "foreign word", respectively giving "asa, bosa, gola, flopa, and chicha"

Then they would mix up the parts from each icon like a man with a donkey head. Then they would give us four options to choose from: golasa, asflapa, bosicha, and bosasa.

Well, the only "word" that has elements from both donkey/asa and man/bosa" is "bosasa" so that had to be the right (or, at least, the MOST right) choice.

The test was worth 176 points total but there were NOT 176 questions. So I think when it came to this icon part and the weird part after, some points were 3 or 2 while the rest were worth nothing.

The last part (and really weird part) was the complicated version of the icon part. I honestly could only narrow it down to 2 or 3 out of the 4 or 5 options.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

no everything is incorrect

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles ... just don't say irregardless! lol

For me the only difference between being despised or being hated is that being despised is perceived as being more polite and I think that is a few hundred years of conditioning.

@Ængelfolc ... It would be only natural that there are a lot of Frankish words in French since the Franks overran them way back when ... just as Spanish has a lot of words of arabic origin and English has a lot words of French origin. I'll take a word of Frankish origin over Latin if possible.

The funny thing is that during the height of the Roman Empire, Greek was still the lingua franca (Frankish tongue). I once asked why was the New Testament written in Greek instead of Latin since the Roman Empire was in charge and that's what I was told. More people spoke Greek. After the fall of the Roman Empire, thanks to the Catholic Church in part, Latin became the "Frankish tongue".

@addyatg ... Let's us know which language you eventually get. I know that you'll have a blast at DLI. Just remember that the coursework comes first. And, to be honest, AF Basic is pretty much a joke in comparison to the Army's or Marine's so relax and remember that it will quickly pass. When I was at Lackland, they weren't even allowed to make the trainee's do pushups as punishment (or extra conditioning as it was known in the Army if anyone asked). Pfft ... I think that they carried a pad of demerit slips and I don't know what happened if you got too many. It'll be good for stories and you'll laugh about it after you get out.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@AnWulf: "English has a lot words of French origin"

The thing is, is that many words that are taken as "French" (Latin/Gaulish) are really "Frankish" (Germanic), and in some cases "Scandinavian" (Old Danish, Norwegian, asf).

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"One has to wonder if those nuances are there because there was a real need for it or are the there just because of our perceptions."

It is the way English speakers were taught to understand a single words shades of meaning, as well as, how the words were used by the folks everyday; This is how meanings shift.

I do not think that "latinate words have a very specific and irreplicable meaning, nuance, or neutrality" at all. English speakers were taught (through academics and living amongst French speakers and clergy) that these words had this kind of worth. I guess the truth of it hangs on through which window one looks out from.

My 2 Marks.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: I actually wrote: "SOMETIMES latinate words.....". Years ago the milk truck delivered fresh milk in glass bottles to our street of an evening. Each evening the driver boomed to his milkboy helpers: TWO HOMOS at # eleven!!!
meaning not homosexuals but homogenized pints of course. In pre-Bastard times the driver would have shouted: TWO MIXED-UPS at # eleven!!! , but all DIY then of course.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

On a more serious note: It is perfectly true that there is a snob value in using latinate words. Thus job adverts contain phrases like "able to work autonomously" - and other "buzz" words. So to intermediate students I just explain this as "on your own", which is near enough for that level. However at proficiency level we then ask the question what is the difference? and clearly autonomously is closer to independently, and "on your own" might mean "alone". Now of course one can come up with other substitutes for autonomously, either completely calqued or just madeup or some revival of OE, but they are never going to have exactly the same feeling as the original (Gk), for good or ill. Of course modern English is littered with the debris of borrowings - wan/pale/pallid;
bloke/wight/man/homo/person; etc.; we just need to weed out the unneeded ones.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

On a more businesslike take/knell/tip/heeding: it is spotlessly true that there is a snob worthiness in wielding latinate words. Thus work adverts house phrases like "able to work autonomously" - and other "buzz" words. So to middling learners I just untangle this as "on your own", which is near enough for that standing of learning. However at the skilled end the asking raised is what is the unlikeliness between both? and indeedly autonomously is closer to independently, and "on your own" might mean "alone". Now indeed one can come up with other stand-ins for autonomously, either utterly borrowed or just madeup or some backkindling of OE, but they are never going to have wholly the same feeling as the firsthand (Gk), for good or ill. Indeed todays English is strewn with the dregs of borrowings - wan/pale/pallid;
bloke/wight/man/homo/person; etc.; we just need to weed out the unneeded ones.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Pathfinders listen up, shape a ring around the hearth...

a *ring* o' roses

and

*naughts* and crosses

and

Saturn's rings


instead of:


a circle o' roses

and

zeros and crosses

and indeed

Saturn's circles

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Pathfinders listen up, shape a ring o hearth(?)

If 'o' = 'around'

then 'osheep' = 'around sheep'

could using 'o-' as a prefixlike thingy be useful for anything?

could a word be wrought for 'sourround' like: 'onknell' (sourround sound) /the hall onknelled allover in whistles and drums/ (?)

onbooms/oblooms = 'around blooms'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"...clearly autonomously is closer to independently, and "on your own" might mean "alone"."

It seems that "on your own" can mean "autonomously" or "alone". Why is it "clearly" closer to independent? The two meanings of the phrase do not take away from the either meaning in context. One could consider "on your own" to mean autonomously and "by yourself" to mean alone, right?

"The new hire must be able to work by himself, without too much oversight."

Yes, cut away the unneeded loans!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: sorry I was not clear. The job ad meant 'independently', substituting 'on your own' makes the meaning ambiguous; 'without too much oversight' would be clearer.

Stanmund: I liked "stand-ins"; found "unlikeliness" confusing with "improbability";
and "intermediate" and "proficient" are in this context technical terms used around the world and by publishers for specifically defined levels, whereas "middling" and "skilled" sound as if they address the performance of the student. Technical lablels are hard to change. I have an "LNB" on the roof, what it is, does, or stands for, I neither know nor care, just I need one for each satellite. It is just a label.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: twenty years ago I had no idea that "job" was countable and "work" was not; (well not usually in English); but every 'middling' English student has to learn this well. The result is that one cannot arbitrarily substitute work for job everywhere without crossing the boundary into nonstandard English. So if one of my students wrote "work advert" they would earn themselves extra homework to discover the difference between countable and uncountable nouns. FYI the commonest mistakes by non-native european speakers are things like "informations"; "equipments"; "advices"; "furnitures"; while of course many speakers from SE asia omit the plurals everywhere....
Can we not keep the word job as is may be Celtic?
Secondly (Fr) "strewn with the dregs" is a mixed metaphor indeed. "bestrewn with the rubble of... conjures up a picture better I think.
But we do love a trier!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

And for all you diehard anglishers I confess to explaining the meaning of "annual" by starting with year, explaining the adjective is "yearly" and that annual means the same. This is the stuff which is so insane.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Job" is only Celtic if one accepts it to be from Irish "gob" (lump), but it has not yet been borne out as true. What is known is that "Job" is from Mid.Eng. jobbe "piece, article (of work); a cartload" << Mid. Eng. jobben.

LNB= Low (O.N.) Noise (O.Fr.) Block (O.Sax) -Down (Br. Celt) converter (Latin) >> Wow! It is a mongrel name if I ever read one! 2/5 Germanic, 2/5 Latin, 1/5 Celtic. Something for everyone!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

"The new hire must be able to work without oversight."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Or better yet...

"The new hire must work without oversight."

Why make it too wordy with "able"? Isn't having the "ability" assumed in this example? Isn't it more to the point?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: the problem with "must" in modern English is the English feel it smacks of being too dictatorial, so often in business people attempt to soften the impact. Quite how we got to this situation I don't know, especially considering that "must" was originally a polite past subjunctive.
One of the difficulties for German speakers is to realize that in German using "must" seems to make things more polite, whereas the opposite happens in English. The same applies to "have to". ("need to " takes the edge off, but really we need to move from command mode to request mode to be safe when doing business).
So for example in a bank:
German: "Sie muessen an den anderen Schalter gehen."
English: "I'm terribly sorry sir, but you seem to have come to the wrong counter. I was wondering if you would like to go over to the other one please".
(Always remembering that length=politeness in England)
OTOH i too detest the work-around "to be able to" but it arises because modal verbs in English are defective in not having infinitives, whereas in German they still do. Also "will be able to" can often be replaced by a simple "can" but many european speakers of Englsh who have a specific future form of the verb in their own language fail to realize that any modal can be used to talk about the future in English.
Finally we should not overlook the fact that the commonest meaning of "must" in English is not obligation, but in fact "logical deduction" eg "Why is she late? She always comes on time. She must be sick or the bus must have been canceled."
Next lecture at 0200 tomorrow

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"I'm terribly sorry sir, but you seem to have come to the wrong counter. I was wondering if you would like to go over to the other one please".

It is overwhelmingly wordy!! Are so many words a "must" in England? Really?! Although, the whole sentence (word-string) is English, save "counter" (L) and "please" (L). Good show, jayles!!

German is much more direct. This sometimes comes up in my English (or whatever tongue I am speaking). It is one of the reasons why Germans are often called "rude" or "abrasive", even when they are not. We're all FRANK! LOL

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Well, we are all frank Franks! That's what I meant to say.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Are so many words a "must" in England?" I did exaggerate to make the point; however we do tend to prefix bad news with "I'm afraid"; and because we lack the implicit politeness of "Sie" I think we tend to use polite phrases to "wrap the package". Thus on the phone preordering to my local German bakery: "I was wondering if you could save a schwarzbrot for me." Response: "VVVhy do you always VVVunder???" This is gospel truth.
But truly Germany is not alone. My teach yourself Hungarian book notes: "Hungarians are more direct....there is hardly any understatement in Hungary". Just depends on whom you meet though.... we make exceptions for beautiful young women.
"Germans are often called "rude" or "abrasive"..." This is partly a slight clash of cultures (though we are both European in our thinking of course). But there is an underlying linguistic difficulty in the intonation patterns. English people tend to use a series of slightly rising intonations in a normal sentence with a fall only at the end. Some German-speakers seem to have a falling intonation on each word. To an English ear this often sounds preremptory or like a sargeant-major, especially if the speaker carries over the glottal stops from German. Very difficult to correct in an adult learner, unless they are prepared to spend their Sommerferien in England every year. Often not an issue if one picked up English from native speakers as a child - children get intonation easily.
mit freunlichen Gruessen

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: Another obvious example: "Could you tell me when the bus is due please?" is, of course, inherently more polite than "When is the bus due?".

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

There is a difference between, "The new hire must be able to work without oversight." and "The new hire must work without oversight." ... at least to me.

The first implies some degree of supervision but not close supervision while the second implies that there will be no supervision ... and no one (officially) to go to if you need help.

Yes, English can be wordy when it comes to politeness. I find myself, usually unnecessarily, trying to translate that wordiness. And don't feel bad Ængelfolc, Americans are often thought of as brusque because we often aren't nearly as wordy at the Brits! :P

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

jayles your examples are a taddish strawen. I think every day folk in Britain hardly ever find themselves saying 'due'

It would mostly be a straightforward:

'do you know when the next bus is mate/love/duck?'

or

'hi what time is the bus getting here?'

'hiya do you know when the next bus is?'

'hiya do you know when the 175 is getting here?'

'alright do you know what time the bus is coming/meant to get here?'

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

The coach leaves Kenn (Somerset) at 8:15 and gets into Kippax (Yorkshire) at 15:45

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

here comes the bus
here arrives the bus

quick, the bus is coming/leaving!
quick, the bus is arriving/departing!

departure lounge - outwards room/hall/yard
departures - outwards
arrival lounge - inwards room/hall/yard
arrivals - inwards
arriving - alighting/endbounding

pickup -

dropoff -

outbound/outwards -

inbound/inwards -

shortstay -

longstay -

overnight -

stopover -

alights -

catch a connecting flight - catch an inlinker flight?

outgoing -

ongoing -

overwintering in the Canaries

oversummering in the Faeroes

take off -

landing -

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

final approach -

-unloftingwards
-endlofting
-ongeardown
-endpath
-endlag
-endingdown
-flightpath
-endlandwarding
-enddownwarding
-drawdown
-endhaltward

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

flight 72011 making/on/in its final approach -

flight 72011 making/on/in its endcoming...(incoming/oncoming/homecoming) inending

flight 72011 making its flightsend ?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

*flight(s)end* ?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: yes indeed; but notice that in all but one case the question was prefixed with the politener "do you know"; this type of question is called "indirect" in the grammar books, as compared to a straight "When is the bus coming?" which might sound too brusque.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Stanmund: the current terms "boarding pass" and "landing card" were in fact coined by a Viking travel agency which offered package summer adventure cruises round Europe with activities such as rape, pillage and plunder. It was big business at the time.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund ... aviation language needs to stay as is because English is the standard language of aviation by various treaties. Even in Paris when ground control talks to Air France, it is supposed to be done in English so that all the other flights will understand (BTW, this caused a lot of heartache but was finally enforced).

There are just some areas ... the military and aviation ... that new words would cause more confusion. I was in both the military and aviation and trust me when I say that those institutions would resist any large-scale change.

But for the sake of the exercise, I would say that for approach you could use "end of flight" or "endbit" ... maybe "endflight" or "flightend"; change "final" to "last".

"Your final approach vector is ..." becomes "Yur last endbit run is ..."

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I found a forum for Anglish that isn't being used. I don't like the wiki forum ... it's not user friendly and too awkward.

I've already registered ... Here is the formum: http://anglishmoot.forumotion.net/

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: ""I was wondering if you could save a schwarzbrot for me." Response: "VVVhy do you always VVVunder???"" LOL! That's too much! This way of speaking seems unsettled and wavering. It lacks heart/boldness from my standpoint.

Why should there be anything wrong with saying:

"Please save a Schwarzbrot for me."

"Excuse me, when is the bus coming?"

Why do these sentences come across as too sharp? They are more blunt, but that makes them better understood, feelings aside.

One of the things that I have found to be true, talking about too many loans in English, is muddled, murky meanings.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Here one can talk anent his thoughts..."

I like the word 'anent' and think it should be brought back into use. I do not, however, like it said as in the sentence above.

Anent-- meaning in regard to; about; concerning, but also (in British English) beside; in line with, is a contraction of anefen(t)/ onefen(t) << (A.Sax. on-efen): "on even" in today's English.

I like about (O.E. onbūtan) in its stead better. I think it better said if one wants to eschew (Frankish *sciuhan) "regard" (even though this is Frankish).

Any thoughts out there?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Instead of saying "proceed", why not say "wend"? It is still said, although not too often.

"to wend forward", "to wend along", "to wend one's way >> "To Canterbury they wend."; "Great voyages to wend."

Thoughts?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Why do these sentences come across as too sharp? They are more blunt, but that makes them better understood, feelings aside."
Yes indeed they are too blunt and leave feelings aside.
Generally if non-native speakers are using English, they are using it for business or in a business situation (incl tourism) or in some university/academic situation; so there is a need to be diplomatic and take into account the feelings or reaction of the person they are dealing with. English people use "softeners" to oil the wheels of negotiation, trading, and working together. So as well as the ones already mentioned you have doubtless noticed "actually", "in fact", "apparently", "it seems that", "as you may be aware" and so on inserted quite often into communication to soften the impact. If you are doing business in English a few extra words might avoid giving unintended offence, depending on whom you are dealing with of course.
There is I know a gulf between "European" and "English" thinking here; for example:-
walking down the street with a beautiful hungarian woman:
Me: Would you like a coffee?
She: Is that a Hungarian question or an English question? If it is hungarian the answer is no. If it is English then it means you want a coffee!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: I think it was Willy Brandt (whom I heard giving a speech in 1964!) who said something like: If we want to sell abroad we must speak English, but if they want to sell to us, dann muessen sie Deutsch sprechen! Every working day I bow to the boss's wife (korean), put my hands in the prayer position and say "vannakkum" to a tamil colleague, shake hands with a Saudi student and make sure I use only my right hand to give him worksheets, I don't expect the Ukrainians to smile, but the brazilians are always in carnival mode, and I don't ask the Japanese any difficult questions in case they lose face... Man muss flexibel sein, wenn man mit Auslaender verhandelt
Things are no better or worse just different; we all have our quirks.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

www.thecheers.org/Entertainment/article_2222_English-Politeness-and-Manners.html

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Here's one for ya ... luxury - O.Fr. luxurie, from L. luxuria ... Even in Icelandic ... It's luxus.

Why use anent when one can use about?

As for wend, that has the sense to wander ... or meander ... Besides, it's too close to wind in pronunciation ...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: except that "went" (commonly used as the past of "go" instead of "gang" as used in Scotland) presumably comes from "wend", and does not meander.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

What a wild and wonderful weekend we had wandering wainlessly through wet weather and winding narrow wynds. With innards washed in the warmth of wintergreens, we went wending along our way whithersoever westward while whistling wearied and waygone, but without a wanhope nor wrinklesome worry in the whole wide world.

Wow! English wordstrings can an half be wrought with a lot of words beginning with 'W-' How many w- words dose the German/Dutchy translations of the wordbatch above give?

The 'w' staff itself is a way upmost Germanic marker. Can't think of any other sister Germanic languages which can randomly let loose so many w- words in any given everyday sentence as English dose. Guessing English would wield a bigger helping of w- words then German thanks to words starting wh- wr- which are wontless to German, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Icelandic etc etc.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

off the top of my head....

-ing, wh- wr- -ight -tch -dg(e) thw- unbe- -eigh -ough -awn-

all wordbits which are unmistakesomely English and not found in any others (?)

whomsoever, therein, herein, albeit, albethey, heretofore, nonetheless, howbeit, therinabove, thereinunder, insofar, inasmuch, notwithstanding, wherewithal, moreover etc etc

Have underwielded them myself, but I love the above distinctive blends of English compounds. I like all compounds but don't consider compound words like: 'standalone' 'homemade' 'roadwortiness' etc, the same thing nor breed though. Guessing the above wordblending is not an English speciality, what with all the wanton compounding in German - but does German indeed do the ('insofar' 'whomsoever') brand of compounding or is more the 'standalone' stuff (?)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Stanmund ... "wainlessly"? You went without a car? "wynd"? - Path?

@Jayles ... Yes, went is a variant of "wende" ... I think the past tense in OE of go was eode/eodest/eodon ... sometimes mergers of words took place like am/was.

But the current definition of "wend" is to go in one direction by an indirect route. But I think, and this is only a guess, that we see a merger/confusion of words here as well. Wind/wend share a the same root and with close pronunciation and meanings (wend meant to turn), they merged. For example, we say ... He wound his way to the top. Well, in OE, the verb to wind was a strong verb ... wind, wand, wunden. We lost wand and wunden, using the French "ou" spelling for "u" and it becomes "wound" ... the a pronunciation shift.

As a side note here ... and maybe somebody can give a definite answer ... we went from 2nd person sing "thu" in Anglo-Saxon/OE to "thou" ... I wonder if the initial pronunciation o "thou" was, in fact, "thu" with a spelling change to use the French "ou" (like vous) and match "you"? Maybe we're mispronouncing it nowadays as "thow"?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I just found the answer to my question ... thou was pronounced as thu. Here is what was written:

... However, I checked M. Goerlach's (1991)"Introduction to Early Modern
English" and Dobson's (1968) "English Pronunciation 1500-1700", on
which Goerlach bases his description, and none of them lists /Dau/
among the variants. For "thou" contemporary orthoepists give
apparently only /Du:/ and unstressed /Du/. ...

...

Should this be so, then the /Dau/ pronunciation is perhaps a modern
"guess" based on the analogy with other <ou> words in the
Standard. But if it is a mistake it can't be corrected. ... http://linguistlist.org/issues/7/7-1473.html

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@AnWulf

indeed 'wainless(ly)' (without wheels) but more to give the meaning of both 'carfree' 'coachless' 'bikeless' etc, then just without a car.

'wynd' is narrow path amongst houses, but still meant it, even though there was more of a feeling of being out and about the land.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Why do some Americanisms irritate people?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/14130942

Here is my reply to a few of his complaints ...

reliable ... goes back to the 1560s in Scotland ... maybe it just stayed alive in America but died out in England.

truck ... can be traced way back to 1610s in usage and to 1794 as a cart for a heavy load ... lorry only back to 1834 as railroad slang and then used in 1911 for a motor vehicle.

mail/post ... confusion on both sides ... in England mail was letters going overseas and post was letters in-country.

faze ... from the Kentish dialect feeze ... to frighten, alarm ... from Anglo-Saxon (AS) (aka Old English) fesian.

hospitalize ... to put in a hospital ... wow, shortened that up!

wrench ... from AS/OE wrenc ... a tool for twisting.
spanner ... from German spannern

elevator/lift ... I like lift ... it's shorter and appropriate ... but it can be confused for the sense of "giving someone a ride" ... As in, "Can I give you a lift?"

gasoline (gas) vs petrol ...

petrol - from Fr. pétrol (1892); earlier used (1580s) in reference to the UNREFINED substance

gasoline ... from gas + o(i)l + chemical suffix -ine ... for the REFINED petrol.

The short form "gas" can be confused when referring to "natural gas".

hood/bonnet ... it's the old Germanic/French thing with two words with essentially the same meaning.

I'm not sure what the author's complaints about the others are ... perhaps if he were to offer alternatives for comparisons.

I cross posted to http://anglishmoot.forumotion.net/f1-talk-anent... in case someone wants to jump out of this rather lengthy forum and start anew.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf: There are(or were) indeed extensive differences between Brit/Am word usage. Some are minor: on/at the weekend; in (the) hospital; I've got/gotten; accommodation(s); can't/cahn't. The most widespread one is the American willingness to use past simple instead of present perfect: Am: Did you do you homework yet? Brit: Have you done your homework yet? Am: I lost my wallet. Brit: I've lost my wallet. (ie It is still lost) This makes it really tricky for non-native speakers to learn the grammar. (and tricky tor the teacher too!)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"what with all the wanton compounding in German - but does German indeed do the ('insofar' 'whomsoever') brand of compounding or is more the 'standalone' stuff (?)"

Compounding is the way of Germanic languages:

Insofar >> Insofern, Insoweit

Whomsoever >> Not a compound in German...Wem auch immer

Standalone >> Selbststaendig, Unabhaengig

Therein >> Darin

Herein >> Hierin, Hier

Albeit >> Obschon, Allerdings, Wenn auch, and more

Albethey >> Not that I know of...never heard of this compound in English

Heretofore >> Bisher

Howbeit >> Obgleich

Therinabove >> No...never heard of this in English either

Therinunder >> No...although, thereunder is darunter.

Inasmuch >> Sofern, Insofern

Notwithstanding, Nonetheless >> Trotzdem, Dennoch, Nichtsdestoweniger

Wherewithal >> No...Germans say Noetiges (needed, necessary)

Moreover >> Weiters (South Germany), Ueberdem, Ausserdem, Ueberdies, and many other ways.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: "This makes it really tricky for non-native speakers to learn the grammar. (and tricky tor the teacher too!)"

Do you mean that it is trickier to learn American English or British English?

Check this out: American guide to British English >> http://www.effingpot.com/

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"spanner" >> span (O.E. spann/ spannan, P.Gmc.*spannō/*spannanan) + er (from O.E. -ware, P.Gmc. *-warioz)

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

I think the BBC article about Americanisms in British English is very true, and one could take the article and apply it to English as a whole. It fits well within this forum/talk. The author sums up nicely his thoughts, which apply to the English debate here, too:

"But what I hate is the sloppy loss of our own distinctive phraseology through sheer idleness, lack of self-awareness and our attitude of cultural cringe. We encourage the diversity offered by Welsh and Gaelic - even Cornish is making a comeback. But we are letting British English wither."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

mail/post: mail << Frankish *malha; post << Latin positum. Stick with MAIL.

The key to English's global success: "To use it requires only a rudimentary knowledge of grammar..."

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Do you mean that it is trickier to learn American English or British English?"
No big difference; just in Brit English one must use present perfect where appropriate (I've lost it) where Am English is not so picky/fussy. Confusing, eh?
"only a rudimentary knowledge of grammar..." However the nuances of the English verb are not that simple. "I've been ironing" -> Ich war gerade beim Buegeln - well that's slightly weird German! I often wish we just had simple present and past in English!
AnWulf: in the North of England one can still hear "thou" inside the family usually pronounced "Tha" eg: "'azthaput'baikint'ginnel?" -> Have you put the bicycle in the sideway/passage? (aztha=Hast thou). There is a film "The Full Monty" with this dialect.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

thou << O.E. þú (said /θu:/) << O.Sax. & O.Fris. ðū; informal, often used with someone considered low/lesser. Said /ðaʊ/ today.

"I thou thee, thou traitor!" - Sir Edward Coke trying to insult Sir Walter Raleigh

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"Stick with MAIL." Aussies do.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"But we are letting British English wither." Which begs the question what exactly is "British English"? The regional and dialect variations are I think fading due to the media, TV in particular and of course American influence in movies and some technical areas such as accounting where all the terminology has become americanized. However some brit english is both ephemeral and weird, if lovable eg "titfer"; "have a butcher's"

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@Ængelfolc ... A few of the words that I pointed out weren't so much "Americanisms" as they were words that the Americans continued to use while the Brits dropped them or substituted other words ... like "reliable", "truck", and "faze" in the States have a long histories pre-dating the colonies.

And there are times that they are taking the French derived word over the German derived word ... like using bonnet rather than hood ... and yet he complains about the purity of British English! lol

We should introduce him to Anglish ... That would really make his day.

@Jayles ... I like using the simple past when appropriate ... "I read (past tense... maybe we should spell it "red" as in AS or "redd" to distinguish from red the color) that book." (Action completed) ... as opposed to "I've read that book." ... Flip it and ask the question ... "Did you read this book?" "Have you read this book?" ... I can't really say there is a difference in meaning ... at least not to me. Just a different approach to saying it.

The difference could come in with a time qualifier. "I redd that book every day until I finished it."

I've got is probably almost as common as I've gotten but in American English, "I've got" is used (poorly) for "I have" ... Who has the wrench? ... I've got it!

Personally, I like "gotten". Actually it was originally "getten" but the "e" was changed to an "o" ... "got" was an abbreviation for "gotten". THEN, "got" 'was substituted for the original past tense of "gat". You gotta love the twist and turns! lol

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

AnWulf:' "Did you read this book?" "Have you read this book?" ... I can't really say there is a difference in meaning '. So much depends on the context and situation. One must choose the example carefully to explain. Perhaps "Did she come?" and 'Has she come?" are easier, the second question really asks whether she is still here. A good rule of thumb is if there is a specific time mentioned or implied then do not use the perfect tense. This works nearly all the time. Also In Brit-speak one must use the perfect tense with "just", "already" "yet" "ever" ; so to the Brits "Did you do your homework already?" sounds wrong, (or Am).
Brits also use "I've got" for "I have" (possession); I think that Am uses "i've gotten" instead of "I've become" ; but maybe it depends on where you are from in the states,
i would not profess to understand Americans......... ;=)))

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Ich habe tatsaechlich mich gerade gefragt, ob Sie schon darueber Bescheid tatsaechlich wissen, dass Sie wohl zur Zeit in der Lage seien, das englische Hoeflichkeitssystem tatsaechlich zu akzeptieren, oder?

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Heard a smidgensworth of that exact same Americanism thing by way of the wireless. Hadn't the foggiest that bods like: 'freight train' and 'train station' are both Americanisms, and thy are outdoing (so-called *British* English) 'goods train' and 'railway station'

Hmmm..is a 'railway set' without the 'trains' and a 'train set' without the 'rails' !! (?)

American English's clout and unlikeness gets far too overcooked. Britain's media elite don't even give an honorable mention to the inroads Jamaican English has had on the English spoken in England. Nobody ever talks of 'Jamaican English' v '*British* English, so why can't we just say American English v English, full stop. Anyway, Jamaican English and Scots English would have to be the first stop of any serious linguist of isms on English. Every man, woman and child in the land, know them two are the two most wayward. JE's clout even fiddled with Britain's accents!

Might wield them unknowingly, but only got so much time for *Americanisms* especially its creepy obessession with casting every Hollywood English actor as some kinda of fiendish swarthy baddie, looking like he's just landed out of somewhere like Marseilles or Naples!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

*In truth the actors are often not even English - just Americans casting as English any swarthy baddie they can lay their hands on*

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles:

Americans also use "I've got" for "I have" (possession), and gotten.

""Did you do your homework already?" sounds wrong" It doesn't sound wrong to me. Is it grammatically wrong in American-English and English-English?

@AnWulf: LOL!! Yes, we should teach that guy (Americanism- fellow, bloke, man (after Guy Fawkes); Norman rewording of the Teutonic name Widu--whence also It. Guido) a thing or two about a thing or two when it comes to true English!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

American English - The History of English

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbvumrknAKs


Laugh-Out-Loud Funny!!!

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Adventure of English

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRtGKXN-K6Y&...

Very interesting segment about American English.

1 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

Ængelfolc: "Did you do your homework already?" not wrong, just American; Brits use 'Have you done' with "already", "just" "yet" and "ever"; unless of course they've succumbed to the American influence.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

"...inroads Jamaican English has had on the English spoken in England."

I don't know of any. Jamaica got English from England. It was a British colony. Now, Jamaica has stronger economic ties with America, and American sway is greater.

Also, in English, American English is as of now in the limelight. I can't see how "American English's clout and unlikeness gets far too overcooked." It is a truth that cannot be thoughtfully spurned or overlooked.

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

@jayles: ""Ich habe tatsaechlich mich gerade gefragt, ob Sie schon ... das englische Hoeflichkeitssystem tatsaechlich zu akzeptieren..."

Ich erkenne die Art an, wie die Briten Englisch sprechen. Ich finde die Sprachart unnoetig hoeflich und allzu sanftmuetig. Es scheint mir, dass man immer einen Eiertanz auffuehren muss. Ueberempfindlichkeit und politische Korrektheit sind Feinde der Kultur . Alte Braeuche sterben dadurch aus.

Meiner Meinung nach...

0 vote Vote!  •  Permalink  •  Report Abuse

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365751...

Of note:

* ‘Americans tend to be much better at stressing the French origins of